Seperating the posers from the actual champs

[homerwannabee]

I think there is always going to be a difference in terms used based upon speaking outside or inside the classic gaming community.

Someone outside the community might think I'm the best DK player they've ever seen, inside the community, that classification would be vastly different.

When my wife or brother or someone outside the community asks me if I'm good at some game, I always inquire whether they mean compared to some random person or like Donald Hayes, because generally I'll say no or that I'm ok but my default comparison is usually a top gamer on that title rather than a casual arcade patron. 

Robert in KoK was speaking of a casual arcade patron when he spoke of an average gamer, not necessarily an average gamer within the hobby IMO.  There is a huge difference.

Again, it has to do with a specific standard.  Something that can give me a general idea of how good that player is.  Labeling two different players with scores of 50,000 and 750,000 respectively with the same title is wrong.  Also I wouldn't like it if the 50,000 person was labeled and expert along with the 750k person.  Again the same problem exists.   A person with a 50,000 point game is vastly different from a person with a 750,000 point game.  They should not be given the same skill level titles.  It's a horrible way to describe how skilled they are at the game.

You would need to define the arena in which are using your comparison.  Those who are involved in the classic gaming community and those who are not for example?  I see plenty of recreational players at the local arcade.  They are nowhere near 300k on DK.

Well that's the upper end of recreational level.  The lower end is the lower 100's.   So I guess you could go even more specific.

Lower end recreational player 100,000 to 200,000
Upper end recreational player 200,000 to 300,000

[Graham Wolfe]

I think trying to apply titles is thinking too deeply. In the fighting game community because I've won money i'm considered 'pro' but honestly I couldn't care less about being pro, what matters to me is who I've beaten and what place I got in tournaments. To me accomplishments and milestones are how I rate myself. I look at the score list for DKJR and look at the people at the top and imagine myself up there and that is what I look to do.

What matters most is what you believe you can accomplish and how well you apply yourself to that potential. You can call yourself anything you want if you reach those goals.

[stella_blue]

My definition of a Donkey Kong "beginner" is pretty basic.

The next time you're in a classic arcade and spot an unfamiliar person playing DK, conduct this simple experiment:

Watch their game from the start.  If and when they reach Level 3-2, observe their facial expression.  If the debut of the pie factory triggers a puzzled or surprised reaction, you've identified a beginner.

[mikegmi2]

Pie what? You mean there's other stages than just the barrel ones?

[Martin Laing]

Haven't read through all the posts here so sorry if I am repeating someone else's idea; but I would like to see a competition where the best average score, minimum of say 4 or 5 games, decides the winner. That would mean no restarting if you die on level 1 or 2. Once you start a game that counts as a game.

[hchien]

Haven't read through all the posts here so sorry if I am repeating someone else's idea; but I would like to see a competition where the best average score, minimum of say 4 or 5 games, decides the winner. That would mean no restarting if you die on level 1 or 2. Once you start a game that counts as a game.

That's a great idea in theory, but what ends up happening is everyone would start running boards and there'd be no point pressing at all because on average you will score higher just running boards.  The game is still challenging without any point pressing but there are a few players who can killscreen "at will" (say >50% of the time).  From a spectator standpoint it's more interesting to watch some point pressing and from the players standpoint it makes the tournament strategy more interesting ("Should I gamble for 1st place or get a safe 3rd place score?").  This was actually Richie's original idea for the KO format but was eventually tossed out.

[Martin Laing]

That's a good point.

I suppose a rule could be put in place requiring the using of the lower level hammer, but then that starts to force game play strategy and wouldn't feel right.

I've also wondered about fastest killscreen time as a comp. A game with no lives lost would take what? About 80 min or so?

[hchien]

I've also wondered about fastest killscreen time as a comp. A game with no lives lost would take what? About 80 min or so?

Now that would make a great competition, especially for spectators.  Do a simultaneous start and it's a side by side race.  I think Vincent's 1st man killscreen was 70 mins?  Not sure.

[Martin Laing]

Imagine all the machines lined up; the starting gun firing, and then the sprint to get to 22-1. Awesome.

Having limited time to play, my next goal is a one man killscreen.

[Ohrami]

A storm is about to hit SRL

[hchien]

At the first Kong Off, we had a mini-speedrun competition-- speedrun to the end of L5.  It was exciting for everyone.  I think Billy, Dave McCrary and I were neck and neck until the end.  Dave McCrary won.

[tudose]

A storm is about to hit SRL

whats going on at SRL?

[Ohrami]

whats going on at SRL?

Nothing yet

It's about to hit

[Xermon54]

At the first Kong Off, we had a mini-speedrun competition-- speedrun to the end of L5.  It was exciting for everyone.  I think Billy, Dave McCrary and I were neck and neck until the end.  Dave McCrary won.

If Phil would've participated, he would've probably been dead last. He would've been trying for at least 12k on 1-1 before advancing to the next level.

Ironically, I personally took a lot of risks on that speedrun challenge, and I finished it on my last man, haha. YOLO all the way!

[JNugent]

What's SRL?