No, that's not true Dioniso, and you know. Not everyone. Some have one opinion, and some have another one, and I think that's ok.


You also mentioned on the same post that you weren't open to discuss about it.


I spent way mooooooooooooooooore on stuff that people didn't care a crap. And i'm not telling they're just trying to destroy the MSX community. I assume it's not interesting for them but if I do it cause i like it, I keep doing it.
In the other hand, that doesn't mean that everybody should do the same, everybody's different and some can accept things better than others. I don't wanna mean that I don't understand what you think and feel about it and I'm sorry.

I could have said the game works perfect and that I don't care at all about it not working on some machines. I could have said that it happens always, with every game now and back on the old days. I could have said that rules allowed it and even NES games if you want. But it would have been a lie. I'm not like that. I voted visuals, audio and so. So you know what I like on your game and what not.


None of the other contestants are, but they took the effort to make the game compatible. Everything I said to Wyz is also for you. I like some of the stuff you do and some other not so much, as with any others. And I accept it when it's the other way.
I have my opinions about compatibility as I have an ass. It's perfectly ok if you have yours and it's different. I had to vote with MINE not with YOURS. Why if I put you a 4 is respecteable but an 1 is not? If I give you like over... 5, then my opinion is valid. But If I give you 1, my opinion is not? So, my opinion is valid only when YOU want?


Congratulations. Lot of people here has no job, included myself. At least, by now, I live on a flat too, not in the street like many people lately.


No. you didn't get 1 point. You got many points. The other votes doesn't count? MANY people here gave you points. Why If a good number of users thinks, "good game!" your reaction is.. "meh, points, nothing wonderful there" but when one (or two) people gives you 1 point, then you think about throwing all your hobby and all what you like to do thru the window?
I'm closed in my room way more than weekends and sometimes for less reward, but that doesn't stop me to have fun and I wouldn't care less if ONLY 1 or 2 people complains for ONLY 1 aspect of ONLY 1 game I made.


Well, your game doesn't stink, I think. It's my opinion. But if I didn't like it, why is it ok if I give it low vote and it's no ok if i think it deserves the low vote for non working on all MSX machines as rules say? Both reasons are a matter of personal opinion anyway.

What can't I complain about a game that doesn't work properly on my machine, uses a mode that allows you take a bit of advantage over games that use the VDP in a standard way and you know IN ADVANCE that it won't work? Would you like a game that I code and I put a Poke that hangs your machine "just because I want". I say "Hey, this is gonna hang those machines, ok? But please, don't complain."


No, it seems it's kinda forbidden Sorry for the black humor... Maybe the rules should clearly say that minimum score is 6, so everybody can be happy.


So your game is not that bad then, huh? See, seems that you didn't get just an 1, or you wouldn't have finished 4th. And I'm not complaining to all this people that gave you points cause their opinion is totally respecteable even if i don't agree with it. I would like to know why I'm less that them and my opinion is not, wrong or not.


The fact that I think a game should be compatible or we'll be covered with games that sometimes work, sometimes not, sometimes only on emulator, sometimes only on 1 specific emulator and so on... it doesn't mean I don't appreciate your or any others effort. But as someone already said, it's not a contest of effort.


You said you weren't open to discuss. Should I have to assume that you pretend to have the only truth then? I don't think you do (pretend that, i mean). NOBODY has the only truth (mostly cause probably there's none, but that's another question). The past sentence it's not the only truth either.


And what about the ones who DO appreciate it? The most of us, even if you still think that i don't (I'm not all the MSX users reincarnated in one person)
I'm sorry you confused two unrelated things. And I hope you still code stuff. If you were here, I'd made you drunk until you do. Believe it or not, nobody here is against you. If you do a nice game, your game is nice, if you do a crappy game, your game is crappy. In both cases YOU ARE STILL WELCOME. And I can tell you here, on MRC, on private or in Salvame Deluxe if you want.

As GuyveR800 has mentioned in another post, there's some confusion when speaking about "TMS9918 or compatible" while at the same time it is also mentioned "Other compatibility tests will be performed in different configurations, including MSX, MSX2, MSX2+ and Turbo-R computers." and also "If a game does not run properly in all MSX computers with at least 16 KB RAM it could be disqualified by the organization."

When you know that all (? or almost all) undocumented features of TMS9918 are supported by the higher official VDP's (9938 - 9958), the case Toshiba T6950 is obviously a source of discussion. Is the complete TMS9918 compatibility more important than the official MSX1 compatibility ?

I must regret that the rules of the contest don't include guiding lines on this matter for the vote, but in my humble opinion, a penalty must be proportionnal to the 'crime'. We don't know exactly how many computers were equipped with the Toshiba VDP. Let's say maybe 10% of all MSX1 selled computers and therefore probably 5% globally when taking in account the MSX2 and higher machines.

You can also understand that the pride of a coder lies in showing how he can use undocumented features to produce a nice game. With this approach, 90 % of the MSX1 machines are concerned, and the coder should be rewarded in this proportion. That's what I call a positive approach of the problem. Maybe it will help for future MSXdev' contests.