Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
I just wanted to add this as an example of how I have been analyzing the MAME evidence.


NOTE: The y-axis of the graph is on a logarithmic scale (if anyone is unsure what this means read here).

The graph above demonstrates the probabilities (as inverses, which I find is a more human relaetable format) involved in a single game worth of MAME transitions.  To make the analysis I had to assume the probability that an artifact resulting from the capture process would generate MAME like behaviors. In this case the graph presents 10%, 20%, and 30%, but I have a spreadsheet showing probabilities for 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, and 90% as well.  I think myself, and those who know far more than myself, realize that 30% is a very generous likelihood that the confluence of factors necessary would make a normal arcade transition appear MAME-like. This is particularly true given the fact that it ignores the odds of such stupendous coincidence in the first place.  Nevertheless, my spreadsheet analysis accounts for the possibility of further developments on this front.

I will leave the graph for others to draw their own conclusions, I will just note the following two examples of other highly improbable events:
  • Winning the Power Ball Lottery Jackpot - 1 in 175,000,000
  • 13 Loci DNA Match with a random person - 1 in 421,000,000,000,000

PS - Apologies for not making the y-axis in scientific notation, I felt it was important for impact that people really see how big these numbers are.

Edit: Oh I also wanted to stress that the graphs are already making the assumption that Billy can demonstrate a method by which an arcade transition can be made to look like a MAME transition.  This is why the lower end of the graph has upward tails, because there is also improbability in a low probability event not happening at all over 84 transititions (I might be off in my number there, but I can easily adjust my analysis as needed).  Again, the tails at the lower end of the chart are because even a low 10%-30% probability event should occur a couple of times when given 84 chances.
22
General Streaming Discussion / Re: List of Classic Arcade Game Streamers
« Last post by KongTower on February 23, 2018, 10:14:48 AM »
Aaron Hightower
aka KongTower on the forum
https://www.twitch.tv/aahight
23
General Donkey Kong Discussion / Re: Official machines?
« Last post by GalacticDancin on February 23, 2018, 09:12:04 AM »
If you go to the Brooklyn Barcade, hit me up.  I live a few blocks away from there :)
24
I know enough to know that a myriad of seemingly plausible explanations, either real or imagined, can be given to explain why Billy Mitchell's gameplay looks like MAME.

Go on then. Give us some.

If there are a "myriad" of reasons it shouldn't take long to post half a dozen or so.

To avoid the confrontation. Raven is stating knowledge that such explanations are possible, not knowledge of specific explanations.

Or at least that is what I took from it.

Unfortunately, if this is the case it means the statement has no factual relevance to the discussion for the simple reason that a possible explanation, even if we grant the assertion that such exists, is not relevant.  Only what was actually done to create the video is relevant.
25
Raven, before there was the board drawing evidence for MAME, people in the Donkey Kong community already were suspicious. There was evidence before all of this. There was the board swap, and the super high risky play that would mean certain death for any other player.

I've looked at much more material than I've alluded to in my posts, where much of it appears to be white noise resulting from the KoK movie and personal rivalries. The Twin Galaxies dispute thread about Billy Mitchell's 1,062,800 point Donkey Kong score is a prime example of this, where it quickly became a train wreck after the MAME evidence was posted. To keep things simple, I've opted to start with the present and work my way backwards in time.

I also have to strongly disagree that the MAME evidence is a single piece of evidence. At a bare minimum we are talking about 3 tapes, but more than that we are talking about MAME-like transitions presenting themselves in a high percentage of board transitions. I consider each and every transition with MAME-like behavior to be a further piece of evidence.  Only one such transition is needed to show the potential for MAME, but multiple transitions are needed to demonstrate high probability.

In this case, I should have chosen my words more carefully. A more apt description would be a certain type (not piece) of evidence. No doubt, MAME is a complex subject, one which I mostly understand, but other than simply comparing results as they've been presented, I'm not fully qualified to call them conclusive proof.

In my opinion, the preponderance of the evidence, including that which I've discovered on my own, indicates a very high probability of guilt, where MAME alone might constitute a 70% probability of guilt in my eyes. At this point in time, having started out at 50% either way, I would now estimate the probability of guilt being 90% or higher. And that's excluding witness statements, except those from Billy Mitchell himself, largely because everybody seems to be pointing fingers at everybody else.

Evidence aside, one thing that stands out to me is that the classic arcade gaming community seems to be very fractured and hostile. Considering the fact that video game cheating appears to be rampant, I can't say I blame anyone for being suspicious and perhaps even angry. Every good story needs a villan, and guilty or innocent, Billy Mitchell seems to be fulfilling that role to perfection. It's just sad knowing that video games exist for people to enjoy, but instead they have become a vehicle for open conflict. Personally, I could care less about some number on a screen, and if someone beat my score to a pulp, I'd be the first to shake their hand, as long as they did it honestly.

Go on then. Give us some.

If there are a "myriad" of reasons it shouldn't take long to post half a dozen or so.

Sorry, I'm not biting. This isn't my first rodeo, and I've played that game before. I've said my peace, take it or leave it.
26
I know enough to know that a myriad of seemingly plausible explanations, either real or imagined, can be given to explain why Billy Mitchell's gameplay looks like MAME.

Go on then. Give us some.

If there are a "myriad" of reasons it shouldn't take long to post half a dozen or so.
28
I'd like to see some of these ways. If there are so many, could you please list a few.

As I said early on, I have not played Donkey Kong in more than 35 years, nor am I an expert in arcade hardware, so I will leave the gameplay and technical aspects of it for others to prove or disprove. However, being a former programmer and electronics technician, I know enough to know that a myriad of seemingly plausible explanations, either real or imagined, can be given to explain why Billy Mitchell's gameplay looks like MAME.

This may be true, but we are only concerned with the real ones.  Furthermore, possible explanations are not the same thing as "What actually happened".  The question before us is not if there is ANY way to explain it, but if the specific tapes and recordings in question were actually created by a method that would explain it.

Quote
Ever hear the expression "can't see the forest for the trees"? Well, that's how many people seem to be about MAME, they are so focused on it that they seem to all but ignore everything else. Billy Mitchell certainly looks guilty, but appearances can be deceiving. Ask yourself this, if you were being accused of being a cheater, would you not want people to consider all available evidence?

Yes there is more than just the MAME evidence and it should be explored and cultivated just as well.  You won't get a debate on that point. However the MAME evidence is already sufficient for the simple reason that I don't have to prove how the magician's trick worked once I demonstrate that he levitated.  I already know that his claim that he "levitated with his mind" is absolutely untrue.  The same thing applies here, if we prove that the submissions were MAME we don't need to prove specifically how he pulled the wool over people's eyes along the way, we know what we saw was a trick and the rest is just the details of how he cheated.


Quote
This is a very complex situation, and no matter where the facts may lead, I continue to remain objective, and refuse to brand someone a cheater on the basis of a single piece of evidence.

Objectivity is certainly good but the evidence has sat out there for weeks now and there are no credible counters to it.  This in spite of the fact that if Billy did not cheat would merely have to supply a list of the components he uses in his recording setup.  Again, proving his innocence is not about if there is ANY explanation in the universe, it's about an explanation of what Billy actually did and whether it actually produces "MAME-like" recordings.

I also have to strongly disagree that the MAME evidence is a single piece of evidence. At a bare minimum we are talking about 3 tapes, but more than that we are talking about MAME-like transitions presenting themselves in a high percentage of board transitions. I consider each and every transition with MAME-like behavior to be a further piece of evidence.  Only one such transition is needed to show the potential for MAME, but multiple transitions are needed to demonstrate high probability.

Again, I don't disagree the rest of the evidence is useful and provides context and speaks to credibility, but I absolutely do not for a second buy the notion that the MAME evidence is anything short of 100% damning as it sits (i.e. lacking a credible counter).  If you want to call it a single piece of evidence then no problem, it's a single piece of evidence that I am more than willing to see this or any other cheater convicted by while they have absolutely no credible explanation for it.
29
Raven, before there was the board drawing evidence for MAME, people in the Donkey Kong community already were suspicious. There was evidence before all of this.  There was the board swap, and the super high risky play that would mean certain death for any other player. 
30
I'd like to see some of these ways. If there are so many, could you please list a few.

As I said early on, I have not played Donkey Kong in more than 35 years, nor am I an expert in arcade hardware, so I will leave the gameplay and technical aspects of it for others to prove or disprove. However, being a former programmer and electronics technician, I know enough to know that a myriad of seemingly plausible explanations, either real or imagined, can be given to explain why Billy Mitchell's gameplay looks like MAME.

Ever hear the expression "can't see the forest for the trees"? Well, that's how many people seem to be about MAME, they are so focused on it that they seem to all but ignore everything else. Billy Mitchell certainly looks guilty, but appearances can be deceiving. Ask yourself this, if you were being accused of being a cheater, would you not want people to consider all available evidence?

This is a very complex situation, and no matter where the facts may lead, I continue to remain objective, and refuse to brand someone a cheater on the basis of a single piece of evidence.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10