genina.com: Forum

You have a play store link provided which doesn't link to the aforementioned game.... Is this yet to come?

@Jeka
It would be basically impossible to prove once and for all if someone was cheating unless standing over their shoulder whilst playing. I'm not suggesting a game disqualified for having to pause, but rather two sets of ranking... One for those who have paused and one for those who haven't. It would certainly be interesting to see the difference in the top scores btwn the two

jeka wrote:@ElricE: you really should read through the forum you are posting to before posting. Every single point you raise had been addressed in this forum before, including someone posting a YouTube video of them solving a puzzle in about 30 seconds.

An easy puzzle not one at the extreme level... having read through the posts on the subject:
A) many have questioned such results and requested a separate scoring record for those not pausing
B) admins response to said request has been consistently blithe and dismissive
C) noone has been able to offer a scrap of proof that they can in fact complete the extreme puzzles in such fantastical times (particularly once times drop below even the two minute mark)... that's been requested fit quite some time also and neatly sidestepped and ignored.

Maybe if admin/devs have the appearance if giving two-****s the debate might get some sort of closure instead of continuing for years without any resolution

Because if someone (well, multiple someones if you regularly check the boards) can supposedly complete the extreme level in under a minute and a half (regularly) something is off. I screenshotted and paused an "extreme" level game (one where there was a high percentage of squares pre-filled) and ran through an online solver on the desktop so I had the solution right in front of me.

Now with the solution right in front of me I could barely fill out all the vacant squares fast enough to break the one and half minute mark (1:29) and yet there were about eight scores below the two minute mark (fastest was 1:06). Now given there are several players consistently/repeatedly scoring extremely low times that are defying what most could even blindly type in (ie, not even allowing any time for mental calculations)... we all have those greased lightening moments but almost daily?? The likelihood that a bunch of savants are consistently pegging the boards is statistically so low as to be damned near impossible.

Having looked in dismay (like many here) at the fantastical times displayed for the "extreme" level, I decided to run a test of my own. Loaded a new game (kept reloading until I had a game with a reasonable percentage of the board filled out, so less typing required), took a screenshot and paused the game (3 seconds on the counter at that point).

Next, jumped on the desktop and ran the puzzle through an online sudoku solver. Now with the solution right in front of me, the best I could achieve was 1:29 (and that was pausing any time the adrenaline finger jitters kicked in which would slow my typing).

Now granted, many of us have those "greased lightening" moments when a puzzle almost solves itself... fingers barely keeping up with the brain and all. I also get that there will be a few savants in the user pool for whom the puzzle provides little or no challenge. But looking at the sheer number of ridiculously low times (and the number of people repeatedly - apparently - achieving such low times), logic can't help but scream that there is some patent cheating going on.

* statistically speaking, the number of people who would be even capable of consistently and repeatedly knocking over the extreme level in sub two and a half minutes would be very small. Spread that number over the many sudoku apps available and the amount of such people playing this particular version drops even further.

* then one has to ask... if someone is consistently knocking over even the extreme level in such monumentally miniscule times, why would they continue to play this game day after day? If the game poses such little mental difficulty, wouldn't said person move on to a game or puzzle which poses a far greater challenge for them?

Sorry, but something ain't smelling right. Segregate the scores into two sections... one for those pausing the game (which enables one to cheat) and one which only ranks games which haven't been paused.

For most of us, the ranking had much less to do with bragging rights... rather we simply want to see how our own times are comparing with others. Having the only mechanism we can use as a reference being clogged up with obvious cheats (I'm not saying ALL have cheated, but it is nigh on statistically impossible for all those times to be legit) makes it a worthless tool.

Oh, and to those who claim they are quite legitimately and consistently achieving those scores: put your money where your mouth is, so to speak and prove it. There's this wonderful thing called YouTube... easy enough to record and upload the evidence with a link posted here. Let's see if anyone can back up their claims once and for all