1) Super Mario Bros. (NES) - 40 Million
2) Tetris (Game Boy) - 33 Million
3) Super Mario Bros. 3 (NES) 18 Million
4) Super Mario World (SNES) - 17 Million
5) Super Mario Land (Game Boy) - 14 Million
6) Super Mario 64 (N64) - 11 Million
7) The Sims (PC) - 10 Million
8) Super Mario Bros. 2 (NES) - 10 Million
9) Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (PS2) - 8.5 Million
10) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (PS1) - 8 Million
11) GoldenEye (N64) - 8 Million
12) Donkey Kong Country (SNES) - 8 Million
13) Super Mario Kart (SNES) - 8 Million
14) Pokemon Red/Blue (Game Boy) - 8 Million
15) Half-Life (PC) - 8 Million
16) Tomb Raider II (PS1) - 8 Million
17) Final Fantasy VII (PS1) - 7.8 Million
18) Myst (PC) - 7 Million
19) Gran Turismo 3 (PS2) - 7 Million
20) Dragon Warrior VII (PS1) - 6 Million
What is the best selling video game so far? I have been thinking about it alot, and I am thinking Starcraft, but thats a total guess.
It depends. SMB1 sold over 40 million copies, but was bundled with a console. SMB3 is the best selling single game of all time that was never bundled with a console, at over 17 million copies. The best selling video game franchise is also the Mario franchise, though numbers change depending on which games you include. If you include every game to every feature Mario, then our favorite plumber is responsible for over 150 million games sold. The best selling PC game of all time is The Sims, with over 6.5 million copies sold. The Sims franchise (expansions included) has sold almost 14 million copies in total. Before The Sims the best selling PC game was Myst, with over 5.5 million copies sold. Myst's sequels were never very succesful, so the franchise as a whole was a poor performer. The fastest selling PC game of all time is Diablo II: Lord of Destruction which hit 1 million units sold faster than any other game prior or hence, though it ended up selling only around 3 million copies, while the original Diablo II only managed 4.5 million. I don't know of any data on the fastest selling console game, though I'm reasonably certain it's one of the Pokémon games.
Arc's statistics are misleading for many of the games because expansions are included in some of the totals. For example, Half-Life has not sold 8 million copies. Half-Life, Opposing Force, Blue Shift, Counter-Strike, and Team Fortress Classic together have sold that number.
It's been a while, and no one has gotten the answers to any of my questions, so I'll go ahead and supply the answers and ask some related questions to keep the fun rolling ;) .
1) Answer: 840.
Related question: How?
2) Answer: Anal-Pokey, Barbarian, USEast.
Related Question: What was the damage of his lance?
3) Answer: baba_zzang dropped due to timeout.
Related Question: kakaka~ otam prz?
4) Answer: Condor Games.
Related Question: Blizzard and Blizzard North both worked on different versions of what game prior to Blizzard North (then Condor Games) being bought by Blizzard's parent company?
5) Answer: Twice for 95 and once for 96. wuscheltom (on Europe) was the first character in the world to hit level 99 in the new ladder season that started with patch 1.10. The first time he hit level 95 he accidentally became a Guardian, so he was deleted and remade to remain a Champion all the way to 99.
Related Question: VET-GrailsGhost on USEast was the second character to ever hit level 99 in the new ladder season. However, wuscheltom spanked the entire USEAST VET clan on the way to 99, passing VET-GrailsGhost despite remaking wuscheltom when VET-GrailsGhost was already level 97. As such, the members of the VET clan are all wuscheltom's bitches. Prior to wuscheltom hitting 99, what was the name and class of the only other character to ever make the members of the VET clan his/her bitches by claiming the #1 spot on USEast, ahead of all the VET clan members that dominated ranks 2-7?
6) Answer: 52.
Related Question: How?
7) Answer: 99,999,999,990
Related Question: What is the least number of moves in which you can beat ChessMaster for the NES on the hardest difficulty?
EDIT: Typo.
Damn, xebra is too hardcore. I'll do some fighting game questions...
In Street Fighter Alpha 2, which characters can kill you in one combo, WITHOUT needing a dizzy?
In Alpha 3, Dan's taunts deal damage in which Ism?
In SF3 3rd Strike, Chun-Li's "special" color (LP+MK+HP) is her default color from what game?
In Guilty Gear XX/X2, how do you perform the glitch that makes I-No fly (while appearing to hump the air =P)?
In Street Fighter EX(+@), some characters can use 4 supers in a single combo. How is this possible?
In King of Fighters '95 (arcade/Neo-Geo versions, NOT PSX), how do you do Kyo's infinite combo?
In Last Blade 2, how do you make Zantetsu and (Speed Mode) Lee perform rapid-fire jabs in the air?
In Mark of the Wolves, which characters can combo two supers in a row?
And finally...
In Super SF2 Turbo (arcade), which three characters CANNOT perform their supers as "Reversals" (that is, using them right as you get up or recover from blockstun)?
There, that should be enough...
-Josh
but then you take my 75 perchance chance of winning, if we was to go one-on-one, and then add 66 and two-thirds ch...percents...i got a 141 and two-thirds chance of winning at sacrifice
Hey fighter guy! Can you tell me the home city of all the SF2Turbo Characters? (Turbo is the one with Fei Long and Dee-Jay right? If not, then that is the one I mean.)
Well, I can't figure out the stone of jordan question, but I think do know the enchant question:
6:
11 (charms) + 20 (items) + 20 (skills) + 1 (battle command from cta or barb) = 52
However you'll get 54 as I suggested if you got skill shrine.
As a curious chess player, I'm interested to know just how quickly the NES ChessMaster can be beaten. I'm too lazy to try to figure it out myself, though :)
11 (charms) + 20 (items) + 20 (skills) + 1 (battle command from cta or barb) = 52
However you'll get 54 as I suggested if you got skill shrine.
You are right, I should have specified only wearable or castable effects. Your breakdown is unimpressive. +11 from charms, +1 from BC, and 20 invested skill points are all givens. Obviously the intent of the question was for you to identify the items needed.
11 (charms) + 20 (items) + 20 (skills) + 1 (battle command from cta or barb) = 52
However you'll get 54 as I suggested if you got skill shrine.
You are right, I should have specified only wearable or castable effects. Your breakdown is unimpressive. +11 from charms, +1 from BC, and 20 invested skill points are all givens. Obviously the intent of the question was for you to identify the items needed.
+3 fire skills circlet
+3 fire skills amu
+3 enchant ormus
2x soj or bul kathos
arachnid mesh
magefist
+1 skills shield, like lidless, sigon's guard or visceratuant
+3 fire skills, +3 enchant orb (not very easy to find, mine is +3 fire skills, +2 enchant, it's the best I've found)
10 fire skill charms & the annihilius charm
Why did you go to the trouble to find such a rare +5 orb when Memory or Leaf in a +3 staff is just as good?
Well, I got so tired of going back and forth between town to buy a +3 enchant staff with the right amount of sockets so I just went ahead and used occu and lidless. I simply never had any luck getting one. Then I just found that orb I'm using now while playing with another char, so I used it instead.
So I ended up trying xebra's NES ChessMaster challenge after all. I set it to the highest difficulty (level 13 - 40 moves in 180 minutes), and left all other settings at their defaults. Despite speeding up the emulation, ChessMaster still moves very slowly, so I think my first attempt will also be my last :) Anyway, here was my game. Anyone who can't read chess notation can safely skip the rest of this post.
Todd-ChessMaster
1. Na3 d5 2. d3 e5 3. h4 Bxa3 4. bxa3 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bh3 Bxh3 7. Nxh3 O-O 8. Bd2 Qd6 9. e3 Qxa3 10. Ng5 h6 11. Kf1 hxg5 12. hxg5 Qa4 13. gxf6 g6 14. Kg2 Nd8 15. Rh8+ Kxh8 16. Qh1+ Kg8 17. Qh6 Ne6 18. Rh1 Qh4 19. Rxh4 Nf4+ 20. exf4 exf4 21. Qh8#
I also tried 15. Qg1 (with 16. Qh2 coming), and that also mated on move 21. I suppose it's quite unlikely that I stumbled across the very quickest win on my first try, so, xebra, how much faster can it be mated?
Durkin's attack is more appropriately notated 1. Na3? d5!
The weaker an opening you start out with, the longer it will take you to beat your opponent. Also, it stands to reason that a highly tactical opening is one that will allow you to defeat the computer the quickest, so consider opening with something else.
There are also some good lines that experienced players will sometimes play against inexperienced players that are in fact inferior, but require the opponent to mount an entirely unflawed defense or they get slaughtered. It stands to reason you could luck NES ChessMaster into responding to such lines incorrectly.
It is clear the ROM has some knowledge of opening theory, since it made the absolute only correct move against 1.Na3? , but I doubt its knowledge extends very deep in many lines. Exploit this.
Try again if you like ;) .
Wow. I didn't think I'd ever have a discussion about chess on this forum! You're right that ChessMaster does have some very limited book knowledge of 1. Na3, as it responds 1... d5 instantly.
I don't actually know anything about the theory of that opening. I only play it against chess engines from around the year 2001 and earlier because almost all of them (even the big names like Fritz!) lose to that attack on the h-file. More recent engines know how to defeat that attack, though.
Since I don't really know anything about Durkin's attack, my question is this: why do you feel so strongly that 1... d5 is the strongest response? My chess database has 26 games featuring 1. Na3 in master play. Black's response was far from unanimous - Nf6 and d5 were each played 8 times, e5 was played 6 times, g6 twice, and 2 people with a sense of humor played 1... Na6 :) It would seem to me that black will likely equalize with any of those moves (except 1... Na6) if he avoids playing into a line where the white N proves more useful on a3 than on its usual c3 or d2 squares. But perhaps you know something those players don't if you've studied this line.
Anyway, perhaps if I get bored I'll take your hint and try some aggressive openings with white.
I can't really say I know much theory behind Durkin's attack, though when you say "master play" I am skeptical. Only old masters like Anderssen ever played ridiculous lines like that ... well, and Durkin himself, but he wasn't that good in the grand scheme of things :P . I don't think a modern GM would ever be caught dead in the white side of 1. Na3 ... .
With reference to the other responses, 1. ... Nf6 is too passive and leads to an inactive (or uselessly traded) dark-squared bishop. 1. ... g6 doesn't even pretend at center control and what is the point of it? There will never be a reason to fianchetto that bishop so this move is really nothing more than the waste of a tempo. 1. ... Na6 gives white a strong advantage in developing his pieces. 1. ... e5 is certainly allowable, and probably as good as 1. ... d5, though I personally think preventing Nc4 is better than placing an immediate (and empty) threat on the foolishly placed knight.
You may be interested to know ChessMaster was representing itself quite well in your game until move 11. You were doing a fair job of losing until ChessMaster blundered. Something like 11. ... e4 12. d4 Qd6 13. Kg2 Qd7 14. Rb1 Rab8 15. Rf1 Qf5 16. Kg1 Ng4 17. Qe2 f6 would have had you in dire straits.
"Master" generally refers to someone who has received a FIDE title (FM, IM, or GM) or met the criteria for becoming a master in one's home country (usually a national rating of 2200 or higher). So these players are not the very best in the world and usually not GMs, but they are still well within the top 1% of serious tournament players. Welling, Grund, and Schlindwein are 3 players rated above 2400 that have played Na3 in the last 10 years. Grund played it against another near-2400 opponent in 1996, and the game was a draw. By the way, those 26 games are in a database of over 2 million total games, so yes, Na3 is still very rare. This database is Chessbase's Megabase 2003, in case you're interested in finding out more about it.
However, often even strong grandmasters don't have very rigid ideas about opening moves. Pavel Blatny is an American GM who regularly plays openings like 1. b3 2. Bb2 3. g3 4. Bg2. You can see him in action if you ever visit a major tournament in the US!
Also, I don't believe that preventing Nc4 should be a motivation for black's move choice. Instead, I feel black should welcome white's knight to c4, whereupon black will soon chase it away by playing d5 or b5 (with Bb7 to follow), or perhaps even simply leave it there to block white's bishop from accessing c4. A more harmonious plan for white seems to be to play c3, Nc2, and make a strong point at d4 by advancing the pawn there. I do agree, though, that 1... e5 does not threaten to play Bxa3. Indeed it's rather difficult for black to threaten much of anything in the first few moves if white doesn't place his pieces aggressively. But my motivation for choosing my opening moves is to place my pieces and pawns in such a way that they work well together, not to make a threat that I expect my opponent will see and adequately respond to.
You're right that my moves in that game are almost all bad until 11... hxg5?? It's intentional. The whole point of the early play is to (unsoundly) give away material (which computers love to take) to remove black's defensive pieces from the kingside (as Qxa3 does). And the idea behind the later play (putting the knight pointlessly on g5, a square on which it can do nothing if black simply ignores it) is to tempt black to take more material to open the h-file. What makes the h-file attack dangerous to a chess engine is that the mating moves (bringing the heavies to the h-file) are not checks or captures. When it evaluates capture or check, a chess engine will extend its search until the captures and checks end, thus seeing many moves farther ahead. Since the threatening moves are not checks or captures, it sees the danger too late. Of course, playing this way against a human is ridiculous, because humans think much differently :)
I don't suppose you play online at FICS (I'm toddmf there) or ICC? Maybe we can meet online and play or talk chess sometime instead of clogging this video game forum with chess stuff :)
Just because 2400's play something doesn't mean it's a good line :P . Heck, just because Kasparov plays something doesn't mean it's a good line. I can remember a particular game in '97 where he opened d3.
In beating NES ChessMaster I don't really try to analyze too much the weaknesses that are specific to programs. I don't think it's profitable in most cases. Just playing hyper agressive chess like you would against any weak player is probably best.
I just played NES ChessMaster on infinite mode in the Smith-Morra and finished it off in 13 moves. I suspect the Smith-Morra, or the Muzio gambit, or particular lines of the Sicilian as black could lead to the fastest wins.
Alright. I'll continue if it doesn't bother anyone, 12Motion! Since you ask, I was the Illinois high school state champion in 1998 (my senior year).
xebra: Yes, you're right about Kasparov. He's also played the Evans Gambit. And another interesting thing is that Kasparov played the King's Indian Defense (1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7) against d4 for most of his career, but he now considers this opening to be unsound. So perhaps Kasparov, as reigning world champion, has played a bad line in hundreds of games as black :) The King's Indian remains a popular line outside of the world's top 10 despite Kasparov's opinion, though.
I guess my point about Na3 and black's many responses are not that the moves are good or the very best, but that they are more than good enough to be able to play in a serious game.
To illustrate this, I think a good analogy can be drawn between speed runners and chess players. Some people will spend tons of time and use any tools available to create a theoretically optimal speed run, whereas others will spend tons of time improving their game-playing skills because they are more interested in playing well. And of course, some people are interested in both and will spend some time on both kinds of runs. Similarly, in chess, there are theoreticians who will spend hundreds of hours and use computer analysis, databases, and other tools to try to unearth the underlying truth about chess. Others, however, will focus their efforts on becoming stronger players so that they can win more games. For these players, 1. Na3 can be a good move if they are playing against a theoretician who has memorized a lot of opening lines. And for the tournament player, which move to play against 1. Na3 is mostly a matter of personal comfort with the position rather than some underlying truth. But that underlying truth still exists for those who wish to search for it! As with speed runs, chess has some people (like me) who are both theoreticians and practical players :)
As for beating CM in 13 moves: I'm impressed! I didn't expect it to be so bad, either. A long time ago, I had an 8088 PC (probably not far off from the computational power of a NES) and ran ChessMaster 2000 on it. I recall it being stronger than that, but then again, I was a much weaker player then.
In Street Fighter Alpha 2, which characters can kill you in one combo, WITHOUT needing a dizzy?
In Alpha 3, Dan's taunts deal damage in which Ism?
In SF3 3rd Strike, Chun-Li's "special" color (LP+MK+HP) is her default color from what game?
In Guilty Gear XX/X2, how do you perform the glitch that makes I-No fly (while appearing to hump the air =P)?
In Street Fighter EX(+@), some characters can use 4 supers in a single combo. How is this possible?
In King of Fighters '95 (arcade/Neo-Geo versions, NOT PSX), how do you do Kyo's infinite combo?
In Last Blade 2, how do you make Zantetsu and (Speed Mode) Lee perform rapid-fire jabs in the air?
In Mark of the Wolves, which characters can combo two supers in a row?
And finally...
In Super SF2 Turbo (arcade), which three characters CANNOT perform their supers as "Reversals" (that is, using them right as you get up or recover from blockstun)?
There, that should be enough...
-Josh
OK I see nobody cares...might as well give the answers anyway.
1. In Alpha 2 there are 4 characters capable of performing 100%-lifebar combos: Shin Akuma (OK, so he's banned from tournaments...), Rose, Gen, and Rolento.
Shin Akuma actually has two different infinite combos. One of them is to get your opponent in the corner, stand a little bit away from him, and keep jumping straight up and throwing air fireballs. The other is even simpler: Low short kick, low fierce punch (this part requires a little timing) cancelled into jab roll, repeat.
Rose's involves a peculiar bug and is as follows: Absorb a high number of fireballs (I think it's 10 or something like that). Then, activate your custom combo (level 3). Start the combo with a sweep, then keep throwing fireballs. It'll take 5 or 6 to kill them, as all those absorbs make your own fireball deal ridiculous damage.
For Rolento, activate lvl3 custom combo. Sweep, and cancel it into his superjump. While in the air, keep mashing Short Kick; upon landing, repeat the superjump combo until they die. This works because special moves do more damage than normals in CCs, and anything from Rolento's superjump is considered a special.
And with Gen, again, activate lvl3 custom combo and sweep them. I forget how this one goes exactly, but basically you keep doing his upwards kick special, but only the first couple hits each time. When meter is about to run out, do the kick special for all 8 hits and it should kill them.
2. In Alpha 3, Dan's taunts can deal damage in X-ism. Too bad that mode absolutely blows. =P
3. Chun's special color in SF3: 3s is none other than her default gray color from Hyper Fighting (a.k.a. SF2 Turbo).
4. Perform I-No's air Dust, and cancel it during its initial frames with Faultless Defense (the green blocking, back+two buttons). You can hold the FD buttons down, or keep cancelling the Dust. Looks quite funny, but not useful in a real match because it sucks up meter so quickly.
5. This is actually possible in all of the EX games. Start a round with the full 3 levels of super meter, and connect a super as the First Attack; this gives you a huge meter bonus, thus recouping much of what you lost with the super. With Allen, for example, you can do the following:
Triple Break (First Attack), Justice Fist -> Fire Force -> Triple Break, Justice Fist -> Triple Break, Justice Fist.
For those who don't know, Fire Force and Triple Break are Allen's two supers. The Triple Break launches them, allowing you to perform juggles like this. And yes, you can chain a special move into a super into another super.
6. Easy one here. Perform QCF+B (quarter circle forward, a.k.a. the fireball motion), then QCF+D; this makes Kyo perform his double kick which launches them. On the Neo-Geo versions of this game, for some reason, doing the second kick with that motion allows you to juggle them with anything you want (normally you can't juggle with ANYTHING after the B version of this move). So, you can just keep doing that double-kick motion with your opponent in the corner, and it's an infinite.
7. Another simple one. Keep pressing A+C in the air; this makes Zantetsu and Lee perform their normal jumping A, but allows it to chain into itself. With Zantetsu this actually is an infinite combo on a grounded opponent in the corner.
8. Kevin, Kain, and both Kim brothers can use two supers in a combo. Kevin can combo his punch super into his kick one, and vice-versa (or kick super twice). Kain can do punch super into kick super IIRC. Dong Hwan can do his air super twice in a row, and Jae Hoon can combo punch super into kick super.
9. The three characters in question are Sagat, Ken, and Dhalsim. If you try to perform their supers as a reversal, they'll just use whatever was the last special move you did with them; interestingly enough, you can use this with Ken to do a reversal AIR HURRICANE KICK (no joke). In the Dreamcast version this was fixed, not sure about Anniversary Edition.
-Josh
but then you take my 75 perchance chance of winning, if we was to go one-on-one, and then add 66 and two-thirds ch...percents...i got a 141 and two-thirds chance of winning at sacrifice
