This all really points back to the Guardians of the Galaxy 2 tip, Jay and the Americans' "Come a Little Bit Closer".
I believe the oldest we have now by year and recording is The Zombies.1
With the new Guardians of the Galaxy coming out and its accompanying Awesome Mix Vol II soundtrack, may we finally get Mr. Blue Sky?
I mean, never mind that Lynne even put Disney/Marvel through licensing hell...
Anything we don't already have from the soundtrack would be just grand - the only one we have is (a live version of) "Surrender".
1. "Mr. Blue Sky" Electric Light Orchestra
2. "Fox on the Run" Sweet
3. "Lake Shore Drive" Aliotta Haynes Jeremiah
4. "The Chain" Fleetwood Mac
5. "Bring It On Home to Me" Sam Cooke
6. "Southern Nights" Glen Campbell
7. "My Sweet Lord" George Harrison
8. "Brandy (You're a Fine Girl)" Looking Glass
9. "Come a Little Bit Closer" Jay and the Americans
10. "Wham Bam Shang-A-Lang" Silver
11. "Surrender" Cheap Trick
12. "Father and Son" Cat Stevens
13. "Flash Light" Parliament
14. "Guardians Inferno" The Sneepers featuring David Hasselhoff3
That's a fantastic solution. A more dynamic variation on my earlier-proposed asterisk idea, where the threshold is actually set (and re-set) by the community post-patch, resulting in far-less-likely need for noncheated top scores to replay to renew a score.
My gut tells me that maybe some of the variables just can't be modeled properly, no matter how powerful your computer. Or maybe it's just "complicated" and not impossible. Calibration figures and lag and squeezing and pausing, those could all be included. If a setting can be set, if a button can be pushed, through it into the model.I think part of the reason this couldn't have been done before is because of such 'variables' - the model couldn't accommodate differences resulting from calibration or pausing. That would be the whole point of simulating optimal scores under the 'new rules', after eliminating the loopholes that allow calibration or pausing to generate higher scores. If they fix their scoring model it would be independent of those variables. If a 3.247 second long sustain has a maximum whammiable benefit of 0.198 overdrive bars, and that is now independent of calibration variations (everyone is given the ability to achieve that regardless of their calibration), then in theory the optimal path is calculable now where it wasn't before (when calibration actually introduced a variable that it won't anymore).
Interestingly, *most* people simply wouldn't care. The game uploaded percentages and earned-star-values with the scores it did submit, and the servers won't re-evaluate past-earned star values based on the new formula (as an Owl told me, the computation is entirely client-side and the servers 'trust' and store whatever earned star value the client submits).
I kind of like that suggestion earlier in the thread to adjust the scoring system up so that after the exploit fixes are put in each note scores higher. That way all the leaderboards stay in place without any wipes or downward adjustment, but all posted scores are not only beatable, but they are guaranteed to be beat.This would be no different than wiping the leaderboards entirely. All the old scores would be worthless and everyone would have to replay all their songs again.
Which is to say, the skill calculation would be unaffected. Everything you had logged a GS for would still be credited to your name as a GS, everything where your best was a 5S is still a 5S. Unlike a wipe, which would actually eradicate your play history from the leaderboard entirely.
It is an interesting question, whether there will ever be an opportunity for them to revamp their scoring system. If they ever wanted to consider something like scoring actually-hammered-on HOPOs more than strummed, or giving an authenticity bonus to upstrumming bassists, it would be something to implement at a time like this.3