You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
YouTube recently suggested some geoguessr video to me that was about some internet rando playing geoguessr, trying to get perfect score in least time possible. I've tried one round of something like that in a solo game to get a feeling how fun/hard it is. It was loads of fun, but it could be even better if done properly. Few things that came into my mind after the one round I played:
This could be done as both Single Player and Cooperative play. So you can either play this mode alone, or with friends, but instead of being against each other like in regular "with friends" game, you'd all start at the same place and try to figure our where you are TOGETHER (each can move freely, but there is only single score and you are playing as a team).
The mode wouldn't be time limited (ie. no countdown), but time would be tracked per round (so there would be a timer in top left corner counting UP, not down).
You wouldn't need to play a perfect game (as seen on video), as that is really hard. Instead, you are just trying to be as perfect as possible (so ideally 25000 points, but not necessary).
This modification (don't have to be perfect play) brings a slight problem - your performance score now consists of two things:
The score you got (anywhere between 0 and 25 000)
The time you took to get that score
Now it would be best (for compatibility reasons and for simplicity sake) to somehow turn this into a single digit. What I propose (but you could have better idea) is the following formula (inspired by distance to score calculation):
[total score] * e^(-[total_minutes_lapsed]/1000)
And round the result.
So for example:
If you can get 25000 in 10 minutes, your overall score is: 25000 * e^(-10/1000) = 24 751
If you can get 25000 in 30 minutes, your overall score is: 25000 * e^(-30/1000) = 24 261
If you can get 24000 in 10 minutes, your overall score is: 24000 * e^(-10/1000) = 23 761
If you can get 24000 in 30 minutes, your overall score is: 24000 * e^(-30/1000) = 23 291
Also, the whole idea could be turned into group-versus as well (2 groups playing coop on same map (including same starting points) against each other - for example 3v3), but that's whole another story - plain and simple coop as described above would be dope in my opinion ;) Unfortunately my JS skills are very limited and I am too busy to learn it now, but I'm at least dropping this idea here, maybe you'll like it and it won't be too difficult :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,
YouTube recently suggested some geoguessr video to me that was about some internet rando playing geoguessr, trying to get perfect score in least time possible. I've tried one round of something like that in a solo game to get a feeling how fun/hard it is. It was loads of fun, but it could be even better if done properly. Few things that came into my mind after the one round I played:
This modification (don't have to be perfect play) brings a slight problem - your performance score now consists of two things:
Now it would be best (for compatibility reasons and for simplicity sake) to somehow turn this into a single digit. What I propose (but you could have better idea) is the following formula (inspired by distance to score calculation):
[total score] * e^(-[total_minutes_lapsed]/1000)
And round the result.
So for example:
Also, the whole idea could be turned into group-versus as well (2 groups playing coop on same map (including same starting points) against each other - for example 3v3), but that's whole another story - plain and simple coop as described above would be dope in my opinion ;) Unfortunately my JS skills are very limited and I am too busy to learn it now, but I'm at least dropping this idea here, maybe you'll like it and it won't be too difficult :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: