Talk:Tetris

Tetris Mobile sales

according to several news articles quoting Henk Rogers (one of the founders and President of the Tetris Company), the mobile version of Tetris has over 425 million paid sales (not counting free downloads) that would make it the best selling game in history (at leas this version of the game), I don't know if anybody else has been able to find more sources. here are some links about the interview:

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/tetris-now-at-425-million-paid-mobile-downloads

https://venturebeat.com/games/mr-tetris-explains-why-the-puzzle-game-is-still-popular-after-three-decades-interview/ Zettus (talk) 14:33, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

My question is whether that is for the current mobile app or all mobile versions combined, many of which have been discontinued and no longer function (like Tetris (Electronic Arts)). If the latter, then I wonder if it's really a valid comparison. oknazevad (talk) 16:57, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Discussion of the original creation date in the article

Recently the original creation date listed in the article was changed from 1984 to the much more likely 1985. While I believe that this was a correct change, I also think that the controversy over the creation date should be mentioned in the article, perhaps even in its own subheading. The company that owns the game[1] and several high profile sources[2][3] claiming a different creation date than the one listed in the article is significant and notable, and should be mentioned in the article. Leaflemon (talk) 03:35, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I can't disagree with your thoughts on the matter. If you want to try to hash up a paragraph here to describe the situation feel free. I'll gladly take a look. oknazevad (talk) 03:51, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that seems like a good idea. I'm the one who changed it from 84 to 85. The only reason I didn't add a paragraph in the article is because there's no real easy way to source it, and the leading theory for the reason TTC gives an incorrect date (while almost certainly true) is speculative. Explodingcreepsr (talk) 07:12, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Tetris BSOD on BBC

First human to beat Tetris game to hard crash (at level 157) which only AI could do thus far: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67871775 94.21.160.159 (talk) 22:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Beating the game

The following sentences appear in the "Gameplay" section: "The game never ends with the player's victory. The player can only complete as many lines as possible before an inevitable loss."

According to CNN however, a player managed to beat the game by "crashing" it. If true, this would be a victory of sorts. It would also mean that a loss, while very likely, is not inevitable. https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/03/tech/oklahoma-teenager-defeats-tetris/index.html 205.162.227.132 (talk) 22:58, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Exploiting a bug in one version of the game (and it's not the original, by the way) to cause it to crash isn't applicable to all versions, and doesn't constitute "winning" in any meaningful sense of the term. If any mention should be made, it's at Tetris (NES video game), the article about that specific version, not the broad overview covering all versions here. oknazevad (talk) 00:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Exactly. The media is running with this and wikipedia is a repository of information from the media, but the reality of exploiting a bug which the kid from Oklahoma recently had done, supposedly by accident, isn't beating the game just because it crashed. The formal last stage is Level 255 according to mathematics. The kid from Oklahoma made it to Level 157 which is just the furthest documented case without a crash. There is an actual Google spreadsheet that accurately and mathematically acknowledges this. It's the same as hitting the top speed in your car in 3rd gear; It's not the actual top speed of your car, you just never switched gears properly, which is the situation with this kid from Oklahoma as he never played properly to surpass Level 157 and prevent the crash of the game with the hardware. Tetris is a game to which you are playing hardware and software at the same time. 207.136.91.93 (talk) 07:31, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

I hate to forumchat but curiosity demands: What exactly is the exploit used here? What makes this a deliberate exploit, rather than an "actual" killscreen crash? -- ferret (talk) 14:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

When you play Tetris at a these high levels you're supposed to NOT play certain types of lines on certain levels to prevent the hardware and software from crashing. There's a whole Google spreadsheet dedicated to this. On certain levels you're supposed to exclude certain types of lines to extend play to prevent a hardware/software crash to make it to Level 255. If you play certain line amounts on certain levels the percentage of a crash is extremely high and you have to prevent that to go the distance. The kid from Oklahoma effectively just got a high score, made it to a high level, prematurely crashed the game by not playing the correct lines, and the press ran with it. 207.136.91.93 (talk) 03:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

It would definitely be considered beating the game as there is nothing left to do. Tetris themselves had come out and congratulated him for the achievement which I'd say sets in stone that he "beat the game". Regardless whether you consider it beating the game or not, it is definitely worth mentioning in the article considering the game has aged to that point. All Tetris players now are pushing the limits of the game just as this kid did and he did it better than anyone else possibly could at 13, pretty crazy. 24.38.94.117 (talk) 18:55, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Problem is it's just one version, which has its own article where this is adequately covered. This is the top level article covering all versions of the game, starting with the true original, the Electronkia-60 version from 1985. The kid from Oklahoma didn't "beat Tetris", he "beat" the NES version of Tetris. oknazevad (talk) 19:33, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Mentioning he made it as far as he had is correct context and accurate as it is fully documented, but he never accomplished "beating the game". He merely got a high score, made it to a high level, attained a unique palette, and prematurely crashed the game at a point where the game has to be played differently with different line-types to progress without a crash. Media orgs are getting this confused, running with it, and confusing people with propaganda and false praise. Similar to the car example I provided (driving in 3rd gear and hitting a top speed, but not the actual top speed), Tetris, if played correctly has more "left to do" beyond Level 157 if played correctly by not playing certain types of lines to go to the next stage without there being a crash. In essence, he purposely made a crash occur due to improper playing of lines at a highly sensitive High Level within the game where crashes occur regularly on particular play-styles of lines, and if you prevent a crash by not playing certain line-types then Level 158 to Level 255 is technically attainable, regardless if the current owners of the namesake of 'Tetris' congratulate him or not. It's our duty to rightfully stipulate accuracy and filter out nonsense. He is merely the current person who has made it the furthest under a fully documented circumstance and that's it. Could there be a person who makes it to Level 158 tomorrow, next week, next month, or next year, next decade, or next century, or next millennium if they play the game correctly and document it under modern standards...yes I believe so. 207.136.91.93 (talk) 11:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

We need some sources that the theoretical 255 level is actually possible, though. What makes certain line combos cause it to crash before then? And if other line combos do make it crash, is it not true that the game is no longer functioning properly? Seems like an academic debate.

but most importantly, none of this belongs here. It belongs,'if anything, at the article on the NES version only. And this entire conversation has turned into a forum post, so is definitely not the proper place. oknazevad (talk) 14:07, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, it belongs in the NES game article. I could potentially see a single-sentence mention being justifiable in this article but even then not necessarily. Popcornfud (talk) 14:10, 6 January 2024 (UTC)