Another Bubbels cheat

I just remembered another cheat Bubbels does, often after you've been
shooting at the same 3 or 4 infernal colors for 30 minutes or more.

You *finally* knock out one of the colors. You get a new set of bubbles
on the screen and it's just the remaining colors. You go through one or
two shots, and then all of a sudden, rising from the dead, out pops a
bubble (to be fired), having the color you'd just eliminated in the last
round!

Naturally, you fail this time, because that color is not on the screen
(to be fired *at*), so there's no way you can have a hit. When it then
dumps out new rows, the resurrected color is back on the screen.

Are these software bugs? Deliberate cheats? It seems like the programmer
didn't have confidence in his/her game, so had to throw in a few sideswipes
to keep the user from winning too often...

Can you tell I've been playing today?

Joyce
--
To send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name.

LOL, Where can I find this?
Years ago, I had a thingy on my desktop, I could plop ants down, and they
would run all over my screen, then I could flatten them with a hammer, a
buzzsaw, a paint gun, and I can't remember what else, all with sound
included.
Then one day, I got thr dreaded BSOD and lost everthing.
It was fun tho and I played with it a lot.

Kyla
--wondering what's for supper
bastX
I just remembered another cheat Bubbels does, often after you've been
shooting at the same 3 or 4 infernal colors for 30 minutes or more.

You *finally* knock out one of the colors. You get a new set of bubbles
on the screen and it's just the remaining colors. You go through one or
two shots, and then all of a sudden, rising from the dead, out pops a
bubble (to be fired), having the color you'd just eliminated in the last
round!

Naturally, you fail this time, because that color is not on the screen
(to be fired *at*), so there's no way you can have a hit. When it then
dumps out new rows, the resurrected color is back on the screen.

Are these software bugs? Deliberate cheats? It seems like the programmer
didn't have confidence in his/her game, so had to throw in a few
sideswipes
to keep the user from winning too often...

Can you tell I've been playing today?

Joyce
--
To send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name.

wrote in message
...
I just remembered another cheat Bubbels does, often after you've been
shooting at the same 3 or 4 infernal colors for 30 minutes or more.

You *finally* knock out one of the colors. You get a new set of bubbles
on the screen and it's just the remaining colors. You go through one or
two shots, and then all of a sudden, rising from the dead, out pops a
bubble (to be fired), having the color you'd just eliminated in the last
round!

Naturally, you fail this time, because that color is not on the screen
(to be fired *at*), so there's no way you can have a hit. When it then
dumps out new rows, the resurrected color is back on the screen.

Are these software bugs? Deliberate cheats? It seems like the programmer
didn't have confidence in his/her game, so had to throw in a few
sideswipes
to keep the user from winning too often...

Can you tell I've been playing today?

Joyce


Only a little.

There seems to be a rule that in order to really truly knock out a color,
you must actually hit with one of that color. Getting rid of a color while
hitting on a different color frequently doesn't seem to count.

Somebody please write that over again in English if you can figure out what
I'm trying to say.

Jo

"jofirey" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
I just remembered another cheat Bubbels does, often after you've been
shooting at the same 3 or 4 infernal colors for 30 minutes or more.

You *finally* knock out one of the colors. You get a new set of bubbles
on the screen and it's just the remaining colors. You go through one or
two shots, and then all of a sudden, rising from the dead, out pops a
bubble (to be fired), having the color you'd just eliminated in the last
round!

Naturally, you fail this time, because that color is not on the screen
(to be fired *at*), so there's no way you can have a hit. When it then
dumps out new rows, the resurrected color is back on the screen.

Are these software bugs? Deliberate cheats? It seems like the programmer
didn't have confidence in his/her game, so had to throw in a few
sideswipes
to keep the user from winning too often...

Can you tell I've been playing today?

Joyce


Only a little.

There seems to be a rule that in order to really truly knock out a color,
you must actually hit with one of that color. Getting rid of a color
while hitting on a different color frequently doesn't seem to count.

Not true. you can get rid of that extra colour if you pop the ones above it,
so it has to fall down.

The best explanation I've got is that whilst we know what the next two
bubbel colours are going to be (the one in the shooter and the one in the
bottom right hand corner), the computer knows the next four or five. If you
eliminate the colour, but that colour happens to be already in the 'queue',
you'll get it back, although it might so happen that inthe mean time, you've
already got a new row or rows that doesn't have that colour included.

The only way to deal with it is to place where you can easily shoot the one
or two bubbels above it that its attached to.

The 'cheat' that I find really annoying (besides the perpetual 'it changed
colour on me' one) is when yo do two trick shots in a row - the firs tone
works and *without moving the cursor* the second one does and it registers
it as a 'miss' even though you know darn well it *ought to be* a 'hit' (and
therefore a pop)

its an evil evil game!!!!

Yowie

So where can I find this game??
Kyla

"Yowie"
"jofirey"
bastXXXetteI just remembered another cheat Bubbels does, often after
you've been
shooting at the same 3 or 4 infernal colors for 30 minutes or more.

You *finally* knock out one of the colors. You get a new set of bubbles
on the screen and it's just the remaining colors. You go through one or
two shots, and then all of a sudden, rising from the dead, out pops a
bubble (to be fired), having the color you'd just eliminated in the last
round!

Naturally, you fail this time, because that color is not on the screen
(to be fired *at*), so there's no way you can have a hit. When it then
dumps out new rows, the resurrected color is back on the screen.

Are these software bugs? Deliberate cheats? It seems like the programmer
didn't have confidence in his/her game, so had to throw in a few
sideswipes
to keep the user from winning too often...

Can you tell I've been playing today?

Joyce


Only a little.

There seems to be a rule that in order to really truly knock out a color,
you must actually hit with one of that color. Getting rid of a color
while hitting on a different color frequently doesn't seem to count.

Not true. you can get rid of that extra colour if you pop the ones above
it, so it has to fall down.

The best explanation I've got is that whilst we know what the next two
bubbel colours are going to be (the one in the shooter and the one in the
bottom right hand corner), the computer knows the next four or five. If
you eliminate the colour, but that colour happens to be already in the
'queue', you'll get it back, although it might so happen that inthe mean
time, you've already got a new row or rows that doesn't have that colour
included.

The only way to deal with it is to place where you can easily shoot the
one or two bubbels above it that its attached to.

The 'cheat' that I find really annoying (besides the perpetual 'it changed
colour on me' one) is when yo do two trick shots in a row - the firs tone
works and *without moving the cursor* the second one does and it registers
it as a 'miss' even though you know darn well it *ought to be* a 'hit'
(and therefore a pop)

its an evil evil game!!!!

Yowie

jofirey wrote:

There seems to be a rule that in order to really truly knock out a color,
you must actually hit with one of that color. Getting rid of a color while
hitting on a different color frequently doesn't seem to count.

Somebody please write that over again in English if you can figure out what
I'm trying to say.

I think you're saying this: For example, say you have a few oranges on
the screen, and they're hanging underneath some greens. Say you fire off
a green bubble which gets rid of those greens, plus the oranges that are
under those greens. And those happen to be the last orange bubbles on the
screen. It sounded like you were saying that didn't really count as
"eliminating the orange bubbles".

I've never noticed that before, but I'll try to pay attention to it next
time.

Joyce

--
To send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name.

Yowie wrote:

The best explanation I've got is that whilst we know what the next two
bubbel colours are going to be (the one in the shooter and the one in the
bottom right hand corner), the computer knows the next four or five. If you
eliminate the colour, but that colour happens to be already in the 'queue',
you'll get it back, although it might so happen that inthe mean time, you've
already got a new row or rows that doesn't have that colour included.

OK, but how do you know of the existence of this queue? I mean, all we can
see is the one that's "up at bat" and the one that's "on deck". (Oops,
wrong metaphor for an Australian - those are baseball terms. I mean
what you said - the one in the shooter, and the one in the lower-right
corner.) How do you know that the computer knows the next 4 or 5? I mean,
maybe it does, but if so, how did you figure that out?

The 'cheat' that I find really annoying (besides the perpetual 'it changed
colour on me' one) is when yo do two trick shots in a row - the firs tone
works and *without moving the cursor* the second one does and it registers
it as a 'miss' even though you know darn well it *ought to be* a 'hit' (and
therefore a pop)

Yeah, I wrote about that. It pretends to be a miss, but really, it's
*stopping* just before it hits, and then saying, "Oh, oops, um, that's a
miss. Uh yeah, it's a miss!" I mean, I've seen the stupid thing actually
*stop* right in front of the target full of same-color bubbles!!

its an evil evil game!!!!

This all reminds me of a Star Trek Next Generation episode called "The
Game" - about this little video game that people wore on their heads,
which looked like a combination of headphones and eyeglasses. They would
play it with their eyes or something. Every time they made a successful
move, the game would trigger a rush of physical pleasure, so everyone
got addicted to it, even Picard. But then it turned out that the game
was actually a subliminal mind control device, and while people were
zoned out playing the game, they were being brainwashed to give up the
Enterprise to some foreign planetary government.

I'm telling you, Bubbels was created by Bonnie and Clyde. It actually
has subliminal brainwashing to get you to give up control of your life
to your cats. Meanwhile, the two devils are laughing up their sleeves
at us whenever their cursed game "cheats" on us. And, of course, peeing
in Bev's sink.

Joyce

--
To send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name.

wrote:
Yowie wrote:

The best explanation I've got is that whilst we know what the next
two bubbel colours are going to be (the one in the shooter and the
one in the bottom right hand corner), the computer knows the next
four or five. If you eliminate the colour, but that colour happens
to be already in the 'queue', you'll get it back, although it might
so happen that inthe mean time, you've already got a new row or rows
that doesn't have that colour included.

OK, but how do you know of the existence of this queue? I mean, all
we can see is the one that's "up at bat" and the one that's "on
deck". (Oops, wrong metaphor for an Australian - those are baseball
terms. I mean what you said - the one in the shooter, and the one
in the lower-right corner.) How do you know that the computer knows
the next 4 or 5? I mean, maybe it does, but if so, how did you figure
that out?

I don't know this for sure, I'm only guessing. It depends, I guess, on
whether you think the program was designed to actually *cheat* occasionally,
or whether it has a set of rules that it sticks to, but we humans don't
quite understand the rules.

Most programs don't have 'cheat' built in (some sophisticated ones do,
though) so I am theorising that the appearance of a bubbel colour that has
already been eliminated from the playing area is not a random 'cheat' but
has a *reason*, and that the reason is that its already in the 'queue'. I
could, of course, be totally wrong. If we coudl find the programmer, we
could ask.

The 'cheat' that I find really annoying (besides the perpetual 'it
changed colour on me' one) is when yo do two trick shots in a row -
the firs tone works and *without moving the cursor* the second one
does and it registers it as a 'miss' even though you know darn well
it *ought to be* a 'hit' (and therefore a pop)

Yeah, I wrote about that. It pretends to be a miss, but really, it's
*stopping* just before it hits, and then saying, "Oh, oops, um,
that's a miss. Uh yeah, it's a miss!" I mean, I've seen the stupid
thing actually *stop* right in front of the target full of same-color
bubbles!!

Drives me nuts. I wonder, again, whether its a *cheat* or its simply a case
of being a very close miss, one that we can't easily see - that is maybe a
pixel big or something.

Its not a *big* file, so I doubt that there is that sort of sophistication
inthe program that makes it *cheat*. But he sublty of programming that makes
it *seem* to cheat on occasion is, I'm quite sure, why we are all so dar
addicted to it. It has exactly the right mix of being partially controllable
and partly random that makes it so infuriatingly easy to play but hard
enough to get a win.

Yowie


its an evil evil game!!!!

This all reminds me of a Star Trek Next Generation episode called "The
Game" - about this little video game that people wore on their heads,
which looked like a combination of headphones and eyeglasses. They
would play it with their eyes or something. Every time they made a
successful move, the game would trigger a rush of physical pleasure,
so everyone
got addicted to it, even Picard. But then it turned out that the game
was actually a subliminal mind control device, and while people were
zoned out playing the game, they were being brainwashed to give up the
Enterprise to some foreign planetary government.

I'm telling you, Bubbels was created by Bonnie and Clyde. It actually
has subliminal brainwashing to get you to give up control of your life
to your cats. Meanwhile, the two devils are laughing up their sleeves
at us whenever their cursed game "cheats" on us. And, of course,
peeing in Bev's sink.

Joyce

--
If you're paddling upstream in a canoe and a wheel falls off, how many
pancakes can you fit in a doghouse? None, icecream doesn't have bones.

wrote:
jofirey wrote:

There seems to be a rule that in order to really truly knock out a
color, you must actually hit with one of that color. Getting rid
of a color while hitting on a different color frequently doesn't
seem to count.

Somebody please write that over again in English if you can figure
out what I'm trying to say.

I think you're saying this: For example, say you have a few oranges on
the screen, and they're hanging underneath some greens. Say you fire
off a green bubble which gets rid of those greens, plus the oranges
that are under those greens. And those happen to be the last orange
bubbles on the screen. It sounded like you were saying that didn't
really count as "eliminating the orange bubbles".

I've never noticed that before, but I'll try to pay attention to it
next time.

Hey! Thats a good observation too - will have to see whether thats a more
viable theory than the 'four or five already in the queue' theory (probably
is).

Yowie

"Kyla =^..^=" wrote in message
. ..
So where can I find this game??
Kyla

http://www.monstergamez.net/swf/bubbels.swf

Hugs,

CatNipped