Motion Induced Blindness

[LUNardei]

I think it's time to stop saying that we can do what they do IF xxx, it is false atm.

not because it might not be politically correct, but because it is not scientifically valid. You cannot state absolutely that what you're referring to is false, because it has not ever been conclusively shown to be false. For this to be the case, and be accepted as such by a professional experimental scientist (ie. me ) you would have to have a situation where a significantly large number of Western gamers were playing in identical situations to the Japanese gamers -- in practice, this would have to mean they were playing in Japanese arcades, putting in the same amount of time, and. 'training' in exactly the same way. Basically, every single other variable except for ethnicity would have to be equal, which at present is clearly not the case -- there aren't exactly hordes of Western gamers invading the arcades of Japan!

In scientific terms you're right, no doubts! It would be interesting to experiment what you say, really. It will be the end of all this free speculations
Anyway, we should face reality. That ATM was the key. It means that ATM we can't fight with equal conditions, so (in my opinion) we can't reach WRs in modern shootings. There are tons of evidences (only evidences, not proofs, obviously) about this. Every single western score.

Therefore, you do not have any hard evidence that supports your theory that the Japanese players' racial makeup is a significant factor in their shoot-em-up success.

Fact is that know we can hardly reach 50% of their scores (it depends on the game). We now that we can't fight with equal conditions, we know it too well! But why? That's the point imho. My guess is that nature can be (honestly I think it is) involved. A theory that seems blasphemous reading some stuff posted here in the (even recent) past.

[Randorama]

Just re-read the sentence:
"The idea that practice can put us all on the same level is very politically correct but simply false (again, read this for clarifications)."
Yes, it's not directly related to MIB. It's just the beginning of my thoughts and theories.

"Please expand upon this point", like my supervisor always says.

That was stated non relevant about videogames, in the Skill thread, you know. That's simply not serious. They suffer less of MIB for example, we MUST consider that.

Do you have data to back up what you say, though? Like Eps points out.

Unproven doesn't mean false.

Neither true, so until you can prove it, it's "*" (undefined). A good thing in science is to talk about PROVEN things, for instance.

Much appreciated. But now I don't know what do you want to prove. Are you the Rando of the Skill topic (method and practice can give WRs to everyone) or the one above (who can consider nature involved)?

This comment makes no sense whatsoever. Again, if you can prove by hard facts that a given population has an innate development of a number of cognitive modules that allow for an increased hand-eye coordination (which modules are those? How they contribute? How they're related in a causal relation?), You still need to prove by hard facts that this factor is preponderant in the learning process of a complex task over time.
Exempli gratia (pure speculation, no real proof of whatever): if there are 10 modules involved in coordinating an aiming task via an object (i.e. if you're using ten different parts of the brain to move the joystick and dodge bullets), and every module contributes in a 10% range to the final result of the perfomance, someone having genetically a better chance to use a module out of then (say, 10% of 10%) would have a whoopping 1% "extra bonus" in performance.
Now, none of this has been proven (again), so i can't honestly say that "asiatic are the superior shmupping race". As i also said in the past, "nature" (if you believe into the dual inheritance theory, Boyd & Richardson(1985)) can give an edge: all things being equal, someone being naturally equipped with an higher hand-eye coordination will be the strongest player. If this factor is individual-based or ethnic-based is something left for future research.
By hard facts, also, i can prove that the westerners who post here play games three times and then whine about not being able to be the universal champions. Who knows, we may have people with the amazing shmup gene floating around on this board (which magically makes people be perfect at the fifth try of a game!), and he probably spends time whining and playing games four times

[NTSC-J]

Forgive me for not reading the whole thread, but the thought that race plays a role in skill is absolutely false. Black sports players have had to deal with this accusation for years, and it has as little factual value to it as Japanese being more inclined to be gifted in games. Could it be that black kids excel at basketball because they actually practice it all the time?

The environment and experience is what shapes a person, there's nothing inherited in terms of any sort of skill like sports or games.

Japanese kids just play these games that much. That's all. Americans are by and large a lazy, short-attention-spanned crowd and that method of constant repitition wasn't ingrained in early developmental stages. There are a number of players from around the world that do play at Japanese record level because they do the same massive amounts of practice.

If you want to try to prove scientifically that race has any part in intellectual development, go read The Bell Curve. Written in the 90s, it's about the most racist, garbage thing you could find and yet still people buy into it.

[DC906270]

nature/genes will play a part, dont think race/ethnicity has anything to do with skill tho

[LUNardei]

"Please expand upon this point", like my supervisor always says.

Uhm. Actually I've already expanded. Ok. Let's semplify:
- my theory is: nature play a relevant role in HIGH LEVEL shmupping (not western or japanese MID level, I mean japanese HIGH LEVEL = WRs)
- in this topic we stated (thanks to a linked article) that asian people suffer less of MIB. This is pretty obviously a physical advantage (maybe slight) in shmupping.
Therefore, physical advantages exist. And are very interesting. More than well known facts like "They play togheter in the arcades with cabs, informations etc.". Why do you find it blasphemous?

Do you have data to back up what you say, though? Like Eps points out.


Neither true, so until you can prove it, it's "*" (undefined). A good thing in science is to talk about PROVEN things, for instance.

Obviously I can't do science explaining my theories here. I can't but you can't too.

This comment makes no sense whatsoever. Again, if you can prove by hard facts that a given population has an innate development of a number of cognitive modules that allow for an increased hand-eye coordination (which modules are those? How they contribute? How they're related in a causal relation?), You still need to prove by hard facts that this factor is preponderant in the learning process of a complex task over time.

Again, I can't, I'm sorry. I can only notice clues, like in this topic.

Exempli gratia

Pure speculation.

(if you believe into the dual inheritance theory, Boyd & Richardson(1985)) can give an edge: all things being equal, someone being naturally equipped with an higher hand-eye coordination will be the strongest player. If this factor is individual-based or ethnic-based is something left for future research.

I'm not referring to that theory. Future research? Ok, I'd really love it. But for the moment we have tons of clues, they're called world records.

By hard facts, also, i can prove that the westerners who post here play games three times and then whine about not being able to be the universal champions. Who knows, we may have people with the amazing shmup gene floating around on this board (which magically makes people be perfect at the fifth try of a game!), and he probably spends time whining and playing games four times

This is an over-simplified view. Is it really that good to say banality like these instead of trying to think something new? WHY?

[LUNardei]

Forgive me for not reading the whole thread, but the thought that race plays a role in skill is absolutely false. Black sports players have had to deal with this accusation for years, and it has as little factual value to it as Japanese being more inclined to be gifted in games. Could it be that black kids excel at basketball because they actually practice it all the time?

The environment and experience is what shapes a person, there's nothing inherited in terms of any sort of skill like sports or games.

This is false. This is what you think, but not what cognitive psychology think nowadays. Really, read only the introdution of Pinker's book. Only the introdution.

- This is who Pinker is
- this is the book I'm always talking about here and there

Japanese kids just play these games that much. That's all. Americans are by and large a lazy, short-attention-spanned crowd and that method of constant repitition wasn't ingrained in early developmental stages. There are a number of players from around the world that do play at Japanese record level because they do the same massive amounts of practice.

How many? Who? Obviously they can prove that they can obtain japanese-like scores. Obviously
And anyway, exeptions may be considered pretty normal.

If you want to try to prove scientifically that race has any part in intellectual development, go read The Bell Curve. Written in the 90s, it's about the most racist, garbage thing you could find and yet still people buy into it.

Let's clarify: I'm not racist or shit like that. Period.
My poor english cannot allow me to answer to this as I want. I can quote this (always from http://pinker.wjh.harvard.edu/books/tbs/index.html):

"Our conceptions of human nature affect every aspect of our lives, from the way we raise our children to the political movements we embrace. Yet just as science is bringing us into a golden age of understanding human nature, many people are hostile to the very idea. They fear that discoveries about innate patterns of thinking and feeling may be used to justify inequality, to subvert social change, to dissolve personal responsibility, and to strip life of meaning and purpose.

In The Blank Slate, Steven Pinker, bestselling author of The Language Instinct and How the Mind Works, explores the idea of human nature and its moral, emotional, and political colorings. He shows how many intellectuals have denied the existence of human nature by embracing three linked dogmas: The Blank Slate (the mind has no innate traits), The Noble Savage (people are born good and corrupted by society), and The Ghost in the Machine (each of us has a soul that makes choices free from biology). Each dogma carries a moral burden, so their defenders have engaged in the desperate tactics to discredit the scientists who are now challenging them.

Pinker tries to inject calm and rationality into these debates by showing that equality, progress, responsibility, and purpose have nothing to fear from discoveries about rich human nature. He disarms even the most menacing threats with clear thinking, common sense, and pertinent facts from science and history. Despite its popularity among intellectuals during much of the twentieth century, he argues, the doctrine of the Blank Slate may have done more harm than good. It denies our common humanity and our individual preferences, replaces hardheaded analyses of social problems with feel-good slogans, and distorts our understanding of government, violence, parenting, and the arts. "

read that book, really.

[Kiken]

Japanese kids just play these games that much. That's all. Americans are by and large a lazy, short-attention-spanned crowd and that method of constant repitition wasn't ingrained in early developmental stages. There are a number of players from around the world that do play at Japanese record level because they do the same massive amounts of practice.

How many? Who? Obviously they can prove that they can obtain japanese-like scores. Obviously
And anyway, exeptions may be considered pretty normal.

Actually, another trend that we've seen develop is the outright abuse of multiple auto-fire switches on Japanese arcade cabs. This leads to WRs that are pretty much unobtainable in any other format (certainly not for those of us restricted in one way or another to playing ports). I really consider these high-scores Overdrive Scoring as it seems more intended to push the hardware.

[LUNardei]

Actually, another trend that we've seen develop is the outright abuse of multiple auto-fire switches on Japanese arcade cabs. This leads to WRs that are pretty much unobtainable in any other format (certainly not for those of us restricted in one way or another to playing ports). I really consider these high-scores Overdrive Scoring as it seems more intended to push the hardware.

This is true for some games, but they use to specify if they play with hardware autofire or not.
Uhm, another note to my thoughts: I absolutely don't want to say that we should stop playing or similar shit. We should always try our best, that's for sure.

[Dave_K.]

- my theory is: nature play a relevant role in HIGH LEVEL shmupping (not western or japanese MID level, I mean japanese HIGH LEVEL = WRs)

At this point, a theory, yes. I think its perfectly acceptable to share these theories, and have people take shots at them.

- in this topic we stated (thanks to a linked article) that asian people suffer less of MIB. This is pretty obviously a physical advantage (maybe slight) in shmupping.

Actually there were two arcticles, talking about two seperate things: eastern people saccade more often looking at a picture than westerners, and MIB disfavors saccade. Drawing a conclusion from both these articles is a working premis, and not fact unless a quantifiable study is performed.

Lastly, the degree of MIB hasn't been quantified in shmups, so again, this is all conjecture at this point, but interesting to think about none-the-less.

LUNardei, if your theory was true, and this natural selection applies to more than just individual asians, then wouldn't ALL asians be much farther advanced then westerners at shmupping? Why do we only hear about a select few who consistantly get WRs?

Maybe a more interesting thought, what about Asians that migrated to the US or Europe in the last 50-100 years, even though their upbringing is based in western culture, they should still have this inate ability right (according to your theory)? Why haven't we herd of any of these westerners making WRs?

[LUNardei]

At this point, a theory, yes. I think its perfectly acceptable to share these theories, and have people take shots at them.

Glad to read this!

Actually there were two arcticles, talking about two seperate things: eastern people saccade more often looking at a picture than westerners, and MIB disfavors saccade. Drawing a conclusion from both these articles is a working premis, and not fact unless a quantifiable study is performed.

An encouraging premiss, I'd say. Now we are sure that there are physical differences between different populations, why ignore it talking about shmups?

Lastly, the degree of MIB hasn't been quantified in shmups, so again, this is all conjecture at this point, but interesting to think about none-the-less.

I totally agree.

LUNardei, if your theory was true, and this natural selection applies to more than just individual asians, then wouldn't ALL asians be much farther advanced then westerners at shmupping?

Take a random arcade center from japan in a random day and compare the scores you find there with our scoreboards. A mid-class player there can probably accomplish a 2-all without a top score, a mid-class player here can't clear a first loop.
Also, we know of great performances from chinese people (different culture and environment but same "nature", more or less).

Why do we only hear about a select few who consistantly get WRs?

Uhm, I think you're referring to super-players like SWY and TAC, am I right? Well, they put for sure more time in games, just because they're famous players and they want to keep this status. Plus they can be even more talented than other japanese players, which is absolutely normal.

Maybe a more interesting thought, what about Asians that migrated to the US or Europe in the last 50-100 years, even though their upbringing is based in western culture, they should still have this inate ability right (according to your theory)? Why haven't we herd of any of these westerners making WRs?

Good point, but in that case they miss the other two factors mentioned, culture and environment.

[NTSC-J]

Just because we don't have westerners posting master scores at this forum, doesn't mean they're not out there. How many westerners play Ketsui on a regular basis? 20? How many play Halo and are master players at it? Too many.

There is no genetic advantage to those of asiatic birth, period. Any sort of difference that the shape of the eye makes is negligible. It's not like they can spot a dime from 200 miles away; it's not that much of a head start if anything at all. If westerners wanted to get world record scores in shooters they would but no one gives a shit. Like I said, take a Japanese kid and throw him into a Halo tournament and watch him suffer. Incidentally, I've heard stuff about Japanese getting motion sickness from FPS', but that's just more horseshit, plenty of Americans do to. Japanese just don't care about Halo so they're not champs at it.

Back in the day when there was an actual arcade scene in the states, there were plenty of gaming wizards. The record holder for Pacman and some other shitty old games is a white guy. Did his beard tell him what cherries to grab? I doubt it. He played the games all the time and there was a community large enough to support competitive play. When arcades were the primary gaming source, it was a much different story.

The only effects racial background have on individuals are in cases like a higher rate of sickle-cell enemia in black folk and asian folk lacking an enzyme or something that retains alcohol.

In the end, it's just making excuses. So many Japanese are better at these games, but it's because they work harder at it. That is all.

[freddiebamboo]

I wasn't thinking of scrolling backgrounds, but rather bullet patterns. Think of some patterns in DDPDOJ (stage 3 comes to mind), where you have large sets of fast blue bullets moving downard, and slower sets of ping bullets moving across. Couldn't you say the blue bullets are "eating" the pink bullets? And if you aren't familiar with the common dodging techniques for these patterns, you may find yourself focusing down more often on the ship to monitor the hitbox.

That shit bothers the hell out of my friend. Multiple color bullets.

Cave seems to have stopped it's multi coloured bullet obsession in it's last few games. I wonder if MIB works without the dots being different colours. Could be cave trying to make things as fair as possible?

As for the other raging debate in the thread, I got to side with NTSC-J on this one. Thousands of dudes do hundreds of hours practise on single games to get WR scores in Japan. It's no wonder the small amount of western players don't come close.

[Randorama]

Uhm. Actually I've already expanded. Ok. Let's semplify:
- my theory is: nature play a relevant role in HIGH LEVEL shmupping (not western or japanese MID level, I mean japanese HIGH LEVEL = WRs)

Why HIGH?

- in this topic we stated (thanks to a linked article) that asian people suffer less of MIB. This is pretty obviously a physical advantage (maybe slight) in shmupping.

Please, let's be careful: if we (well, someone, i do a different job) can prove that a lower MIB is indeed innate (and not developed by an indirect effect, like for instance the use of an ideographic writing system) in some ethnic group, and this gives an advantage in a critical aspect of shmupping, then there is a proof. Which is not such an immediate proof, i'd add.

Therefore, physical advantages exist. And are very interesting. More than well known facts like "They play togheter in the arcades with cabs, informations etc.". Why do you find it blasphemous?

I don't, personally: i'm used to fully spell-out the possible conditions behind a model, and check i they match with the fact i'm trying to understand, though. I wouldn't be surprised at all if indeed, some populations have some traits being advantageous to a complex activity like shmupping. However, i don't think they're "huge".
All things being equal, though. Which means that if you don't know how to play a game (which specific tricks to do and when, which rules out skill-based tasks like effectively dodging a pattern) you will never get a WR.

Obviously I can't do science explaining my theories here. I can't but you can't too.

In fact i'm talking about unproven things, while you're inducing that what is not false must necessarily be true, which is an error in terms of presuppositions calculus. Beside that, a good method in science is to be careful with claims and try to base them.

Pure speculation.

like i pointed out!

I'm not referring to that theory. Future research? Ok, I'd really love it. But for the moment we have tons of clues, they're called world records.

Simple question: how to get 27M on Ibara? Second question: does it involve extremely advanced dodging skills? Honestly, factors increasing a better perfomance in dodging bullets and discerning patterns can be an help in games that are demanding in this department.

This is an over-simplified view. Is it really that good to say banality like these instead of trying to think something new? WHY?

Because you're invited to prove otherwise. The high-score section can give you a lot of empirical proof of people sitting down and play for six-seven months, four hours a day, Ketsui...a suggestion: before claiming things you don't like "banal", you should check if you're actually thinking something "new" yourself. You are actually beating a dead horse by invoking genetics ONLY, as we both know.
Beside that, "new explanation" has a different meaning from " pertinent explanation".

[LUNardei]

There is no genetic advantage to those of asiatic birth, period.

Can you prove it by hard facts?

[LUNardei]

Why HIGH?

'Cause the question is: how can they reach THAT level of play?
I also want to say that is unproven that we can reach that level.

Please, let's be careful: if we (well, someone, i do a different job) can prove that a lower MIB is indeed innate (and not developed by an indirect effect, like for instance the use of an ideographic writing system) in some ethnic group, and this gives an advantage in a critical aspect of shmupping, then there is a proof. Which is not such an immediate proof, i'd add.

Ok, I agree. I'm only trying to bring on a different, a bit more complete view on this problem. Nothing absolutely scientific, this should be clear.

I don't, personally: i'm used to fully spell-out the possible conditions behind a model, and check i they match with the fact i'm trying to understand, though. I wouldn't be surprised at all if indeed, some populations have some traits being advantageous to a complex activity like shmupping. However, i don't think they're "huge".

Never said they're huge.

In fact i'm talking about unproven things, while you're inducing that what is not false must necessarily be true, which is an error in terms of presuppositions calculus. Beside that, a good method in science is to be careful with claims and try to base them.

From this topic seems that a better method in science is: "be careful if someone has already spoken about something". No offense, just my impression.

Pure speculation.

like i pointed out!

We agree about this

Simple question: how to get 27M on Ibara? Second question: does it involve extremely advanced dodging skills? Honestly, factors increasing a better perfomance in dodging bullets and discerning patterns can be an help in games that are demanding in this department.

Yes but... I still don't see anyone here with 27M on Ibara. I'd really like it, obviously.

Because you're invited to prove otherwise.

You know I can't.

The high-score section can give you a lot of empirical proof of people sitting down and play for six-seven months, four hours a day, Ketsui...

I am that one! But I've only got a good 160M (not already posted). MMM destroyed my score in a few weeks. This makes me think about talent (intended as a better natural equipment for shmups), the same thing that can be more diffuse (is it the right word?) in asian individuals. Can be, not must be (final word on this).

a suggestion: before claiming things you don't like "banal", you should check if you're actually thinking something "new" yourself. You are actually beating a dead horse by invoking genetics ONLY, as we both know.

No, no, no, NO. I always talked about culture, environment AND nature, not nature only. A dead horse is "Play more, play better, know everything", which is only a GREAT beginning.

[professor ganson]

Dave, I finally had a chance to take a more careful look at your original post. Really fascinating stuff. Thanks.

I have just one comment. The idea that the phenomenon is due somehow to a breakdown in our attention strikes me as puzzling. When I viewed the example you gave, I was careful to focus my eyes toward the center WHILE CAREFULLY ATTENDING TO MY PERIPHERY. But even when I was concentrating with full attention on the areas where the colored spots lie, I would notice them disappear. Indeed, what's even more puzzling to me at the moment is that we all NOTICE them disappear, so it doesn't seem like there is a breakdown in the attention with respect to the items that disappear. Perhaps I'm missing something here.

[Dave_K.]

I have just one comment. The idea that the phenomenon is due somehow to a breakdown in our attention strikes me as puzzling. When I viewed the example you gave, I was careful to focus my eyes toward the center WHILE CAREFULLY ATTENDING TO MY PERIPHERY. But even when I was concentrating with full attention on the areas where the colored spots lie, I would notice them disappear. Indeed, what's even more puzzling to me at the moment is that we all NOTICE them disappear, so it doesn't seem like there is a breakdown in the attention with respect to the items that disappear. Perhaps I'm missing something here.

Do all of the yellow dots disapear at the same time for you? Look at the flash example again, and see if certain dots disapear and come back, as if fighting for "attention"...then all three disapear if you relax and let it happen. Per the last two sentences of that Natrure abstract, the breakdown is said to be "between object representations within the human visual system".

Since you are in academia, maybe you have access to download the full article and can repost it here? I wouldn't mind reading the rest of it.

I may have taken a leap trying to relate this to classic ADD just because the abstract references cases of attention deficits. I've always thought manic shmups may contribute somewhat to ADD as you are being trained to constantly scan the screen for new events while keeping track of hundreds of bullets. At least I feel pretty jacked up after playing, and find it hard to concerntrate on anything afterwards.

[professor ganson]

Do all of the yellow dots disapear at the same time for you? Look at the flash example again, and see if certain dots disapear and come back, as if fighting for "attention"...then all three disapear if you relax and let it happen. Per the last two sentences of that Natrure abstract, the breakdown is said to be "between object representations within the human visual system".

Since you are in academia, maybe you have access to download the full article and can repost it here? I wouldn't mind reading the rest of it.

I'll give this all more thought once I get a copy of the paper. I have a research assistant this summer, and I'll ask him to get me two hard copies of this. I can send you one in the mail. I'll get your address once I have a copy.

[Dave_K.]

That would be awsome. Thanks professor ganson!

[Tar-Palantir]

Paper available here.

[chtimi-CLA]

the kind of MIB i die the most to is when i'm zipping around fast patterns, but some slow pattern is approaching. i know i'm probably going to get hit, but i freeze and eat it like a charged astaroth 3B.
that could be called downward MIB, strangely i find it much easier the other way around (upward)

[shiftace]

I have just one comment. The idea that the phenomenon is due somehow to a breakdown in our attention strikes me as puzzling. When I viewed the example you gave, I was careful to focus my eyes toward the center WHILE CAREFULLY ATTENDING TO MY PERIPHERY. But even when I was concentrating with full attention on the areas where the colored spots lie, I would notice them disappear. Indeed, what's even more puzzling to me at the moment is that we all NOTICE them disappear, so it doesn't seem like there is a breakdown in the attention with respect to the items that disappear. Perhaps I'm missing something here.

I think, when they talk about attentional processing, they're not talking about conscious attention. Rather, it's some unconscious operation in the visual pathway; there's an enormous amount of processing that occurs before visual stimuli register consciously. They're probably talking about the separation of foreground (objects) from background (scene). In any case, that definition makes sense in context. I'm not an expert on human vision, but I got to think about it for a couple of classes. Interesting paper, I hope they publish more.

[raiden]

I was wondering about this whole issue with different saccading rates: isn´t saccading something you can also do consciously? Just went home by bike and tightened my eyes in order to prevent insects from flying into them, and they started to saccade a lot more often.
So whatever theoretical genetic benefit asian folks might have, I´d think western folks might just "emulate" by tightening their eyes when playing. Of course this conscious tightening is a little more exhausting than leaving your eyes at their natural shape, but playing shmups is an exhausting process in itself. If tightening your eyes helps prevent MIB, therefore keeping track of all bullets in the game, it should be worth the effort.
But on the other hand, this MIB phenomenon is one that´s happening on a small area of the screen. Whereas tightening your eyes, like concentrating on a small area, helps you dodge through tight patterns, it hardens noticing distant bullets that are fired quickly at you. So I think the whole genetic difference, at most, boils down to something similar to the debate about screen sizes: it´s overview versus precision. One is better for certain games/situations, while for other games/situations, the other is better.
I still find the MIB phenomenon fascinating, as it explains so many "strange" situations occuring when playing shmups, but I don´t think the existence of this phenomenon is really that relevant on different scores from different cultures.

[Dave_K.]

Paper available here.

Thanks!

I still find the MIB phenomenon fascinating, as it explains so many "strange" situations occuring when playing shmups, but I don´t think the existence of this phenomenon is really that relevant on different scores from different cultures.

Not so sure about the squinting thing, as people normally do this when their eyes fatigue, which changes the shape of the eye/lens to focus better, similar to putting on a pair of reading glasses. Wether or not this means more saccade because of a reduced visual field is debateable. As for MIB relevance from different cultures, its just a hypothesis at this point given the other cited article on eastern visual perception. Obviously a study would have to be done to draw real conclusions.

[WarCheese]

Hello all:

Thanks for sharing this.

The pattern reminds me of some of DOJ's patterns... So, that's why I can't past lvl 3...

Cheers.

WarCheese