Hi, it's me. You know, the original poster?(posted 9257 days ago)Anyway, I have to agree with QT in that it certainly seems that this discussion was never resolved in the past, which is why I posted this in the first place.
In searching the boards, all I could find were a few discussions, one from almost exactly a year ago, where the topic was never resolved. Everyone had their opinions and pretty much stuck to them.
Here's my opinion: I think that if you allow multiple-credit games, you introduce a pretty big problem - you'll have to establish different rules for every game that doesn't follow the regular rules (which, as QT mentioned, state pretty clearly that games are to be one-credit only.) Do you allow continues for a full game? Multiple games as long as you keep winning?
Plus, you'll have to publish those rules somewhere that everyone (like me) can see them so that everyone knows what they are and will hopefully, post consistently.
On the other hand, if only one credit is allowed, you could potentially have a zillion-way tie for 1st in games like tdfever because if you play it enough times and figure out the controls, you'll get 14 points. I'm not sure that's really the answer either.
On a third hand (ha!), what do you do with games like Arch Rivals? Using Chris' theory, would you play a full game (multiple credits, obviously) as long as you're always ahead? There's enough variation in the game to allow score differentiation with only one credit. So, what then?
Bottom line: if multiple-credit games are allowed, someone (the voting public, I would guess) will need to determine EXACTLY which games to allow and then post this information conspicuously and often. Otherwise, you'll have problems with inconsistent uploads and it will become a verification nightmare.
That's just my opinion, I could be wrong....