Duck Dodgers Starring Daffy Duck

Edit history:

SDAVerification: 2016-11-15 11:36:44 am

2016-10-18 10:40:17 am

Game Page: Doesn't exist yet

Duck Dodgers Starring Daffy Duck (ntscus) (n64) [100 %] [Single Segment]

Decision: Reject

Reason: It's well played in many parts, but overall there are too many mistakes.

https://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/verificationfiles/1963/

This run will be available for a month. After that these link(s) will no longer work.

Thread title:

SDAVerification

2016-10-18 10:40:22 am

Run Information

Duck Dodgers Starring Daffy Duck (ntscus) (n64) [100 %] [Single Segment]

Verification Files

http://v.speeddemosarchive.com/duckdodgers64-20161008/

Please refer to the Verification Guidelines before posting.

Please post your opinions about the run and be certain to conclude your post with a verdict (Accept/Reject). This is not a contest where the majority wins - I will judge each verification on its content. Please keep your verification brief unless you have a good reason otherwise.

LotBlind

Edit history:

LotBlind: 2016-11-04 03:06:26 pm

2016-11-03 12:03:00 pm

Doing this (60 min in)

Uilnslcoap

2016-11-03 06:02:37 pm

F*ckin' sanity effects...

I will look at this tonight as well.

LotBlind

2016-11-05 01:16:12 pm

A/V: video should probably be cropped. The left channel is partially muted between 38:02 and 45:23. I think there's other instances too and it really can't be the game doing it based on the timing.

Video Game arcade: sheesh that looks tough!

18:25: here I don't know if jumping off the driveway is smart - looks like you're slightly higher when on the pavement. You were going the right direction as well. On the other hand had you gotten the trick sooner, it would have saved time going to and fro.

20:34: I think I'm gonna call that an unforced mistake - stopping to make sure your jump angle isn't as far out would've given you a better chance of rounding the corner successfully.

The chutes look like you have some kind of slope boost in the game. Do you jump further if you're jumping off a slope? Why do I feel you sometimes fly further...

21:00: Looks like a hasty jump - wouldn't have saved much time but at least it looked like you could have set it up better quickly enough to save something.

21:50: Looked like okay movement in here so getting caught in the wind is probably fine.

28:31: Here's one of these shorter jumps that happen from time to time - is this you messing the inputs a bit?

Well so this run could be improved for sure. Games with sucky controls that pull weird shit on you can be run so it still looks good, it just takes longer to learn to satisfy the arcane conditions. 27:38 is a case of this. It looks like the runner is doing everything right and the game just doesn't react, but I feel (and it's tough to say ofc) that by choosing a more direct approach on the button the fumbling could have been avoided.

30:54 - this merry-go-round looks like there might have been more consistent strategies. In the end you get the atom by hopping onto the middle bit and just taking a few more running steps. I can't tell if the atom is slowed down randomly but it looks to behave pretty predictably (aside from randomly doing a 180).

I think the hopping precisely onto buttons could be practiced really easily without needing to reset or anything. I'm sure there's a button somewhere that you can use as many times as you like.

45:18 - here, why couldn't you just have taken a few steps back before throwing? I felt it was going to miss before you threw. Maybe it was very close to hitting him though.

45:23 - This is where the audio turns to normal... was there some cable issue? Does it start at 38:02?

46:56 - Why did you jump a second time in the air? Don't you have any control during the first jump? Taking two attempts to make it up the pyramid is fine but this looks really sloppy. Did it function as a death warp though? How much time did you lose to falling overall?

55:18 - at the end of the race, why do you prefer to bump into the icicle?

1:03:32 - the sound comes back to the left ear again hear so there must have been another issue. There's more of it in the next couple of minutes.

1:05:47 - why the weaving?

Can't you use the electric fences for damage boosting while in chicken form? It looks like it sends you flying, but maybe it's mostly vertical.

So looks like a lot of this run goes fine, and the runner clearly knows the route well, but I feel that's mostly all the parts that are a bit basic anyway. The runner stops for better setups for some difficult-er tricks sometimes, which is what I'd have liked to see done a few more places. Multiple times the mistakes looked like something you can iron out by just studying the platforms etc. a bit more carefully and doing more attempts. I think I'll let the runner comment on stuff I've pointed out though before casting my vote.

A/V: video should probably be cropped. The left channel is partially muted between 38:02 and 45:23. I think there's other instances too and it really can't be the game doing it based on the timing.

Video Game arcade: sheesh that looks tough!

18:25: here I don't know if jumping off the driveway is smart - looks like you're slightly higher when on the pavement. You were going the right direction as well. On the other hand had you gotten the trick sooner, it would have saved time going to and fro.

20:34: I think I'm gonna call that an unforced mistake - stopping to make sure your jump angle isn't as far out would've given you a better chance of rounding the corner successfully.

The chutes look like you have some kind of slope boost in the game. Do you jump further if you're jumping off a slope? Why do I feel you sometimes fly further...

21:00: Looks like a hasty jump - wouldn't have saved much time but at least it looked like you could have set it up better quickly enough to save something.

21:50: Looked like okay movement in here so getting caught in the wind is probably fine.

28:31: Here's one of these shorter jumps that happen from time to time - is this you messing the inputs a bit?

Well so this run could be improved for sure. Games with sucky controls that pull weird shit on you can be run so it still looks good, it just takes longer to learn to satisfy the arcane conditions. 27:38 is a case of this. It looks like the runner is doing everything right and the game just doesn't react, but I feel (and it's tough to say ofc) that by choosing a more direct approach on the button the fumbling could have been avoided.

30:54 - this merry-go-round looks like there might have been more consistent strategies. In the end you get the atom by hopping onto the middle bit and just taking a few more running steps. I can't tell if the atom is slowed down randomly but it looks to behave pretty predictably (aside from randomly doing a 180).

I think the hopping precisely onto buttons could be practiced really easily without needing to reset or anything. I'm sure there's a button somewhere that you can use as many times as you like.

45:18 - here, why couldn't you just have taken a few steps back before throwing? I felt it was going to miss before you threw. Maybe it was very close to hitting him though.

45:23 - This is where the audio turns to normal... was there some cable issue? Does it start at 38:02?

46:56 - Why did you jump a second time in the air? Don't you have any control during the first jump? Taking two attempts to make it up the pyramid is fine but this looks really sloppy. Did it function as a death warp though? How much time did you lose to falling overall?

55:18 - at the end of the race, why do you prefer to bump into the icicle?

1:03:32 - the sound comes back to the left ear again hear so there must have been another issue. There's more of it in the next couple of minutes.

1:05:47 - why the weaving?

Can't you use the electric fences for damage boosting while in chicken form? It looks like it sends you flying, but maybe it's mostly vertical.

So looks like a lot of this run goes fine, and the runner clearly knows the route well, but I feel that's mostly all the parts that are a bit basic anyway. The runner stops for better setups for some difficult-er tricks sometimes, which is what I'd have liked to see done a few more places. Multiple times the mistakes looked like something you can iron out by just studying the platforms etc. a bit more carefully and doing more attempts. I think I'll let the runner comment on stuff I've pointed out though before casting my vote.

Uilnslcoap

2016-11-10 08:09:23 pm

F*ckin' sanity effects...

Finally finished it. The above from Lotblind describes most of my concerns. There are a number of ugly-looking moments, though the genre and era make that probably tolerable. There are several "Wow, that was nice" moments too, though. I'm kind of torn. Minus any other input, I'm generally in favor of publishing a new run in the hopes that someone else will see it and want to do better. So I would give this a slightly tepid accept on those grounds.

ktwo

2016-11-11 05:33:20 am

Since there are currently two submissions in verification, where there is discussion about the decision, I'll take this opportunity to remind about the following section in the verification guidelines (https://kb.speeddemosarchive.com/Verification_Guidelines ):

Quote:

While, the speedrun community is ever evolving and runs will eventually become outdated, the standards can be controlled at the time of acceptance to the site. Objectively, the ”high quality” criteria for the gameplay can be translated into:

* On par with the fastest runs on the internet for the category
* On par with the fastest runs on the internet for comparable games and categories

This can both mean that some ”world records” should be rejected (typically for games that haven't been optimized enough by the community) and that some ”non-world records” should be accepted (typically for highly competitive games).

If you are not sure what is considered reject-worthy, here is a small list of reject-worthy mistakes:

* A death that costs a significant amount of time.
* A poor, inefficient route and bad planning.
* Using the wrong weapon against enemies or bosses.
* Failing to use the fastest method of movement when it could have easily been used.
* Numerous sloppy minor mistakes (missed jumps, whiffed attacks, failing to perform a shortcut) that cost a significant amount of time (significant depends on the run length).
* Bad rng costing a significant amount of time
* Not skipping skippable cutscenes (unless the in-game timer is used and not running during cutscenes - it's still very much encouraged to skip cutscenes in this case as well though)

Overall, imagine you were in the shoes of the runner. If you think you would have told yourself after the run:
”Wow, that went really well. There were only a few mistakes, bosses were behaving well and the rng was mostly favorable – this time will be hard for me to beat without a considerable effort.”
Then it's probably a good fit for SDA!

A special case worth mentioning is when a submitted run is faster than a run that is currently on the site and yet considerably slower than the fastest runs on the internet (and not submitted to SDA). In this case, the same general rules above apply. That means that improvements are not accepted by default.

This is of course just a guideline and SDA-verification will never be an exact science. It's still worth keeping in mind this section though. All replies that contain a reasoning behind their recommended decision are welcome, regardless of which way they are leaning towards.

Since there are currently two submissions in verification, where there is discussion about the decision, I'll take this opportunity to remind about the following section in the verification guidelines (https://kb.speeddemosarchive.com/Verification_Guidelines ):

[quote]While, the speedrun community is ever evolving and runs will eventually become outdated, the standards can be controlled at the time of acceptance to the site. Objectively, the ”high quality” criteria for the gameplay can be translated into:

* On par with the fastest runs on the internet for the category
* On par with the fastest runs on the internet for comparable games and categories

This can both mean that some ”world records” should be rejected (typically for games that haven't been optimized enough by the community) and that some ”non-world records” should be accepted (typically for highly competitive games).

If you are not sure what is considered reject-worthy, here is a small list of reject-worthy mistakes:

* A death that costs a significant amount of time.
* A poor, inefficient route and bad planning.
* Using the wrong weapon against enemies or bosses.
* Failing to use the fastest method of movement when it could have easily been used.
* Numerous sloppy minor mistakes (missed jumps, whiffed attacks, failing to perform a shortcut) that cost a significant amount of time (significant depends on the run length).
* Bad rng costing a significant amount of time
* Not skipping skippable cutscenes (unless the in-game timer is used and not running during cutscenes - it's still very much encouraged to skip cutscenes in this case as well though)

Overall, imagine you were in the shoes of the runner. If you think you would have told yourself after the run:
”[i]Wow, that went really well. There were only a few mistakes, bosses were behaving well and the rng was mostly favorable – this time will be hard for me to beat without a considerable effort.[/i]”
Then it's probably a good fit for SDA!

A special case worth mentioning is when a submitted run is faster than a run that is currently on the site and yet considerably slower than the fastest runs on the internet (and not submitted to SDA). In this case, the same general rules above apply. That means that improvements are not accepted by default.[/quote]
This is of course just a guideline and SDA-verification will never be an exact science. It's still worth keeping in mind this section though. All replies that contain a reasoning behind their recommended decision are welcome, regardless of which way they are leaning towards.

WeaponXMetsu

2016-11-11 06:39:16 pm

A/V: I have no idea as to why that would happen. The connections were perfectly fine so it may have been the game? Software seemed to be working great as well.

Video Game Arcade is a pain in the ass! lol

18:25: It is touchy. Something about being close to a wall that makes you jump shorter. Even mid jump. If I was right next to the overhead I would consistently fall short. I tried to set myself further away and slightly higher though. Still couldn't figure out how to jump from under and over. It surely could save time, but it was very touchy and I never could get it.

20:34: Yep, That could've gone better. What I'm doing is going into a "stealth" mode. Jumping forward seems to make you thrust more, but landing on a slope and jumping messes that up. At least from what I've learned about the game slopes are bad.

21:00: Yeah, probably. I messed up the timing.

21:50: Yeah, you can get through the tunnel without getting caught by the fans though. That still could've gone better, but I'm not sure how consistent I could be at it.

28:31: It's odd. When I have played the game it usually seems to build off the momentum of the first few jumps. That would mean I have to jump consistently and without mistake to get a boost of speed. Usually on a straight path, but I couldn't seem to do that. Also I'm sure it's noted where I do mess up and do another jump in the air. That is purely my mistake.

27:38: Yeah, that sucked. Even though I was trying to go around it for some reason acted like I was pushing up against the button.

30:54: Tell me about it. Sometimes I can get it right away and other times it takes forever. I never really figured out a good set up for it.

45:18: The goal of throwing it was to let it hit the side of the control panel. Usually the bomb doesn't bounce that high so it would've been likely for it to return and hit Sam. Unfortunately the fight could've been a lot better. Missing one is fine, but 3 is excessive.

45:23: There were no issues with the cables or the software. I however do use a dazzle to record so maybe the issue is with that?

46:56: That is a huge mistake on my part. I tried to correct, but forgot to slam down causing him to get dizzy and unfortunately for me caused him to fall off. I don't know how much time I lossed, but I would assume getting back there took somewhere in the amount of 45 seconds.

55:18: Not about bumping into the icicle really. Anything to avoid the teleporter because if you're next to it when sliding you could accidentally go into the teleporter without meaning to which would cause a major loss in time.

1:05:47: Sensitivity. Just slightly in any direction pretty much causes you to do that.

Electric fence. Not really. Every time I've gotten hit by an electric fence it usually just fries you and stops you from advancing. In most cases. However if you were to be more precise and hit it a certain way I'm sure you could, but I wouldn't know how to set that up.

There were a few things I was unaware of before submitting and that was some of the huge mistakes I made. However I did stop running the game because of lack of competition and the lack of interest in it. This is as far as I have gotten and I don't believe I will be attempting it anymore. If anything it can be used as a guide for anyone else that wants to attempt it.

A/V: I have no idea as to why that would happen. The connections were perfectly fine so it may have been the game? Software seemed to be working great as well.

Video Game Arcade is a pain in the ass! lol

18:25: It is touchy. Something about being close to a wall that makes you jump shorter. Even mid jump. If I was right next to the overhead I would consistently fall short. I tried to set myself further away and slightly higher though. Still couldn't figure out how to jump from under and over. It surely could save time, but it was very touchy and I never could get it.

20:34: Yep, That could've gone better. What I'm doing is going into a "stealth" mode. Jumping forward seems to make you thrust more, but landing on a slope and jumping messes that up. At least from what I've learned about the game slopes are bad.

21:00: Yeah, probably. I messed up the timing.

21:50: Yeah, you can get through the tunnel without getting caught by the fans though. That still could've gone better, but I'm not sure how consistent I could be at it.

28:31: It's odd. When I have played the game it usually seems to build off the momentum of the first few jumps. That would mean I have to jump consistently and without mistake to get a boost of speed. Usually on a straight path, but I couldn't seem to do that. Also I'm sure it's noted where I do mess up and do another jump in the air. That is purely my mistake.

27:38: Yeah, that sucked. Even though I was trying to go around it for some reason acted like I was pushing up against the button.

30:54: Tell me about it. Sometimes I can get it right away and other times it takes forever. I never really figured out a good set up for it.

45:18: The goal of throwing it was to let it hit the side of the control panel. Usually the bomb doesn't bounce that high so it would've been likely for it to return and hit Sam. Unfortunately the fight could've been a lot better. Missing one is fine, but 3 is excessive.

45:23: There were no issues with the cables or the software. I however do use a dazzle to record so maybe the issue is with that?

46:56: That is a huge mistake on my part. I tried to correct, but forgot to slam down causing him to get dizzy and unfortunately for me caused him to fall off. I don't know how much time I lossed, but I would assume getting back there took somewhere in the amount of 45 seconds.

55:18: Not about bumping into the icicle really. Anything to avoid the teleporter because if you're next to it when sliding you could accidentally go into the teleporter without meaning to which would cause a major loss in time.

1:05:47: Sensitivity. Just slightly in any direction pretty much causes you to do that.

Electric fence. Not really. Every time I've gotten hit by an electric fence it usually just fries you and stops you from advancing. In most cases. However if you were to be more precise and hit it a certain way I'm sure you could, but I wouldn't know how to set that up.

There were a few things I was unaware of before submitting and that was some of the huge mistakes I made. However I did stop running the game because of lack of competition and the lack of interest in it. This is as far as I have gotten and I don't believe I will be attempting it anymore. If anything it can be used as a guide for anyone else that wants to attempt it.

LotBlind

Edit history:

LotBlind: 2016-11-12 04:06:16 am

2016-11-12 04:02:51 am

The a/v thing isn't reject-worthy (at least not by itself) but I hope you figure out what was causing it. If you like you can try posting under "tech support" on our forum and see if anyone has ideas.

18:25 - You're saying you've never gotten the trick (from underneath the overhanging part) or were you referring to this run?

20:34 - But there's no slope there. I don't understand.

Consistent jumping: oh, if you need multiple accurately timed jumps it's a lot like strafe jumping in Quake-series games then Smiley

Watch a piece of a run for something like Quake or Star Trek Elite Force and you'll see what I mean. In those games if you jump too late you lose some speed but not all of it. Are you saying slopes have nothing to do with it?

30:54 - if there's really no more consistent way it would go under RNG and would be judged for the whole run. Have you tried testing and practising tough parts like this in an emulator first?

1:05:47 - Urm... you mean you can't just let the stick be centered without touching it? Or what?

Did you contact the guy who was TASing the game at some point? Just google duck dodgers TAS.

Okay, sounds like you're through with the game. As you say, it's not all for naught: this thread will be here for future reference should someone pick the game up so they can avoid repeating the same mistakes. As such though, looking at where the bar is usually set, the run quality isn't high enough to accept it onto SDA.

reject (good luck with whatever you're running though!)

The a/v thing isn't reject-worthy (at least not by itself) but I hope you figure out what was causing it. If you like you can try posting under "tech support" on our forum and see if anyone has ideas.

18:25 - You're saying you've never gotten the trick (from underneath the overhanging part) or were you referring to this run?

20:34 - But there's no slope there. I don't understand.

Consistent jumping: oh, if you need multiple accurately timed jumps it's a lot like strafe jumping in Quake-series games then :) Watch a piece of a run for something like Quake or Star Trek Elite Force and you'll see what I mean. In those games if you jump too late you lose some speed but not all of it. Are you saying slopes have nothing to do with it?

30:54 - if there's really no more consistent way it would go under RNG and would be judged for the whole run. Have you tried testing and practising tough parts like this in an emulator first?

1:05:47 - Urm... you mean you can't just let the stick be centered without touching it? Or what?

Did you contact the guy who was TASing the game at some point? Just google duck dodgers TAS.

Okay, sounds like you're through with the game. As you say, it's not all for naught: this thread will be here for future reference should someone pick the game up so they can avoid repeating the same mistakes. As such though, looking at where the bar is usually set, the run quality isn't high enough to accept it onto SDA.

reject (good luck with whatever you're running though!)

WeaponXMetsu

2016-11-12 11:50:22 am

18:25 - Yep, I've never been able to perform that for one reason or another.

20:34 - Sorry, for some reason I must have gotten confused.

Cool. I'll definitely keep that in mind.

30:54 - I have not. Mainly because I don't have a controller that would work well with an emulator. I'm too cheap to buy a converter or just an n64 usb controller. Still thinking about it though.

1:05:47 - You can, but you'll have to readjust since you seem to go at an angle no matter how center you try to be. From what I remember anyway. That's something to note for anyone that would like to try it out though.

I actually never found a TAS. I have looked for runs prior to doing a speedrun of the game. I have also searched google and only came up with the marvin missions TAS.

Yeah, pretty much. You never know. Maybe one day I'll try to do better, but I'm not really thinking about it.

Thanks to everyone taking time out of their day to take a look at it.

LotBlind

2016-11-12 12:11:06 pm

18:25 - It seems weird to be going for a trick you've never gotten in a long SS run like this, especially when it's for an inaugural submission, especially seeing as you're clearly wasting time trying to do it.

Controllers vs. emulators: come to think of it, I've never played a game that uses analogue controls through emulators so it didn't occur to me that was an issue... I'm sure you would still find it worthwhile if you plan to refine runs like this for all the hassle it saves in testing.

For the record, there's no completed TAS, but someone has TASed it some, meaning they might have insights or would be able to help anyone picking this up later. (Video

WeaponXMetsu

2016-11-14 11:48:51 pm

18:25 Yeah, I never originally planned for it to go into an SDA submission. It's been so long since I ran it I forgot. I submitted it then watched it and realized the possibility of it being rejected. However, I wanted to be sure before I deleted the video.

Yeah, I think for the most part I'd prefer a peripheral. Some day maybe.

Oh, nice! That's all I heard, but I still was unable to find it. Thank you for that link.

SDAVerification

2016-11-15 11:36:45 am

Decision posted.