Game Page: http://speeddemosarchive.com/Grandia.html
Grandia (pal) (psx) [Any %] [Segmented]
Verifier Responses
Decision: Reject
Reason: It seems that most of the time save in this run was due to playing on a PS2 with fast disc speed. The overall quality of the run is insufficient for a segmented run.
https://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/verificationfiles/1463/
This run will be available for a month. After that these link(s) will no longer work.
Grandia (pal) (psx) [Any %] [Segmented]
Verifier Responses
Quote from chris_x:
This in a REJECT for me!
A/V issues:
Segment 6: The video shows a fixed image for about 1:35 minutes
Segment 20: The whole Garlyle base video is stuttering badly
Segment 31: The runner needs 3 attempt to pass the valley of the flying dragon (i.e. reboot 2x)
Segment 44: The runner needs 2 attempts against the 2nd massacre maschine (i.e. reboot 1x)
Gaming issues:
Though there are a few boss fights that are faster than the current run (e.g. Gaia Core and Evil Gaia in segment 96), there are the following encounters which are much slower:
Ganymede (segment 17) - 1 min slower
Military train (segment 24) - 1:40 min slower
Massacre maschine 2 (segment 44) - 3:30 min slower
Nana, Saki and Mio (segment 72) - 1 min slower
Baal 1 (segment 73) - 1 min slower
Mage King (segment 90) - 1 min slower
Gaia incl. Gaia Armor (segment 95) - 1:20 min slower
The total time saved (according to the in-game timing) is 52 minutes. So if you only look at that this would be a great improvement.
But most of the time is saved because of the higher disc speed on the PS2 (better hardware), which is causing less loading time when moving between dungeons and houses etc.
The run is not innovative at all! The runner uses the same route as the current run (only one save point isn't used in Feena's house). In most boss fights the runner uses the same tactics.
The runner is slower when buying and selling things in stores or eqip things (especially when a character has left the group).
The runner ignores the current run's verifiers' comments and critics (especially regarding the magic training).
A/V issues:
Segment 6: The video shows a fixed image for about 1:35 minutes
Segment 20: The whole Garlyle base video is stuttering badly
Segment 31: The runner needs 3 attempt to pass the valley of the flying dragon (i.e. reboot 2x)
Segment 44: The runner needs 2 attempts against the 2nd massacre maschine (i.e. reboot 1x)
Gaming issues:
Though there are a few boss fights that are faster than the current run (e.g. Gaia Core and Evil Gaia in segment 96), there are the following encounters which are much slower:
Ganymede (segment 17) - 1 min slower
Military train (segment 24) - 1:40 min slower
Massacre maschine 2 (segment 44) - 3:30 min slower
Nana, Saki and Mio (segment 72) - 1 min slower
Baal 1 (segment 73) - 1 min slower
Mage King (segment 90) - 1 min slower
Gaia incl. Gaia Armor (segment 95) - 1:20 min slower
The total time saved (according to the in-game timing) is 52 minutes. So if you only look at that this would be a great improvement.
But most of the time is saved because of the higher disc speed on the PS2 (better hardware), which is causing less loading time when moving between dungeons and houses etc.
The run is not innovative at all! The runner uses the same route as the current run (only one save point isn't used in Feena's house). In most boss fights the runner uses the same tactics.
The runner is slower when buying and selling things in stores or eqip things (especially when a character has left the group).
The runner ignores the current run's verifiers' comments and critics (especially regarding the magic training).
Quote from eLmaGus-:
After I watched both runs and compared a lot of the route they are taking and all battles, I am really at a loss with my decision.
Now first of let me say that I think both runs can improve DRASTICALLY with a different route and if anybody wants to do another one of those it should be on the NTSC Version to cut down the time by a lot.
However now to the run that got submitted.
A/V:
A/V is good, the issues that Chris-X mentions can be fixed by cutting the segment video down to where he actually loads up the "successful" save, the exception is the 45 second cutscene entering Garlyle Base, which is unfortunate but not really something that is all that bad.
Cheating:
No Cheating detected whatsoever.
Game Play:
Now here is why I am having so much trouble with this.
Chris-X has pointed out "slower" fights, but overall, I have to say, both runs in question do have their ups and downs and overall, at least from my perspective, both runs come down to basically the same level of execution.
One thing that he pointed out though which is perfectly correct, the shop menus ARE drastically slower than the ones of the current run on SDA, which is something that should not be the case, ESPECIALLY in a segmented run.
Even though this run clocks in at a way better time, I am more than convinced that you can cut A LOT of time from this.
I wanted to stay neutral, but I feel like the current run has the slight advantage of having the better menus, even if the theoretical routes and some fights have worse luck/execution than the submitted one.
So my final verdict will sadly be Reject.
Now first of let me say that I think both runs can improve DRASTICALLY with a different route and if anybody wants to do another one of those it should be on the NTSC Version to cut down the time by a lot.
However now to the run that got submitted.
A/V:
A/V is good, the issues that Chris-X mentions can be fixed by cutting the segment video down to where he actually loads up the "successful" save, the exception is the 45 second cutscene entering Garlyle Base, which is unfortunate but not really something that is all that bad.
Cheating:
No Cheating detected whatsoever.
Game Play:
Now here is why I am having so much trouble with this.
Chris-X has pointed out "slower" fights, but overall, I have to say, both runs in question do have their ups and downs and overall, at least from my perspective, both runs come down to basically the same level of execution.
One thing that he pointed out though which is perfectly correct, the shop menus ARE drastically slower than the ones of the current run on SDA, which is something that should not be the case, ESPECIALLY in a segmented run.
Even though this run clocks in at a way better time, I am more than convinced that you can cut A LOT of time from this.
I wanted to stay neutral, but I feel like the current run has the slight advantage of having the better menus, even if the theoretical routes and some fights have worse luck/execution than the submitted one.
So my final verdict will sadly be Reject.
Quote:
As the others have stated, this run is very similar to the current one for the most part, often to its detriment. On the whole, it is still slightly improved after accounting for load times. A large chunk of this comes from the final segment, combined with some other improved fights (I believe all the Gaia Battlers are noticably faster) and better enemy dodging (particularly Typhoon Tower). These improvements are, however, very sporadic, and make no alterations to the questionable level of magic grinding. A/V wise there's some stuttering in the FMV in segment 24 as well, though I'd guess there's most likely little the runner could do about it.
I have a firm policy of not rejecting runs that consistently improve upon a previous one. This one saves a lot of time in places, yet at the same time there are so many fights that are slower and have no reason to be slower with such similar strategies. It makes it hard to assume that this wasn't somewhat rushed, especially when there are no notes given for the runner to justify their level of knowledge and planning in. As a result, I can't say that I'd disagree with either possible decision should it come to pass, meaning I choose to vote to that effect.
Decision: Undecided.
I have a firm policy of not rejecting runs that consistently improve upon a previous one. This one saves a lot of time in places, yet at the same time there are so many fights that are slower and have no reason to be slower with such similar strategies. It makes it hard to assume that this wasn't somewhat rushed, especially when there are no notes given for the runner to justify their level of knowledge and planning in. As a result, I can't say that I'd disagree with either possible decision should it come to pass, meaning I choose to vote to that effect.
Decision: Undecided.
Quote from Eternalspirit:
... Meh.
I feel bad for rejecting something that likely took a long time to put together, but that is unfortunately what I feel I should do here. Things that contributed to this decision:
- no runner notes, means I cannot reconcile some of the decisions made in this run, such as why the exact same route and magic grinding were used as the previous run, the magic grinding in particular leaving the verifiers wondering whether less grinding would have been faster.. I am absolutely not saying the route/grinding are wrong, but I know the previous runner made some headway with less magic grinding and without any notes, I cannot be sure if the runner tried anything different or not
- hesitation and indecision throughout the run when it came to battles
- the most troublesome thing for me, in a few instances, the runner honestly seemed surprised that he couldn't do a particular action.. usually this was him going to use a skill, then finding out the character didn't have enough SP for it
- menu'ing was pretty slow throughout the run
I also feel that this run was rushed. I wouldn't be surprised if a fair few of the segments were a first or second attempt. I really feel like so much time can be saved in this run as well. So I unfortunately have to reject this.
As a side note, I really hope future attempts at this game will be made using an NTSC copy on a PS2.
I feel bad for rejecting something that likely took a long time to put together, but that is unfortunately what I feel I should do here. Things that contributed to this decision:
- no runner notes, means I cannot reconcile some of the decisions made in this run, such as why the exact same route and magic grinding were used as the previous run, the magic grinding in particular leaving the verifiers wondering whether less grinding would have been faster.. I am absolutely not saying the route/grinding are wrong, but I know the previous runner made some headway with less magic grinding and without any notes, I cannot be sure if the runner tried anything different or not
- hesitation and indecision throughout the run when it came to battles
- the most troublesome thing for me, in a few instances, the runner honestly seemed surprised that he couldn't do a particular action.. usually this was him going to use a skill, then finding out the character didn't have enough SP for it
- menu'ing was pretty slow throughout the run
I also feel that this run was rushed. I wouldn't be surprised if a fair few of the segments were a first or second attempt. I really feel like so much time can be saved in this run as well. So I unfortunately have to reject this.
As a side note, I really hope future attempts at this game will be made using an NTSC copy on a PS2.
Decision: Reject
Reason: It seems that most of the time save in this run was due to playing on a PS2 with fast disc speed. The overall quality of the run is insufficient for a segmented run.
https://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/verificationfiles/1463/
This run will be available for a month. After that these link(s) will no longer work.
Thread title: