Username:
B
I
U
S
"
url
img
#
code
sup
sub
font
size
color
smiley
embarassed
thumbsup
happy
Huh?
Angry
Roll Eyes
Undecided
Lips Sealed
Kiss
Cry
Grin
Wink
Tongue
Shocked
Cheesy
Smiley
Sad
1 page
--
--
List results:
Search options:
Use \ before commas in usernames
1-Up!
Game Page: Doesn't exist yet

SS Light World run

Verifier Responses

Quote:
Okay, now that I've watched Aaron Hayne's run, I can see that this run had more bad paths than I originally thought, and Cody misses some easy shortcuts. It's still well-executed for the most part (except for the end, which was pretty sloppy), but Aaron's run is generally faster (I think this run only has 5 or 6 stages that are significantly faster than Aaron's run).

I think this run could be beat even if the larry battle took twice as long. It's still a good run, but I'm really conflicted now. I guess I'll give this run a weak accept because it's deathless and it's overall good, but I wouldn't be surprised if this run was rejected.


Quote:
Going with mike89's version difference comparison in which he estimates 1:20 difference between the versions, that makes Aaron Hayne's run a good 30s faster than this. That's with Aaron having 4 deaths (worth a good 20s) and stating sub 21 is something he may even go for. These two runs (or an improvement to Aaron's) would stand side by side, so I think this has to be a reject. Even ignoring that time comparison, Aaron's run is significantly more optimised, even just looking at the first world. The wall jumping is much more optimised and there are lots of easy to implement shortcuts used throughout.

The fact it's deathless and a good run makes it hard to reject, but this has to be compared with the competition. If this run was accepted, it would surely have to be obsoleted when Aaron's run hit the front page. There's close to a minute left for improvement here if a deathless run could be achieved.  I wouldn't think it wrong to see this accepted, but given the PC run it should at least be a short lived record.


Quote:
I reject the run, but I accept the audio commentary. Wink

Yeah, it's deathless, and it has perfect Larry luck, which makes it hard to do, and I'm sure will have people crying hypocrite citing my staunch defense of the :51 DKC3 run from some time ago. However, what makes this situation different is that a significantly better run already exists, and there was no other competition in that instance. I won't go over detailed level stuff because you know what can be improved, the audio commentary alone would have taught you a few things, and Aaron's run should teach you the rest.


Quote:
It's unfortunate that a better run appeared around the same time this became available for verification. This is a very solid run, although as others have stated, some shortcuts are missed and frankly, despite this being deathless (compared to the other run having 4 deaths) this run generally looks more sloppy.

The rest of my comments would effectively by paraphrasing what others have said, so I'll just say that I'm rejecting this, mainly on the grounds a better run exists, the runner of which is already trying to improve.


Quote:
The sloppy/unoptimized levels really hurt this run. If this game was not being actively speedran by a few individuals, I would be tempted to accept this run due to its lack of deaths, and otherwise consistent play, but as as things currently stand, I'm going to have to reject this. A better run is well within the realm of possibility, and I would hate to put this run through the queue only to be bested before it sees the light of day.


Quote:
The fact this run is deathless is very impressive in itself, but I have to say the overall play quality here is pretty sloppy and that really hurts this run's wow factor.  Not to say it's all bad, far from it, but lots of little mistakes peppered through the levels, and in many cases strats that are far from optimal.  On the subject of strats, lets a take a look at the highs and the lows:

Good
1-11:  Very precise jumps, faster than the sliding method.  Good stuff.
1-12:  Well done.
2-10:  A hard level to get smooth, nicely executed.
3-7:  Skipping the third conveyor is pimp
4-boss:  No speed tech here obviously, but definite style points for using the safe spot in the center.
5-16:  No hesitation for the skip, though a little shaky at the end.
5-boss:  Perfect luck.

Bad
1-2:  Go up the left
1-17:  Stay on the right
2-4:  Getting to Bandage Girl from the 2nd fan isn't that hard, and decidedly faster
2-6:  Going above the chambers at the start saves a couple seconds.
2-16:  Should be getting Bandage Girl just before or right as the second round of lasers starts
3-3:  Top route looks cool, but is slower
3-15:  Definitely shouldn't have to wait on the second moving platform
4-5:  Two quick hops at the start lets you skip waiting on the elevator
4-13:  Go back up after the 2nd key
4-16:  Small detail, but go over the crumbling wall at the top
5-1:  Don't fear the flash!  Way too timid.  A good 7 seconds slower than it can be, and at least 4 or 5 slower than it should be.
5-14:  It's not too hard to figure out a consistent jump at the start to a further platform, definitely faster.
5-15:  In the narrow part no need to pause between between jumps.  Very timid here.
6-2: Overly timid, even for the late game
6-boss: No saw skip = 3 or 4 seconds lost
Map navigation:  Quit to map at the end of x-17, not the start of x-18 (costs a good chunk of time over the run).

In levels not mentioned above there's also lots of tiny and not so tiny mistakes, but I think the runner at least had the right idea going in.  I have no doubt with time (and more importantly, polish) the runner could get himself a hefty improvement, but for this run I have to say reject.


Decision: Reject

Reason: Too many errors. Also this run doesn't size up to the faster run that appeared around the same time.

This run will be available for a month. PM me for a link.
Thread title:  
Quote from Flip:
Map navigation:  Quit to map at the end of x-17, not the start of x-18 (costs a good chunk of time over the run).


AHHAHA! Wow I'm such an idiot. Thanks for the responses guys. You can bet I'll be trying again.