Tales of Symphonia: Dawn of a New World

2012-04-21 09:46:43 pm

SDA Apprentice -- (3-1)

Well Mortyre, I can see your point, and while it does seem like it is Nate calling the shots, this run was still fairly verified like all the rest.

The only other thing that could be said about this run was something that the runner mentioned, if you think about it, Nate was really the only person to do a speed run for this game, and chances are no one else would have given it a shot if it was rejected (I've seen this happen about three times myself). Does this mean it should be automatically accepted? No, but in no way was this run accepted just because the runner is an admin. As I said before, while I was a verifier that rejected the run, it was a weak reject due to audio issues, and after being told that the audio is passable, really it comes down to the gameplay, and that right there should tell you something.

Like Nate said at the top: Spare the drama. This isn't as bad as other verifications, and there is no reason to raise conflicts because of this. Just watch the run and enjoy it when it comes out (besides those audio problems only happen during the cutscenes, not like you watch those anyway)...

Well Mortyre, I can see your point, and while it does seem like it is Nate calling the shots, this run was still fairly verified like all the rest.

The only other thing that could be said about this run was something that the runner mentioned, if you think about it, Nate was really the only person to do a speed run for this game, and chances are no one else would have given it a shot if it was rejected (I've seen this happen about three times myself).  Does this mean it should be automatically accepted?  No, but in no way was this run accepted just because the runner is an admin.  As I said before, while I was a verifier that rejected the run, it was a weak reject due to audio issues, and after being told that the audio is passable, really it comes down to the gameplay, and that right there should tell you something.

Like Nate said at the top: Spare the drama.  This isn't as bad as other verifications, and there is no reason to raise conflicts because of this.  Just watch the run and enjoy it when it comes out (besides those audio problems only happen during the cutscenes, not like you watch those anyway)...

Axel Ryman

2012-04-21 11:47:20 pm

We all scream for Eyes Cream

Quote from MAS8705:

Well Mortyre, I can see your point, and while it does seem like it is Nate calling the shots, this run was still fairly verified like all the rest.

The only other thing that could be said about this run was something that the runner mentioned, if you think about it, Nate was really the only person to do a speed run for this game, and chances are no one else would have given it a shot if it was rejected (I've seen this happen about three times myself). Does this mean it should be automatically accepted? No, but in no way was this run accepted just because the runner is an admin. As I said before, while I was a verifier that rejected the run, it was a weak reject due to audio issues, and after being told that the audio is passable, really it comes down to the gameplay, and that right there should tell you something.

Like Nate said at the top: Spare the drama. This isn't as bad as other verifications, and there is no reason to raise conflicts because of this. Just watch the run and enjoy it when it comes out (besides those audio problems only happen during the cutscenes, not like you watch those anyway)...

Not only that, but Verifiers don't make the final decision, it's the admin in charge of the verification process(In this case, Flip) to decide whether a run is accepted or rejected. The main purpose for verification is mostly to make sure each run is up to SDA Quality, i.e no cheating and such, with each verifier weighing in on what they think of the run. While the verifiers comments play a part, Flip has the final say in all of it. so if all the verifiers say no, Flip could just easily ignore all of them and say yes. Obviously he won't, he will be impartial and take what they say while thinking on the matter himself as well.

Nate admits that the audio is bad, and is also on the lower-end of SDA Acceptable. If people still really have a problem, then maybe some currently existed examples of similar lower-end quality audio or even worse should be mentioned so people can understand why this run being acceptable should not be causing any problems.

[quote="MAS8705"]Well Mortyre, I can see your point, and while it does seem like it is Nate calling the shots, this run was still fairly verified like all the rest.

The only other thing that could be said about this run was something that the runner mentioned, if you think about it, Nate was really the only person to do a speed run for this game, and chances are no one else would have given it a shot if it was rejected (I've seen this happen about three times myself).  Does this mean it should be automatically accepted?  No, but in no way was this run accepted just because the runner is an admin.  As I said before, while I was a verifier that rejected the run, it was a weak reject due to audio issues, and after being told that the audio is passable, really it comes down to the gameplay, and that right there should tell you something.

Like Nate said at the top: Spare the drama.  This isn't as bad as other verifications, and there is no reason to raise conflicts because of this.  Just watch the run and enjoy it when it comes out (besides those audio problems only happen during the cutscenes, not like you watch those anyway)...[/quote]

Not only that, but Verifiers don't make the final decision, it's the admin in charge of the verification process(In this case, Flip) to decide whether a run is accepted or rejected. The main purpose for verification is mostly to make sure each run is up to SDA Quality, i.e no cheating and such, with each verifier weighing in on what they think of the run. While the verifiers comments play a part, Flip has the final say in all of it. so if all the verifiers say no, Flip could just easily ignore all of them and say yes. Obviously he won't, he will be impartial and take what they say while thinking on the matter himself as well.

Nate admits that the audio is bad, and is also on the lower-end of SDA Acceptable. If people still really have a problem, then maybe some currently existed examples of similar lower-end quality audio or even worse should be mentioned so people can understand why this run being acceptable should not be causing any problems.

André

2012-04-22 01:03:50 am

Main Work!!!

Mortyre, Maybe we don't have enough post to verify in your opinion but as far as I'm aware, Eternal is the one with the less number of posts in the verifier of this game with a total of 299 posts which isn't bad imo. MAS, I never said the A/V was that worst, I just found that I really dislike verifying this run because of A/V, mainly because of Seg.8 but you and the others verifiers already know that since I didn't stop talking about this one and no it doesn't happen only during cutscene. Axel, I understand your statement but it was only a matter of opinion, I found that the A/V of this run was unacceptable but I'm not complaining about this run being accepted since Nathan said it was acceptable and the gameplay was clean but looked non-fluid because of the video and the audio was disturbing but I agree that it's fine since it only happen in the earlier segment and it's more rare in the later segments.

VorpalEdge

2012-04-22 11:20:47 am

welcome to the machine

Speaking personally (and not having seen the run), I would much rather accept low a/v quality runs from someone who tried recording properly but had technical problems than someone who just ignored the recording guidelines in general.

André

2012-04-22 02:00:17 pm

Main Work!!!

Yup I agree! and like Nate said, maybe it will encourage someone to beat his time.

So finally, I'm very happy that this run have been accepted anyway and Nathan, if you want a Seg. by Seg. comment, I'll search my EHDD for it and pm it to you, so again great job.

Axel Ryman

2012-04-22 03:49:04 pm

We all scream for Eyes Cream

Quote from AndréLucLévesque:

Axel, I understand your statement but it was only a matter of opinion, I found that the A/V of this run was unacceptable but I'm not complaining about this run being accepted since Nathan said it was acceptable and the gameplay was clean but looked non-fluid because of the video and the audio was disturbing but I agree that it's fine since it only happen in the earlier segment and it's more rare in the later segments.

My post wasn't really to anyone specifically(Well...Mortyre maybe..if only the first part), mainly just those who do have a problem with the decision. So yeah my post doesn't exactly apply to you thumbsup

Not only that, but VorpalEdge also brings up a point as well. We know Nate would never do it on purpose, and he even tried to salvage what he could to make it as acceptable as possible, and, while I haven't seen it yet, I'm sure it's acceptable for SDA.

Player 2

2012-04-22 10:07:28 pm

Survive

I was the last verifier, which is pretty obvious if you go to the ToS2 page and see that it's basically just me and Nate talking about the game. Even though we had different opinions on some things, after watching the run I fully believe that he had the best strategies. The Galf Beasts worked wonderfully, and he used all of the tricks we had found to save some time. Of course, I personally still would have attempted to do a few things differently, but that'll have to wait until I can look at the game and not hate it with a fiery passion.

I just wanted to say a big CONGRATS to Nate and his sister on finishing this run that drove me mad many years ago. It really is excellent and I'm glad everything worked out.

DK28

2012-04-22 10:42:21 pm

General Kong - Bullets and Bananas

Funny that of all people for this to happen to, it would be nate. Go figure. Of all people, nate knows tech stuff. IMO it shouldn't be too big an issue. I can see where someone from the outside might see an "abuse of power", but from non registered to lurker to admin, I would see nate as above reproach here. Anyway, I think this would be more of a deal if it were a call about gameplay issues. Audio falls in the cosmetic category, he's obviously not cheating or anything.

Bottom line, Congrats to nate and Sarah. It's always good to see an admin submit when they have so much else to shoulder.

MortyreR45

(user is banned)

2012-04-23 03:40:39 am

I AM FUCKED ANGRY

I have no problems with this run it is very cool. And other users with low capture tools have a better chance. SDA has runs which very bad video quality, why not this run.

But I would like discuss this. It is misunderstand to the knowledge base.

->

http://kb.speeddemosarchive.com/Ways_to_get_your_run_rejected_for_video_quality

Ways to get your run rejected for video quality

3.Both capture cards and DVD recorders: failing to record both channels of audio. This is important because sometimes there are sound effects on only one channel. Obviously, this doesn't apply to NES, Sega Master System, or other systems that cannot produce stereo audio.

Ok understand

4.Capture cards: capturing to a lossy codec (video or audio). Audio should be uncompressed (PCM) or otherwise lossless (e.g. FLAC). Video should be one of the following: Lagarith, HuffYUV, TechSmith Screen Capture Codec (used by e.g. Camtasia), FRAPS codec. You need a fast, reliable hard drive to write the data, because there will be a lot of it. Once you capture, then you can use, for example, Anri-chan to encode the video. Encoding to a lossy format while capturing kills the quality.

it is not a reason, must change to a other place.

5.Mono audio: not using one channel or not copying the audio to both channels. Anri-chan does this for you if you say yes to the "NES" question.

Ok understand.

#

Verification Guidelines

03 Quality (Capture)
The verification copies of the runs do not usually represent the quality of the final product. However, if you notice any serious problems with the video or audio quality (such as the picture going completely blank or the audio on only one channel, sounding overpeaked, or completely missing), or if you notice a missing segment/mismatched segments, please report it to Flip immediately. Also, if there are failed attempts in the video, please tell Flip when the run actually starts and ends.

I think in the future, the final result of the verification must be clearing. or it make no sense to verify a run

bt congrats to

I have no problems with this run it is very cool. And other users with low capture tools have a better chance. SDA has runs which very bad video quality, why not this run.

But I would like discuss this. It is misunderstand to the knowledge base.

->

http://kb.speeddemosarchive.com/Ways_to_get_your_run_rejected_for_video_quality

Ways to get your run rejected for video quality

3.Both capture cards and DVD recorders: failing to record both channels of audio. This is important because sometimes there are sound effects on only one channel. Obviously, this doesn't apply to NES, Sega Master System, or other systems that cannot produce stereo audio.

Ok understand

4.Capture cards: capturing to a lossy codec (video or audio). Audio should be uncompressed (PCM) or otherwise lossless (e.g. FLAC). Video should be one of the following: Lagarith, HuffYUV, TechSmith Screen Capture Codec (used by e.g. Camtasia), FRAPS codec. You need a fast, reliable hard drive to write the data, because there will be a lot of it. Once you capture, then you can use, for example, Anri-chan to encode the video. Encoding to a lossy format while capturing kills the quality. 
 
it is not a reason, must change to a other place.

5.Mono audio: not using one channel or not copying the audio to both channels. Anri-chan does this for you if you say yes to the "NES" question.

Ok understand.

#

Verification Guidelines

03 Quality (Capture)
The verification copies of the runs do not usually represent the quality of the final product. However, if you notice any serious problems with the video or audio quality (such as the picture going completely blank or the audio on only one channel, sounding overpeaked, or completely missing), or if you notice a missing segment/mismatched segments, please report it to Flip immediately. Also, if there are failed attempts in the video, please tell Flip when the run actually starts and ends.

I think in the future, the final result of the verification must be clearing. or it make no sense to verify a run

bt congrats to

Eternalspirit

2012-04-23 07:31:06 am

For everyone commenting on the run's A/V.. please watch it first before you do so. I think a lot of you will be pretty shocked at how absolutely horrendous it is. It is, in my opinion, the worst run on the site for A/V, and by a mile.

nate

2012-04-23 04:29:47 pm

just curious - do you have perfect pitch?

gia

2012-04-23 05:55:43 pm

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

unless this thread gets locked there will be new posts upon this run being posted on the front page, another exception could be made to have it there sooner I bet, and get this done with Tongue

Or open up the link to the verification copy, or the youtube link if it got uploaded there, right now most are speculating at best and I'm intrigued at how bad could it be Tongue

nate

2012-04-23 06:44:40 pm

sometimes frames are dropped. sometimes you see the video skip (repeating what was in the buffer for maybe .5-1 second). sometimes it goes five or ten minutes without doing it and sometimes it happens every few seconds. whenever frames are dropped vdub attempts to compensate by altering the audio frequency. if you're sensitive to pitch you can hear it very easily. otherwise you may not even notice.

note that the in-game timer was used so it couldn't have affected timing.

André

2012-04-23 11:37:02 pm

Main Work!!!

I don't know if this question was for me but yes I do have perfect pitch, that maybe one of the reason it was so hard for me.