Addition of "one segment per map/level category" [locked]

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

Spider-Waffle

Edit history:

Spider-Waffle: 2009-07-13 04:30:45 pm

2009-07-13 04:20:37 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

Quote:

Well, no, although it's one of the main reasons. But bigger than this is the fact that having multiple similar categories confuses and probably ultimately turns away viewers. For example, have a look at the Metroid Prime page:
http://speeddemosarchive.com/MetroidPrime.html
There are 15 runs. Now, I know Metroid speedrunning goes back to the dawn of civilisation and I don't doubt these runs are all excellent - quality isn't the issue here. However, how am I, as a naive viewer who knows nothing about Metroid Prime speedrunning, supposed to choose one to watch? The times are all similar, and so are many of the categories, not to mention that every PAL run has its NTSC equivalent. The end result was that I simply didn't watch any of them.

The same problem will apply if you have OSPL and MS categories. If you get a solid submission to both categories, viewers won't know which to choose and at any rate they are unlikely to watch both if the times are similar (which they will be - for the vast majority of games, there will be no major route differences between a OSPL run and a MS run), which means in the end each run gets half as many viewers as it otherwise would (or less, if some turn away when they can't decide which to watch). As a viewer, I'd rather not have to worry about whether the run I was downloading was inferior to the other option.

So would my suggested solutions:

Quote:

If this is the case I think the problem is in SDA's admissions or how they advertise the runs available to viewers, not the fact that the categories exist.

SDA could require runs on new categories be of similar quality to existing runs for that game. Also, SDA could give an editor's ranking of how the runs for a game rank within that game. Both of which I think are better solutions than reducing the number of available categories, especially when this means denying runners and viewers the category they most prefer.

Not ultimately make SDA better rather going with the solution of not having a place for more runs to exist? If having multiple runs and not knowing which ones are best is the problem I think SDA would be better off with the solution of letting people know what they think are the best runs rather than trying to reduce the number of runs. I mean gee wiz, I could suggest SDA just hosting ONE speedrun, a single run for one game, and only allowing new runs which obsolete that one run as a solution to the problem. Then no one would ever have the problem of deciding which run to DL, the average quality of runs would be maximized, the quality of the best run on the site would be maximized, the median quality of runs would be maximized, the quality of the worst run would be maximized. As a viewer you'd never have to worry if the run you were downloading was inferior to another run. This seems to solve all the problems you say having multiple categories creates. Is this the best solution, I think not.

Quote:

If you get a solid submission to both categories, viewers won't know which to choose and at any rate they are unlikely to watch both if the times are similar (which they will be - for the vast majority of games, there will be no major route differences between a OSPL run and a MS run)

The difference between OSPL and MS would be HUGE for many games. I can think of over 100 things in my HL I could never have done with OSPL. If both the runs are good just watch one or the other or both, it's not SDA's fault if a view can't do this. Also implementing some sort of rating system like I've suggested would help viewers decide.

[quote]Well, no, although it's one of the main reasons. But bigger than this is the fact that having multiple similar categories confuses and probably ultimately turns away viewers. For example, have a look at the Metroid Prime page:
http://speeddemosarchive.com/MetroidPrime.html
There are 15 runs. Now, I know Metroid speedrunning goes back to the dawn of civilisation and I don't doubt these runs are all excellent - quality isn't the issue here. However, how am I, as a naive viewer who knows nothing about Metroid Prime speedrunning, supposed to choose one to watch? The times are all similar, and so are many of the categories, not to mention that every PAL run has its NTSC equivalent. The end result was that I simply didn't watch any of them.

The same problem will apply if you have OSPL and MS categories. If you get a solid submission to both categories, viewers won't know which to choose and at any rate they are unlikely to watch both if the times are similar (which they will be - for the vast majority of games, there will be no major route differences between a OSPL run and a MS run), which means in the end each run gets half as many viewers as it otherwise would (or less, if some turn away when they can't decide which to watch). As a viewer, I'd rather not have to worry about whether the run I was downloading was inferior to the other option.[/quote]

So would my suggested solutions:[quote]If this is the case I think the problem is in SDA's admissions or how they advertise the runs available to viewers, not the fact that the categories exist.

SDA could require runs on new categories be of similar quality to existing runs for that game.  Also, SDA could give an editor's ranking of how the runs for a game rank within that game.  Both of which I think are better solutions than reducing the number of available categories, especially when this means denying runners and viewers the category they most prefer.[/quote]
Not ultimately make SDA better rather going with the solution of not having a place for more runs to exist?  If having multiple runs and not knowing which ones are best is the problem I think SDA would be better off with the solution of letting people know what they think are the best runs rather than trying to reduce the number of runs.  I mean gee wiz, I could suggest SDA just hosting ONE speedrun, a single run for one game, and only allowing new runs which obsolete that one run as a solution to the problem.  Then no one would ever have the problem of deciding which run to DL, the average quality of runs would be maximized, the quality of the best run on the site would be maximized, the median quality of runs would be maximized, the quality of the worst run would be maximized.  As a viewer you'd never have to worry if the run you were downloading was inferior to another run.  This seems to solve all the problems you say having multiple categories creates.  Is this the best solution, I think not.

[quote]If you get a solid submission to both categories, viewers won't know which to choose and at any rate they are unlikely to watch both if the times are similar (which they will be - for the vast majority of games, there will be no major route differences between a OSPL run and a MS run)[/quote]

The difference between OSPL and MS would be HUGE for many games.  I can think of over 100 things in my HL I could never have done with OSPL.  If both the runs are good just watch one or the other or both, it's not SDA's fault if a view can't do this.  Also implementing some sort of rating system like I've suggested would help viewers decide.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

Spider-Waffle

Edit history:

Spider-Waffle: 2009-07-13 04:42:08 pm

2009-07-13 04:36:21 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

Dex it's funny, you say less segments adds nothing of worth to SDA, then you say mass segmenting would get your run rejected because it's lame. You see the contradiction here?

Suppose I beat your deuce ex run using 10 times more segments, using all the tricks you used and few more and much better optimization. So now your saying your deuce ex run has nothing of worth to SDA right?

I kind of think it'd be funny to obsolete everyone's segmented run opposed to this category by using more segments, I wonder what they would think after that, they might not change their opinion, but it'd just be interesting.

Breakdown

2009-07-13 05:11:31 pm

Haters gonna hate

It seems a little backwards to suggest that runs with lots of segments are unfair to runs that use less and suggesting a seperate category for the runs with less. If it's the runs that use more segments that make things unfair, wouldn't it make more sense to make a category for the mass segmented runs? You could judge it by something like average segment length, for example's sake say an average of less than 45 seconds per segment would put it in this category. It could be applied to basically every game out there unlike this one segment per map stuff with no complicated rulings for individual cases (if you're going to make a category like that people are going to try and make it fit games where it's really a stretch, and that's nothing but a hassle for the staff). Sure it's a bit arbitrary, but it's easy to apply across the board, and doesn't prevent a few short segments in a run for a "normal segemnted" (something like the D2: LoD 100% with luck manipulation at a vendor). So I propose that if a new category be made, it should be call "total allotment of segments", or TAS. (oh snap!)

Now do I think this is a good idea, no, but I think it's a better one than this OSPL stuff. It would be a category created for a relatively small amount of games where it can be applied in the first place and ILs can't, and in some cases where it can apply it very unclear just how it should. For example take Fallout 2, what constitutes a map there? Any one area one the world map? Each individual loaded area within a map location? What happens when you get warped to another area and can't save right away? These kinds of questions would pop up for loads of games if this new category came to be, and there would almost definitely be instances were it simply could not apply. For those games, where's the "logically" segmented run's defense against one that saves every 5 seconds so not to lose so much as a frame?

And yes, I'm aware I'm going to catch shit for the TAS comment, and it was probably uncalled for but I couldn't resist.

It seems a little backwards to suggest that runs with lots of segments are unfair to runs that use less and suggesting a seperate category for the runs with less.  If it's the runs that use more segments that make things unfair, wouldn't it make more sense to make a category for the mass segmented runs?  You could judge it by something like average segment length, for example's sake say an average of less than 45 seconds per segment would put it in this category.  It could be applied to basically every game out there unlike this one segment per map stuff with no complicated rulings for individual cases (if you're going to make a category like that people are going to try and make it fit games where it's really a stretch, and that's nothing but a hassle for the staff).  Sure it's a bit arbitrary, but it's easy to apply across the board, and doesn't prevent a few short segments in a run for a "normal segemnted" (something like the D2: LoD 100% with luck manipulation at a vendor).  So I propose that if a new category be made, it should be call "total allotment of segments", or TAS. (oh snap!)

Now do I think this is a good idea, no, but I think it's a better one than this OSPL stuff.  It would be a category created for a relatively small amount of games where it can be applied in the first place and ILs can't, and in some cases where it can apply it very unclear just how it should.  For example take Fallout 2, what constitutes a map there?  Any one area one the world map?  Each individual loaded area within a map location?  What happens when you get warped to another area and can't save right away?  These kinds of questions would pop up for loads of games if this new category came to be, and there would almost definitely be instances were it simply could not apply.  For those games, where's the "logically" segmented run's defense against one that saves every 5 seconds so not to lose so much as a frame?

And yes, I'm aware I'm going to catch shit for the TAS comment, and it was probably uncalled for but I couldn't resist.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-07-13 05:59:27 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

If fallout is really that hard to decide on OSPL then maybe the category doesn't make sense for it and it shouldn't have it just as it doesn't have IL category. There's not a small amount of games it would apply to and vast majority it would be very easy to figure out what a level is. Basically any FPS, RTS, or puzzle game divided into levels would easily be able to have such category.

Let's suppose there never was a MS category for save anywhere games and it was always OSPL like quake and other games are. What would you think about the argument for adding a MS category?

ridd3r.

2009-07-13 06:43:28 pm

we have lift off

Quote:

I would say that if the vast, vast majority of runners are following different philosophies on segmentation to that which is given in the rules (do you not agree that this is so?), then we should rewrite those rules. I also think that people new to the site not understanding runners' segmentation decisions and consequently dismissing some of the best runs is a real problem, not a hypothetical one.

I completely see your point but as dex pointed out there are exceptions like groobo's diablo run. While you may have got the wrong idea from the rules about some runs on this site when you first joined, point is you are wiser now and so would anyone else be whos around for any length of time. I honestly would have said that you would have been in the minority in thinking like that. When I saw runs like the 0:55 super metroid run it was clearly stated it was 7 segments, the HL2DQ run was a lot of segments but I was amazed along with everyone else at that run.

At the end of the day if you change the rules then runs like the diablo run will suffer, but the way I see it if you leave them as they are things will go on the way they are which seems just fine to me.

Quote:

If I want to make a OSPL full run I can't if there's already a good segmented run

Quote:

Dex it's funny, you say less segments adds nothing of worth to SDA, then you say mass segmenting would get your run rejected because it's lame.

You classed the run as "good" which must mean its not mass segmented as you have made your opinions on mass segmenting clear right? Dex's point was that why would people want to watch a run done in 30 minutes in say 20 segments over a run done in 25 minutes in say 30 segments? Unless there is a massive difference in segments people will watch the faster run, or if they want the skill factor they will watch a SS run.

Also is it the case that there is a run you want to beat but its MS and you want to OSPL it? Do you think this issue will ever arise?

[quote] I would say that if the vast, vast majority of runners are following different philosophies on segmentation to that which is given in the rules (do you not agree that this is so?), then we should rewrite those rules. I also think that people new to the site not understanding runners' segmentation decisions and consequently dismissing some of the best runs is a real problem, not a hypothetical one. [/quote]

I completely see your point but as dex pointed out there are exceptions like groobo's diablo run. While you may have got the wrong idea from the rules about some runs on this site when you first joined, point is you are wiser now and so would anyone else be whos around for any length of time. I honestly would have said that you would have been in the minority in thinking like that. When I saw runs like the 0:55 super metroid run it was clearly stated it was 7 segments, the HL2DQ run was a lot of segments but I was amazed along with everyone else at that run.

At the end of the day if you change the rules then runs like the diablo run will suffer, but the way I see it if you leave them as they are things will go on the way they are which seems just fine to me.

[quote] If I want to make a OSPL full run I can't if there's already a good segmented run [/quote]

[quote] Dex it's funny, you say less segments adds nothing of worth to SDA, then you say mass segmenting would get your run rejected because it's lame. [/quote]

You classed the run as "good" which must mean its not mass segmented as you have made your opinions on mass segmenting clear right? Dex's point was that why would people want to watch a run done in 30 minutes in say 20 segments over a run done in 25 minutes in say 30 segments? Unless there is a massive difference in segments people will watch the faster run, or if they want the skill factor they will watch a SS run.

Also is it the case that there is a run you want to beat but its MS and you want to OSPL it? Do you think this issue will ever arise?

dex

Edit history:

dex: 2009-07-13 07:06:00 pm

2009-07-13 06:46:03 pm

Invisible avatar

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Dex it's funny, you say less segments adds nothing of worth to SDA, then you say mass segmenting would get your run rejected because it's lame. You see the contradiction here?

I see the contradiction here: the contradiction is you acting like you understood what I was talking about when you actually did not. What I mean is that a *new category that enforces less segments* adds nothing of worth to SDA as it is right now. It doesn't add runs that are more interesting, it doesn't add runs that are more impressive, and it doesn't add anything of note to the watcher. That doesn't mean avoiding over-segmentation adds nothing of worth to SDA, when done at the runner's discretion. And also, nice work taking my sentences out of context (two fallacies in a single sentence, you're going for the record here) - I never said mass segmenting would get your run rejected because it's lame; I said that if a run was improved *solely due to mass-segmentation, then it would get rejected because it's lame and most verifiers would consider it of no additional worth to SDA, and ultimately less impressive than the earlier run*. Edit: Oh, and also notice, with mass segmentation comes massive save penalty. Which also could be basis for rejection.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Suppose I beat your deuce ex run using 10 times more segments, using all the tricks you used and few more and much better optimization. So now your saying your deuce ex run has nothing of worth to SDA right?

Yeah, it's pretty crap, assuming you're talking about the *Deus Ex* run (Have some respect for the best game ever, will ya? ;)). Which is why I'm redoing the run right now, and I keep doing longer segments, and they are so optimised the save penalty would actually make you lose time if you used more segments. Not to mention I am keeping most of the tricks in the new run secret, and believe me, there are a bunch. So, yeah, go for it.

Also, you assume I care about 'being the best' or something. I just like having fun making in-game videos. That some people like to watch them is an added bonus, but I'm not gonna fret if they stop. That is what SDA is about; entertainment. Having fun. Competition is a less important matter. Outside of Quake, Metroid and Megaman there's not that much competition around, and it's mostly of the friendly kind. Because of that and of the unspoken rules, over-segmented runs beating normal runs just because they are over-segmented is not a problem - no runner will make a new run if they have no valuable routes by themselves to add. And if they did, they would be shunned by the community. If the new, super-segmented run would be worth watching because of cool new tricks and cool route changes, I'd gladly give the 'crown' up. It would clearly be worth the crown, if only for the better route/tricks. And yes, if such a situation would arise, my DX run would be nothing of worth to SDA, seeing as there's something better in many respects, offsetting the huge amount of segments. It wouldn't phase me at all, and I'm willing to bet 90% of the runners have a similar outlook on this.

You speak of there being problems with how SDA works; yet there are no problems. So, in order to bring attention to your 'solution', you create the problem. How does that make any sense? Not to mention a simpler solution to fight over-segmentation would be a different category similar to what Breakdown suggested (not that I agree with it, but it makes more sense than the OSPL idea).

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Let's suppose there never was a MS category for save anywhere games and it was always OSPL like quake and other games are. What would you think about the argument for adding a MS category?

There wouldn't be many; however, what does that matter? There aren't many for adding an OSLP category right now, either. We're talking about the situation right now. Surely you understand that?

Quote from ridd3r.:

You classed the run as "good" which must mean its not mass segmented as you have made your opinions on mass segmenting clear right? Dex's point was that why would people want to watch a run done in 30 minutes in say 20 segments over a run done in 25 minutes in say 30 segments? Unless there is a massive difference in segments people will watch the faster run, or if they want the skill factor they will watch a SS run.

That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. It's a category at best useless; at worst a way for relatively mediocre runs to be posted on popular games.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]Dex it's funny, you say less segments adds nothing of worth to SDA, then you say mass segmenting would get your run rejected because it's lame.  You see the contradiction here?[/quote]
I see the contradiction here: the contradiction is you acting like you understood what I was talking about when you actually did not. What I mean is that a *new category that enforces less segments* adds nothing of worth to SDA as it is right now. It doesn't add runs that are more interesting, it doesn't add runs that are more impressive, and it doesn't add anything of note to the watcher. That doesn't mean avoiding over-segmentation adds nothing of worth to SDA, when done at the runner's discretion. And also, nice work taking my sentences out of context (two fallacies in a single sentence, you're going for the record here) - I never said mass segmenting would get your run rejected because it's lame; I said that if a run was improved *solely due to mass-segmentation, then it would get rejected because it's lame and most verifiers would consider it of no additional worth to SDA, and ultimately less impressive than the earlier run*. Edit: Oh, and also notice, with mass segmentation comes massive save penalty. Which also could be basis for rejection.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]Suppose I beat your deuce ex run using 10 times more segments, using all the tricks you used and few more and much better optimization.  So now your saying your deuce ex run has nothing of worth to SDA right?[/quote]
Yeah, it's pretty crap, assuming you're talking about the *Deus Ex* run (Have some respect for the best game ever, will ya? ;)). Which is why I'm redoing the run right now, and I keep doing longer segments, and they are so optimised the save penalty would actually make you lose time if you used more segments. Not to mention I am keeping most of the tricks in the new run secret, and believe me, there are a bunch. So, yeah, go for it.

Also, you assume I care about 'being the best' or something. I just like having fun making in-game videos. That some people like to watch them is an added bonus, but I'm not gonna fret if they stop. That is what SDA is about; entertainment. Having fun. Competition is a less important matter. Outside of Quake, Metroid and Megaman there's not that much competition around, and it's mostly of the friendly kind. Because of that and of the unspoken rules, over-segmented runs beating normal runs just because they are over-segmented is not a problem - no runner will make a new run if they have no valuable routes by themselves to add. And if they did, they would be shunned by the community. If the new, super-segmented run would be worth watching because of cool new tricks and cool route changes, I'd gladly give the 'crown' up. It would clearly be worth the crown, if only for the better route/tricks. And yes, if such a situation would arise, my DX run would be nothing of worth to SDA, seeing as there's something better in many respects, offsetting the huge amount of segments. It wouldn't phase me at all, and I'm willing to bet 90% of the runners have a similar outlook on this.

You speak of there being problems with how SDA works; yet there are no problems. So, in order to bring attention to your 'solution', you create the problem. How does that make any sense? Not to mention a simpler solution to fight over-segmentation would be a different category similar to what Breakdown suggested (not that I agree with it, but it makes more sense than the OSPL idea).

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]Let's suppose there never was a MS category for save anywhere games and it was always OSPL like quake and other games are.  What would you think about the argument for adding a MS category?[/quote]
There wouldn't be many; however, what does that matter? There aren't many for adding an OSLP category right now, either. We're talking about the situation right now. Surely you understand that?

[quote="ridd3r."]You classed the run as "good" which must mean its not mass segmented as you have made your opinions on mass segmenting clear right? Dex's point was that why would people want to watch a run done in 30 minutes in say 20 segments over a run done in 25 minutes in say 30 segments? Unless there is a massive difference in segments people will watch the faster run, or if they want the skill factor they will watch a SS run.[/quote]
That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. It's a category at best useless; at worst a way for relatively mediocre runs to be posted on popular games.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

Spider-Waffle

Edit history:

Spider-Waffle: 2009-07-13 09:11:35 pm

2009-07-13 08:14:57 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

I would argue that OSPL does add runs that are more interesting in that you get see new ways of doing tricks and new strategies that are more consistent to pull off, in much the same watching a real speedrun instead of just a TAS is interesting. I don't know how you could argue that runs which segment less aren't in one aspect doing something that is more impressive, I really don't see how your making this statement. By being more interesting or interesting in it's own way, and being more impressive (depending on the quality) this is offering much to the viewer.

How would a verifier tell if a run was improved *solely due to mass-segmentation, explain to me this please.

People would want to watch a OSPL speedrun and not just a MS speedrun for the same reason people want to watch MS speedruns and not just TASes, or that people want to watch SS and not just ILs or MS. For me I think the biggest reason is that I like to see larger segments is because I just don't want to see the fastest strategy with frame perfect input, I also like see which strategies are more consistent and seeing how the runner decided to put it all together into one run is what makes it interesting. Also I can find it very impressive when I see 1 minute or 1 hour long segment that did so many hard things. When you segment every 8 seconds you can only showcase your skill to a certain extent. Where's if you had segments that are much longer it can be a better showcase for your skill.

Most of the games OSPL would apply to runners are needed segment at least 2-3 times per level to get .5s optimization. So OSPL runs would be about 1/2 to 1/3 or less times as many segments as MS runs. People would want to watch runs that used 3 times less segments and needed to find easier ways to do some tricks and took a great deal of skill to pull off the whole segment all at once.

The differences would be between watching a 180 segment 30 minute run or a 72 segment 32 minute run. You don't think some people would want to watch the 72 segment 32 minute run?

I could make better MS quake runs than what OSPL quake runs are available now using better optimization and few tiny new tricks, they'd use 3-5 segments instead of 1 and be like 4% faster. Which run do you think people would rather see or be more impressed by?

I would argue that OSPL does add runs that are more interesting in that you get see new ways of doing tricks and new strategies that are more consistent to pull off, in much the same watching a real speedrun instead of just a TAS is interesting.  I don't know how you could argue that runs which segment less aren't in one aspect doing something that is more impressive, I really don't see how your making this statement.  By being more interesting or interesting in it's own way, and being more impressive (depending on the quality) this is offering much to the viewer.

How would a verifier tell if a run was improved *solely due to mass-segmentation, explain to me this please.

People would want to watch a OSPL speedrun and not just a MS speedrun for the same reason people want to watch MS speedruns and not just TASes, or that people want to watch SS and not just ILs or MS.  For me I think the biggest reason is that I like to see larger segments is because I just don't want to see the fastest strategy with frame perfect input, I also like see which strategies are more consistent and seeing how the runner decided to put it all together into one run is what makes it interesting.  Also I can find it very impressive when I see 1 minute or 1 hour long segment that did so many hard things.  When you segment every 8 seconds you can only showcase your skill to a certain extent.  Where's if you had segments that are much longer it can be a better showcase for your skill.

Most of the games OSPL would apply to runners are needed segment at least 2-3 times per level to get .5s optimization.  So OSPL runs would be about 1/2  to 1/3 or less times as many segments as MS runs.  People would want to watch runs that used 3 times less segments and needed to find easier ways to do some tricks and took a great deal of skill to pull off the whole segment all at once.

The differences would be between watching a 180 segment 30 minute run or a 72 segment 32 minute run.  You don't think some people would want to watch the 72 segment 32 minute run?

I could make better MS quake runs than what OSPL quake runs are available now using better optimization and few tiny new tricks, they'd use 3-5 segments instead of 1 and be like 4% faster.  Which run do you think people would rather see or be more impressed by?

dex

2009-07-13 08:55:06 pm

Invisible avatar

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I would argue that OSPL does add runs that are more interesting in that you get see new ways of doing tricks and new strategies that are more consistent to pull off, in much the same watching a real speedrun instead of just a TAS is interesting. I don't know how you could argue that runs which segment less aren't in one aspect doing something that is more impressive, I really don't see how your making this statement. By being more or interesting or interesting in it's own way, and being more impressive (depending on the quality) this is offering much to the viewer.

That's the thing; in comparison with the way games are segmented on SDA (discounting seriously extreme cases like... Half-Life), it doesn't offer anything. Not any better routes (presumably, if it did, the more segmented run could be beaten), not any better execution (same), and negligibly more impressiveness, if that. It doesn't offer any extensive endurance, either (that's what SS is for). And even if it were impressive due to less segments, it still would be the odd one out - segmented, but a bit less than the normal run, and (assuming similar same routes) hardly different at all. Hence, it's a useless category however you look at it: if it uses the same routes as the mass-segmented run, it'll be an unworthy addition, and therefore something we don't want. If it used a bunch of new routes and tricks, then it would likely beat the old run even if it were level-by-level, and then this category wouldn't be of any use, either.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

How would a verifier tell if a run was improved *solely due to mass-segmentation, explain to me this please.

Presumably, a verifier would know the old run. He would also know the game. Then he would watch the new run, and see that it uses pretty much the same routes as the old one, maybe with negligible variations. Then, he notices the improvement is small, and the segment count is really large. Conclusion: run doesn't add anything, and improves the old one solely due to mass-segmentation.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Also I can find it very impressive when I see 1 minute or 1 hour long segment that did so many hard things. When you segment every 8 seconds you can only showcase your skill to a certain extent. Where's if you had segments that are much longer it can be a better showcase for your skill.

But the thing is, you are pretty much the *only* person segmenting every 10 seconds (besides groobo's Diablo run, but that's due to luck manipulation and IMO justified). Nobody else considers segmenting every 10 seconds necessary. When I was looking through the game list checking what PC games had SS runs, I saw the segmented runs, and almost all kept way over 1 minute per segment, in a segmentation scheme of their choice. Personally, I believe that if the current system works perfectly, what's the point of making a superficial category of use to nobody?

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

The differences would be between watching a 180 segment 30 minute run or a 72 segment 32 minute run. You don't think some people would want to watch the 72 segment 32 minute run?

Nobody was stopping you from making the Half-Life run a 72 segment 32 minute run in the first place. And your run wouldn't get obsoleted just because of someone using more segments, because the community, and by extension verifiers wouldn't let the otherwise copy-pasted over-segmented run pass verification; and let's not forget that pretty much no runner would actually consider making a run that's just a copy-paste of the old one. That you chose to go 180 segments instead is YOUR fault and YOUR choice alone, and no argument for a new category. And I'm willing to bet that if a watcher would wander onto the Half-Life page and had the choice, he would still pick the 30 minute run in the end, just because the final number is better. And do you think that you'd get a super-overwhelming reaction about the new run? Sure, there would be people saying 'whoa, badass' in the core Half-Life fanbase due to the very large improvement in regards to the segmented run; but while watching, most people outside that fanbase would have the niggling feeling "I've seen this before", and it would seem more boring to them (the more 'casual' watchers of speedruns, so to speak). The only way the OSLP category would be of any use is if it completely replaced the current multi-segment category - and that's not going to happen for a variety of reasons, from viewers liking lower final times more, through many runners actually using mid-level saves, right up to the massive amount of runs that would have to be grandfathered or removed.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I could make better MS quake runs than what OSPL quake runs are available now using better optimization and few tiny new tricks, they'd use 3-5 segments instead of 1 and be like 4% faster. Which run do you think people would rather see or be more impressed by?

If the segmented run was really good, likely the segmented one :P. If people are looking for endurance-based impressiveness, they can watch the (magnificent) single-segment demos we have up. If they are looking for a segmented run, they probably want a lot of tricks and optimisation - if the more segmented run can achieve that to *a good enough degree* (those words are also important, don't ignore them), it's likely to be more impressive. Of course, this is largely a moot point because the OSPL scheme was chosen just for continuity sake (splices in the demos can be really glaring, really annoying) and for easiness of making and sharing the demos (the latter very useful for projects). It simply made sense from the convenience point of view, and it still does in Quake. So it became a rule that no saves are permitted in Quake speedrunning. Also, good luck improving the project times we have now by 4% just by segmenting :P.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]I would argue that OSPL does add runs that are more interesting in that you get see new ways of doing tricks and new strategies that are more consistent to pull off, in much the same watching a real speedrun instead of just a TAS is interesting.  I don't know how you could argue that runs which segment less aren't in one aspect doing something that is more impressive, I really don't see how your making this statement.  By being more or interesting or interesting in it's own way, and being more impressive (depending on the quality) this is offering much to the viewer.[/quote]
That's the thing; in comparison with the way games are segmented on SDA (discounting seriously extreme cases like... Half-Life), it doesn't offer anything. Not any better routes (presumably, if it did, the more segmented run could be beaten), not any better execution (same), and negligibly more impressiveness, if that. It doesn't offer any extensive endurance, either (that's what SS is for). And even if it were impressive due to less segments, it still would be the odd one out - segmented, but a bit less than the normal run, and (assuming similar same routes) hardly different at all. Hence, it's a useless category however you look at it: if it uses the same routes as the mass-segmented run, it'll be an unworthy addition, and therefore something we don't want. If it used a bunch of new routes and tricks, then it would likely beat the old run even if it were level-by-level, and then this category wouldn't be of any use, either.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]How would a verifier tell if a run was improved *solely due to mass-segmentation, explain to me this please.[/quote]
Presumably, a verifier would know the old run. He would also know the game. Then he would watch the new run, and see that it uses pretty much the same routes as the old one, maybe with negligible variations. Then, he notices the improvement is small, and the segment count is really large. Conclusion: run doesn't add anything, and improves the old one solely due to mass-segmentation.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]Also I can find it very impressive when I see 1 minute or 1 hour long segment that did so many hard things.  When you segment every 8 seconds you can only showcase your skill to a certain extent.  Where's if you had segments that are much longer it can be a better showcase for your skill.[/quote]
But the thing is, you are pretty much the *only* person segmenting every 10 seconds (besides groobo's Diablo run, but that's due to luck manipulation and IMO justified). Nobody else considers segmenting every 10 seconds necessary. When I was looking through the game list checking what PC games had SS runs, I saw the segmented runs, and almost all kept way over 1 minute per segment, in a segmentation scheme of their choice. Personally, I believe that if the current system works perfectly, what's the point of making a superficial category of use to nobody?

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]The differences would be between watching a 180 segment 30 minute run or a 72 segment 32 minute run.  You don't think some people would want to watch the 72 segment 32 minute run?[/quote]
Nobody was stopping you from making the Half-Life run a 72 segment 32 minute run in the first place. And your run wouldn't get obsoleted just because of someone using more segments, because the community, and by extension verifiers wouldn't let the otherwise copy-pasted over-segmented run pass verification; and let's not forget that pretty much no runner would actually consider making a run that's just a copy-paste of the old one. That you chose to go 180 segments instead is YOUR fault and YOUR choice alone, and no argument for a new category. And I'm willing to bet that if a watcher would wander onto the Half-Life page and had the choice, he would still pick the 30 minute run in the end, just because the final number is better. And do you think that you'd get a super-overwhelming reaction about the new run? Sure, there would be people saying 'whoa, badass' in the core Half-Life fanbase due to the very large improvement in regards to the segmented run; but while watching, most people outside that fanbase would have the niggling feeling "I've seen this before", and it would seem more boring to them (the more 'casual' watchers of speedruns, so to speak). The only way the OSLP category would be of any use is if it completely replaced the current multi-segment category - and that's not going to happen for a variety of reasons, from viewers liking lower final times more, through many runners actually using mid-level saves, right up to the massive amount of runs that would have to be grandfathered or removed.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]I could make better MS quake runs than what OSPL quake runs are available now using better optimization and few tiny new tricks, they'd use 3-5 segments instead of 1 and be like 4% faster.  Which run do you think people would rather see or be more impressed by?[/quote]
If the segmented run was really good, likely the segmented one :P. If people are looking for endurance-based impressiveness, they can watch the (magnificent) single-segment demos we have up. If they are looking for a segmented run, they probably want a lot of tricks and optimisation - if the more segmented run can achieve that to *a good enough degree* (those words are also important, don't ignore them), it's likely to be more impressive. Of course, this is largely a moot point because the OSPL scheme was chosen just for continuity sake (splices in the demos can be really glaring, really annoying) and for easiness of making and sharing the demos (the latter very useful for projects). It simply made sense from the convenience point of view, and it still does in Quake. So it became a rule that no saves are permitted in Quake speedrunning. Also, good luck improving the project times we have now by 4% just by segmenting :P.

Smilge

2009-07-13 10:02:48 pm

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I would argue that OSPL does add runs that are more interesting in that you get see new ways of doing tricks and new strategies that are more consistent to pull off, in much the same watching a real speedrun instead of just a TAS is interesting.

Gonna have to agree with dex, that's what SS is for.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-07-13 10:29:33 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

Would argue that the reason most runners make their segments over a minute long is because they tend to favor OSPL; they're obviously not trying to make the fastest MS run they can.

Also, There's other HL runs with segments similar to every 10 seconds by various other runners.

LLCoolDave

2009-07-13 11:53:25 pm

So let me get this straight: You want to add a rule to explicitely allow as a seperate category what you claim most runners already do instinctively. How about another category that requires you to hold the game pad with both hands? Surely, that's what most people already do, but imagine how upset they'd be if somebody with one arm suddenly beat them. As there is currently no regulation on Handedness, it would make sense to protect the two-handers from the devastating one armed man of quick playing.

As has been pointed out several times before, you are THE ONLY ONE making this an actual problem. The only really massively segmented runs on SDA that I know of are Diablo and Half-Life. Most others, even if not quite strictly adhering to that arbitrary OSPL (really wrong name as has been pointed out as well) segmenting, still use it in a somewhat reasonable manner. "Midlevel saves" don't usually save all THAT much time over not segmenting unless they are there to make an immensly hard trick more accessible, in which case that trick would most likely not be part of the OSPL run, forcing the player to take the slower way around then. So what you gain, for most runs, is getting rid of a third or so of the segments and being like 5-10% slower by doing less tricks or moving just generally slightly less optimized. This doesn't feel like a significant step upwards. Obviously this category makes sense SOLELY on games that have both a OSPL and some other run on it. However, can you SERIOUSLY name more than half a dozen games that you are really confident would be getting an additional run if they were allowed to get on SDA by doing a slightly slower OSPL run. I can't.

SDA, while theoretically allowing for competition, is just not as competitive as you may think outside the core games. There's the well known series like Zelda, Mario, Mega Man and Half-Life where several people are actually working on, or consider working on runs. Then there's all the rest where there is really not much interest in obsoleting a previous run. If somebody should pick up a game that has already been run and decides to beat it, I have not yet seen anybody approaching this with a "I could beat this if I segmented twice as much" attitude. Obsoleting old runs usually happens on the basis of thinking you can do it BETTER, not just slightly FASTER. Simply put, the runner that thinks "I could produce a high quality run on this game if only there was a seperate OSPL category" that you envision doesn't seem to exist at all. At least I havn't bumped into one yet.

In the end, you are proposing a solution to a problem that quite frankly doesn't seem to exist outside your head just yet. If you want this debate to be of ANY significance, you have to give a CONCRETE example of where it would actually help. Running around trying to tell people they sure regret that there is no OSPL category when they don't is not the way to go. I propose you pick up a well received run and beat it using your mass segmenting approach, get it accepted on SDA AND cause an uproar because people prefered the old run more. Only if you can manage that I will believe you that there may be need for further rules. Until then, mass segmenting will, to me, just remain something I am personally not fond of.

So let me get this straight: You want to add a rule to explicitely allow as a seperate category what you claim most runners already do instinctively. How about another category that requires you to hold the game pad with both hands? Surely, that's what most people already do, but imagine how upset they'd be if somebody with one arm suddenly beat them. As there is currently no regulation on Handedness, it would make sense to protect the two-handers from the devastating one armed man of quick playing.

As has been pointed out several times before, you are THE ONLY ONE making this an actual problem. The only really massively segmented runs on SDA that I know of are Diablo and Half-Life. Most others, even if not quite strictly adhering to that arbitrary OSPL (really wrong name as has been pointed out as well) segmenting, still use it in a somewhat reasonable manner. "Midlevel saves" don't usually save all THAT much time over not segmenting unless they are there to make an immensly hard trick more accessible, in which case that trick would most likely not be part of the OSPL run, forcing the player to take the slower way around then. So what you gain, for most runs, is getting rid of a third or so of the segments and being like 5-10% slower by doing less tricks or moving just generally slightly less optimized. This doesn't feel like a significant step upwards. Obviously this category makes sense SOLELY on games that have both a OSPL and some other run on it. However, can you SERIOUSLY name more than half a dozen games that you are really confident would be getting an additional run if they were allowed to get on SDA by doing a slightly slower OSPL run. I can't.

SDA, while theoretically allowing for competition, is just not as competitive as you may think outside the core games. There's the well known series like Zelda, Mario, Mega Man and Half-Life where several people are actually working on, or consider working on runs. Then there's all the rest where there is really not much interest in obsoleting a previous run. If somebody should pick up a game that has already been run and decides to beat it, I have not yet seen anybody approaching this with a "I could beat this if I segmented twice as much" attitude. Obsoleting old runs usually happens on the basis of thinking you can do it BETTER, not just slightly FASTER. Simply put, the runner that thinks "I could produce a high quality run on this game if only there was a seperate OSPL category" that you envision doesn't seem to exist at all. At least I havn't bumped into one yet.

In the end, you are proposing a solution to a problem that quite frankly doesn't seem to exist outside your head just yet. If you want this debate to be of ANY significance, you have to give a CONCRETE example of where it would actually help. Running around trying to tell people they sure regret that there is no OSPL category when they don't is not the way to go. I propose you pick up a well received run and beat it using your mass segmenting approach, get it accepted on SDA AND cause an uproar because people prefered the old run more. Only if you can manage that I will believe you that there may be need for further rules. Until then, mass segmenting will, to me, just remain something I am personally not fond of.

zoonel

2009-07-14 03:30:01 am

Go play spacechem !

You guys seems a lot against the ospl because its either a sub-optimised run or the definition of per level is too vague and it will lead to too much categories for the viewers. I disagree with all of those things :

why allow a single segment run when a segmented one will beat the time ? obviously for some greatness of doing the game in one shot. Same goes for 100%, low% why allow it, its just playing the game with some constraints so why allowing it as its oviously sub-optimal ?
And what's that IL table for games like doom/quake/whatever ? its just individual levels played with a naked character nothing to do with the "normal" way of playing the game where you carry more powerfull weapons, must manage your ammo and can pull off faster routes. Why allow IL then if not only for a challenge perspective with a clearly defined sets of rules ? => that's exactly what i want to see with OSPL category : greatness with a clearly defined rule but based on the complete game instead of just IL.
The per level statement is absolutly not vague because its exactly the same as IL except you do the entire game this way allowing you to carry whatever the games offer you to carry between levels.
And the too much category is just a silly argument when you see all the current possible categories.It will just make more work for the administrators and verifiers; viewers will just pick the first video if they dont know the game and if they are interested well they can choose between more option to watch which is a + . The metroid exemple is a good exemple :p because i never played it and i decided to see the run because of some top 10 list i read; as a lambda viewer and new to sda (i didnt know the site well at this time) i came across all those categories with no meaning of what they ment. But you dont have to bee a genious to figure out the first video is what you want and the 100% or low% is for some constraints while playing the game. Actually after viewing the any % segmented i came back to watch the 100% and single segment ! The only difficulty for metroid categories is to understand the difference between pal and ntsc wich is another debate.

I understand admins dont want another category but i do. For some games the ospl has no sense just like IL, for other it has. If i take the wc3 game i would rather see a OSPL then a SS for greatness. You can't do an IL table for wc3 because of the hero level and objects.
For starcraft there is only an IL table, but that's ok because you can put the IL togheter to have a complete run of the game wich is not the case for games like doom where IL are just IL and that's not a speedrun of the game.

The ospl category is a just balance between single segment and multi-segment and its not a meaningless category for speedrun because if it is you can throw all those 100% low% game+ SS other character ... and only keep any% any segments for the fastest run ; easy to maintain easy for viewers just like you guys want.
Its not because you dont see interest in it that there isn't.

You guys seems a lot against the ospl because its either a sub-optimised run or the definition of per level is too vague and it will lead to too much categories for the viewers. I disagree with all of those things :

why allow a single segment run when a segmented one will beat the time ? obviously for some greatness of doing the game in one shot. Same goes for 100%, low% why allow it, its just playing the game with some constraints so why allowing it as its oviously sub-optimal ?
And what's that IL table for games like doom/quake/whatever ? its just individual levels played with a naked character nothing to do with the "normal" way of playing the game where you carry more powerfull weapons, must manage your ammo and can pull off faster routes. Why allow IL then if not only for a challenge perspective with a clearly defined sets of rules ? => that's exactly what i want to see with OSPL category : greatness with a clearly defined rule but based on the complete game instead of just IL.
The per level statement is absolutly not vague because its exactly the same as IL except you do the entire game this way allowing you to carry whatever the games offer you to carry between levels.
And the too much category is just a silly argument when you see all the current possible categories.It will just make more work for the administrators and verifiers; viewers will just pick the first video if they dont know the game and if they are interested well they can choose between more option to watch which is a + . The metroid exemple is a good exemple :p because i never played it and i decided to see the run because of some top 10 list i read; as a lambda viewer and new to sda (i didnt know the site well at this time) i came across all those categories with no meaning of what they ment. But you dont have to bee a genious to figure out the first video is what you want and the 100% or low% is for some constraints while playing the game. Actually after viewing the any % segmented i came back to watch the 100% and single segment ! The only difficulty for metroid categories is to understand the difference between pal and ntsc wich is another debate.

I understand admins dont want another category but i do. For some games the ospl has no sense just like IL, for other it has. If i take the wc3 game i would rather see a OSPL then a SS for greatness. You can't do an IL table for wc3 because of the hero level and objects.
For starcraft there is only an IL table, but that's ok because you can put the IL togheter to have a complete run of the game wich is not the case for games like doom where IL are just IL and that's not a speedrun of the game.

The ospl category is a just balance between single segment and multi-segment and its not a meaningless category for speedrun because if it is you can throw all those 100% low% game+ SS other character ... and only keep any% any segments for the fastest run ; easy to maintain easy for viewers just like you guys want.
Its not because you dont see interest in it that there isn't.

dex

2009-07-14 03:35:45 am

Invisible avatar

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Also, There's other HL runs with segments similar to every 10 seconds by various other runners.

Not true. Half-Life: 9.9 seconds per segment, but that's you. Other runs are single segment, I believe.
Opposing Force: Run by you in ? segments... can't say I know what the average 'tps' (time per segment) is, but it doesn't matter because it's yours and not 'by various other runners'.
Boot Camp run - 1 minute and 12 seconds per segment.
Blue Shift: Not scripted by Jerry Yu, about 1 minute and 11 seconds per segment.
Scripted by groobo, about 24 seconds per segment. That's not very similar to every 10 seconds by far. Plus, it's just ONE run, not like your 'various other runners' implies many runs.

And if you say the mass-segmented runs have been obsoleted, then you're just showing that over-segmented runs can be beaten in a less segmented manner if you have a better route and actually try.

Quote from LLCoolDave:

In the end, you are proposing a solution to a problem that quite frankly doesn't seem to exist outside your head just yet.

Or indeed, if it existed he would likely be the only person creating it.

Quote:

I understand admins dont want another category but i do. For some games the ospl has no sense just like IL, for other it has. If i take the wc3 game i would rather see a OSPL then a SS for greatness. You can't do an IL table for wc3 because of the hero level and objects.

But you can do an OSPL run if you want, as has been repeatedly stated. Just limit yourself, if your run is good it'll end up on SDA. We (as in the opponents of the idea) want to leave the decision at the discretion of the runner without making another artificial category which would be less popular, and in almost all cases pretty much the same as the run segmented more (if one would exist).

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]
Also, There's other HL runs with segments similar to every 10 seconds by various other runners.  
[/quote]
Not true. Half-Life: 9.9 seconds per segment, but that's you. Other runs are single segment, I believe.
Opposing Force: Run by you in ? segments... can't say I know what the average 'tps' (time per segment) is, but it doesn't matter because it's yours and not 'by various other runners'.
Boot Camp run - 1 minute and 12 seconds per segment.
Blue Shift: Not scripted by Jerry Yu, about 1 minute and 11 seconds per segment.
Scripted by groobo, about 24 seconds per segment. That's not very similar to every 10 seconds by far. Plus, it's just ONE run, not like your 'various other runners' implies many runs.

And if you say the mass-segmented runs have been obsoleted, then you're just showing that over-segmented runs can be beaten in a less segmented manner if you have a better route and actually try.

[quote="LLCoolDave"]In the end, you are proposing a solution to a problem that quite frankly doesn't seem to exist outside your head just yet.[/quote]
Or indeed, if it existed he would likely be the only person creating it.

[quote]I understand admins dont want another category but i do. For some games the ospl has no sense just like IL, for other it has. If i take the wc3 game i would rather see a OSPL then a SS for greatness. You can't do an IL table for wc3 because of the hero level and objects.[/quote]
But you can do an OSPL run if you want, as has been repeatedly stated. Just limit yourself, if your run is good it'll end up on SDA. We (as in the opponents of the idea) want to leave the decision at the discretion of the runner without making another artificial category which would be less popular, and in almost all cases pretty much the same as the run segmented more (if one would exist).

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

Spider-Waffle

Edit history:

Spider-Waffle: 2009-07-14 06:13:06 am

2009-07-14 05:27:26 am

Don't think! feeeeeal

Well I'm starting to think maybe OSPL is only more popular than MS for certain games, These games I think are ones you can nearly optimize a level in one segment like quake, quake 2, warcraft III, starcraft (only exception I see is is doom games not counting doom3) which also have clear cut breaks between levels (the clear cut breaks I think is important) yet info from previous levels carry over. These games basically fit the bill for ILs, but they have info from previous levels that carry over, making IL less meaningful. For some of these games people make ILs anyway starting with vanilla characters for whatever reason like quake, and doom. Personally I'd rather see a OSPL than these ILs, but good for quake it has OSPL but no MS.

So what would you think about OSPL only for games which could have ILs with starting with vanilla info, like quake, doom, doom II, quake II, quake III, warcraft III, painkillers, and a few others? I think these are the games where OSPL really shines.

Thanks to my poll I've concluded that OSPL for a game like HL isn't what people want. Could you reopen that too please, the SS and TAS are really close, and I like a larger sample size than 4 and 1 for the other categories, there's not much statistical significance either. I really am up in the air between a lot of different HL speedruns at the moment. I've talking with people on aim for hours late into the AM about them, I'm going to need to pick one soon. How am I supposed to use a poll but keep it this thread anyway if that's what you want? I threw my current MS run in there because I wanted to see how it compared, I also wanted to represent every category so I could accurate representation and compare people interests to help my thoughts on things like this thread. I'm really killing two birds with one stone here. My poll was the very thing that most convinced me OSPL for HL wasn't what people wanted, it's rather funny you closed it when in fact if you wanted to help shift my opinion closer towards yours you should have CREATED it. It's like you really think I have an ill will or make things personal or something. I'm really following the rules and I've never directly insulted or attacked anyone, yet people do that all the time yet you never give them warnings.

I'm not stuck in one opinion, I'm a very open minded person. Many people seemed to think OSPL wouldn't be that popular, but couldn't convince me. I thought there's probably some truth to what these people are saying if so many people are saying it. So I took it upon myself to get the evidence to convince myself one way or other as it seemed my opinion was oddly different for some reason.

I have a theory that these games which can get ILs with vanilla starting info are basically the only ones people want OSPL for. I'd like to test this with a poll or something similar as well. Will you allow me to do this without closing the poll?

If you've ever watched the HL:BS or boot camp speedruns you'd notice there's an inordinate amount of dead time, same with the poral run in progress as OSPL. the actual time playing is closer to 10s per segment than you might think. Also there's other HL runs done for mods which were free that I'm referring too.

Well I'm starting to think maybe OSPL is only more popular than MS for certain games,  These games I think are ones you can nearly optimize a level in one segment like quake, quake 2, warcraft III, starcraft (only exception I see is is doom games not counting doom3) which also have clear cut breaks between levels (the clear cut breaks I think is important) yet info from previous levels carry over.  These games basically fit the bill for ILs, but they have info from previous levels that carry over, making IL less meaningful.  For some of these games people make ILs anyway starting with vanilla characters for whatever reason like quake, and doom.  Personally I'd rather see a OSPL than these ILs, but good for quake it has OSPL but no MS.

So what would you think about OSPL only for games which could have ILs with starting with vanilla info, like quake, doom, doom II, quake II, quake III, warcraft III, painkillers, and a few others?  I think these are the games where OSPL really shines.

Thanks to my poll I've concluded that OSPL for a game like HL isn't what people want.  Could you reopen that too please, the SS and TAS are really close, and I like a larger sample size than 4 and 1 for the other categories, there's not much statistical significance either.  I really am up in the air between a lot of different HL speedruns at the moment.  I've talking with people on aim for hours late into the AM about them, I'm going to need to pick one soon.  How am I supposed to use a poll but keep it this thread anyway if that's what you want?  I threw my current MS run in there because I wanted to see how it compared, I also wanted to represent every category so I could accurate representation and compare people interests to help my thoughts on things like this thread.  I'm really killing two birds with one stone here.  My poll was the very thing that most convinced me OSPL for HL wasn't what people wanted, it's rather funny you closed it when in fact if you wanted to help shift my opinion closer towards yours you should have CREATED it.  It's like you really think I have an ill will or make things personal or something.  I'm really following the rules and I've never directly insulted or attacked anyone, yet people do that all the time yet you never give them warnings.

I'm not stuck in one opinion, I'm a very open minded person.  Many people seemed to think OSPL wouldn't be that popular, but couldn't convince me.  I thought there's probably some truth to what these people are saying if so many people are saying it.  So I took it upon myself to get the evidence to convince myself one way or other as it seemed my opinion was oddly different for some reason.

I have a theory that these games which can get ILs with vanilla starting info are basically the only ones people want OSPL for.  I'd like to test this with a poll or something similar as well.  Will you allow me to do this without closing the poll?

If you've ever watched the HL:BS or boot camp speedruns you'd notice there's an inordinate amount of dead time, same with the poral run in progress as OSPL.  the actual time playing is closer to 10s per segment than you might think.  Also there's other HL runs done for mods which were free that I'm referring too.

Scepheo

2009-07-14 06:15:43 am

I'm trying not to take a stance here, but just word my view on the issue;

I have come to think of the OSPL category as the IL category for games where the normal definition of IL doesn't work. Having said that, it'd be there to enable more competition on the games which have them. Because in MS-competition you'd be trusting too much on the runners not to mass segment, for fairness. And SS would simply be to susceptible to simple mistakes (like slipping your finger) to be a competitive category.

Most arguments against this OSPL category are just as well arguments against the IL category. Which is a bad thing. I think. Unless you also want to get rid of that category.

On the other hand, there isn't enough competition on most games on SDA to get a real public for these runs, making it an unnecessary category that'd simply confuse viewers and clutter game pages.

Just my two cents.

TheVoid

2009-07-14 06:25:52 am

About Painkiller (Since I'm busy with that one myself), how would OSPL be any different from IL runs? It would be exactly the same.

The only possible difference would be that you "could" use the Black Tarot cards that you automatically unlock by speeding through the levels (But then again, for Painkiller another IL category could already be created where you can use any Black Tarot cards for the levels since that causes quite a difference compared to normal IL's).
But my response to that would be "Meh :-\". That would feel like a weak thing to do.

Take the Black Tarot card from the first level for example, which you automatically get for just finishing the level. It's called "Endurance" and has the effect of "Take only half of the damage"... I mean, my response to that would be "Pussy !!!" Wink

And if you say "Then I'll won't use that card", then I'll say "Then what's the point of OSPL?".

dex

Edit history:

dex: 2009-07-14 07:16:43 am

2009-07-14 06:59:07 am

Invisible avatar

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I'm not stuck in one opinion, I'm a very open minded person. Many people seemed to think OSPL wouldn't be that popular, but couldn't convince me. I thought there's probably some truth to what these people are saying if so many people are saying it. So I took it upon myself to get the evidence to convince myself one way or other as it seemed my opinion was oddly different for some reason.

Evidence? What, most people saying they wouldn't prefer it in a thread isn't as good an evidence as a poll (which is basically people saying what they think in pretty much the same manner, except by choosing an option)? I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. In fact, polls can be easily swayed if the maker is skilful enough at forming the poll answers/asks the questions at a certain place or time etc. There are enough people in here stating their opinion to know how the popularity tends to go, and that's the best measure that can be used. In fact, specifically because you were stuck to one opinion, you chose to ignore all the people talking against it and tried to go against that, with blackmail and useless posts. You are the one close minded here.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

My poll was the very thing that most convinced OSPL for HL wasn't what people wanted, it's rather funny you closed it when in fact if you wanted to help shift my opinion closer towards yours you should have CREATED it. It's like you really think I have an ill will or make things personal or something.

There's nothing personal about it. I just am a damn forum mod. A forum mod is supposed to keep the forum clean. Surely you understand that creating that thread reeks of ill intent (so much that like 5 different people on IRC thought the thread was of ill intent before I even woke up to see the thread) at this time, especially if you also include OSPL options in the poll? That you have no ill will doesn't mean you do not come off as having ill will. As you pointed out, the thread clearly supports my point of view; why would I close it for any other reason than to keep the forum clean, then? I know that the OSPL discussion belongs here, that's why I do not want it spreading out to other forums, and that's why I didn't want any thread like that created - I thought the discussion here would show how dominant the 'OSPL not necessary' opinion is, a poll is not necessary when you have several people stating their opinions clearly. I don't want other threads flooded with banter. You've made 2 posts that were basically spam in the PC forum for no apparent reason, and I was not going to let the discussion on OSPL matters continue there. If you wanted to make the thread asking just what run you should do, you could have added ONLY the options you were considering, and not mix it up with OSPL matters.

I will however reopen the thread, as per request. Bear in mind that if I see even the slightest bit of more agitation of the OSPL idea in there it'll get locked again. Keep the OSPL discussion where it belongs, in this thread. Also, you're searching for theories that I think you have ill will, when you should rethink your forum behaviour instead. If a mod repeatedly gives away warnings you largely disregard, there is something inherently wrong with said behaviour. And I would think you have an idea of what constitutes proper behaviour even without those warnings. Think about that when you post, that's all I ask from you.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Well I'm starting to think maybe OSPL is only more popular than MS for certain games, These games I think are ones you can nearly optimize a level in one segment like quake, quake 2, warcraft III, starcraft (only exception I see is is doom games not counting doom3) which also have clear cut breaks between levels (the clear cut breaks I think is important) yet info from previous levels carry over. These games basically fit the bill for ILs, but they have info from previous levels that carry over, making IL less meaningful. For some of these games people make ILs anyway starting with vanilla characters for whatever reason like quake, and doom. Personally I'd rather see a OSPL than these ILs, but good for quake it has OSPL but no MS.

That's a flawed argument; correlation doesn't imply causation. In almost every of those cases of games where there's both IL *and* OSPL only or the OSPL category is the only one the reason has nothing to do with how the levels can be optimised and how they work. The OSPL category is simply *convenient* to do *team projects* in, and that's the reason they are used, whereas ILs are the convenient way to compete fairly. Not because they are more impressive or purer, or more popular. With time, it became so inherent to the community nobody would try to change that. That's why it became a rule not to save in Quake runs. The reason is probably very similar in the Doom community. In games which don't have any 'community ruleset' like this, the way the runs should be segmented should be left at the discretion of a runner.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Also there's other HL runs done for mods which were free that I'm referring too.

Argh; we're talking about SDA, not about 'mod runs'. Mod runs are generally done for fun in a rather quick manner, without much attention to detail. Since it's easier to segment a lot, they are segmented a lot. This is no basis for an SDA argument - the whole run creation process is drastically different.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I have a theory that these games which can get ILs with vanilla starting info are basically the only ones people want OSPL for. I'd like to test this with a poll or something similar as well. Will you allow me to do this without closing the poll?

In my opinion the best way would be first seeing what people think in this thread, and then actually taking the opinions into account. That will give a much better picture than a binary or ternary choice. Hence, please refrain from making the poll UNLESS the opinions are divided very closely. I stated my opinion on this earlier in the post. (in a nutshell, no)

Quote:

Most arguments against this OSPL category are just as well arguments against the IL category. Which is a bad thing. I think. Unless you also want to get rid of that category.

Not really; the IL categories are generally different from the standard segmented runs (different gear in levels, stuff not carrying over). Also they are made to enable players to improve just one level, which is a HUGE difference from the obsoletion of a standard segmented run. OSPL is exactly the same as the standard segmented, you'd still have to obsolete the entire run. Most of the time you can't really redo a level well if you need to end up with the same stats for continuity.

OSPL works in Quake, because we have tools to automatically make the demos fit. The same probably holds for Doom. It would not in an overwhelming majority of OSPL categories, and hence would be awfully similar to the current way segmentation is defined.

This is also important: ILs add something (can obsolete single levels, in addition to the differences due to different starting gear). Dedicated OSPL does not. That's why ILs are limited mostly to games where you can choose the level out of the menu or the stuff doesn't carry over (I think the only exception is the Max Payne run, but again, that's probably just a mistake from the old years that's left unfixed).

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]I'm not stuck in one opinion, I'm a very open minded person.  Many people seemed to think OSPL wouldn't be that popular, but couldn't convince me.  I thought there's probably some truth to what these people are saying if so many people are saying it.  So I took it upon myself to get the evidence to convince myself one way or other as it seemed my opinion was oddly different for some reason.[/quote]
Evidence? What, most people saying they wouldn't prefer it in a thread isn't as good an evidence as a poll (which is basically people saying what they think in pretty much the same manner, except by choosing an option)? I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. In fact, polls can be easily swayed if the maker is skilful enough at forming the poll answers/asks the questions at a certain place or time etc. There are enough people in here stating their opinion to know how the popularity tends to go, and that's the best measure that can be used. In fact, specifically because you were stuck to one opinion, you chose to ignore all the people talking against it and tried to go against that, with blackmail and useless posts. You are the one close minded here.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]My poll was the very thing that most convinced OSPL for HL wasn't what people wanted, it's rather funny you closed it when in fact if you wanted to help shift my opinion closer towards yours you should have CREATED it. It's like you really think I have an ill will or make things personal or something.[/quote]
There's nothing personal about it. I just am a damn forum mod. A forum mod is supposed to keep the forum clean. Surely you understand that creating that thread reeks of ill intent (so much that like 5 different people on IRC thought the thread was of ill intent before I even woke up to see the thread) at this time, especially if you also include OSPL options in the poll? That you have no ill will doesn't mean you do not come off as having ill will. As you pointed out, the thread clearly supports my point of view; why would I close it for any other reason than to keep the forum clean, then? I know that the OSPL discussion belongs here, that's why I do not want it spreading out to other forums, and that's why I didn't want any thread like that created - I thought the discussion here would show how dominant the 'OSPL not necessary' opinion is, a poll is not necessary when you have several people stating their opinions clearly. I don't want other threads flooded with banter. You've made 2 posts that were basically spam in the PC forum for no apparent reason, and I was not going to let the discussion on OSPL matters continue there. If you wanted to make the thread asking just what run you should do, you could have added ONLY the options you were considering, and not mix it up with OSPL matters.

I will however reopen the thread, as per request. Bear in mind that if I see even the slightest bit of more agitation of the OSPL idea in there it'll get locked again. Keep the OSPL discussion where it belongs, in this thread. Also, you're searching for theories that I think you have ill will, when you should rethink your forum behaviour instead. If a mod repeatedly gives away warnings you largely disregard, there is something inherently wrong with said behaviour. And I would think you have an idea of what constitutes proper behaviour even without those warnings. Think about that when you post, that's all I ask from you.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]Well I'm starting to think maybe OSPL is only more popular than MS for certain games,  These games I think are ones you can nearly optimize a level in one segment like quake, quake 2, warcraft III, starcraft (only exception I see is is doom games not counting doom3) which also have clear cut breaks between levels (the clear cut breaks I think is important) yet info from previous levels carry over.  These games basically fit the bill for ILs, but they have info from previous levels that carry over, making IL less meaningful.  For some of these games people make ILs anyway starting with vanilla characters for whatever reason like quake, and doom.  Personally I'd rather see a OSPL than these ILs, but good for quake it has OSPL but no MS.[/quote]
That's a flawed argument; correlation doesn't imply causation. In almost every of those cases of games where there's both IL *and* OSPL only or the OSPL category is the only one the reason has nothing to do with how the levels can be optimised and how they work. The OSPL category is simply *convenient* to do *team projects* in, and that's the reason they are used, whereas ILs are the convenient way to compete fairly. Not because they are more impressive or purer, or more popular. With time, it became so inherent to the community nobody would try to change that. That's why it became a rule not to save in Quake runs. The reason is probably very similar in the Doom community. In games which don't have any 'community ruleset' like this, the way the runs should be segmented should be left at the discretion of a runner.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]Also there's other HL runs done for mods which were free that I'm referring too.[/quote]
Argh; we're talking about SDA, not about 'mod runs'. Mod runs are generally done for fun in a rather quick manner, without much attention to detail. Since it's easier to segment a lot, they are segmented a lot. This is no basis for an SDA argument - the whole run creation process is drastically different.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]I have a theory that these games which can get ILs with vanilla starting info are basically the only ones people want OSPL for.  I'd like to test this with a poll or something similar as well.  Will you allow me to do this without closing the poll?[/quote]
In my opinion the best way would be first seeing what people think in this thread, and then actually taking the opinions into account. That will give a much better picture than a binary or ternary choice. Hence, please refrain from making the poll UNLESS the opinions are divided very closely. I stated my opinion on this earlier in the post. (in a nutshell, no)

[quote]Most arguments against this OSPL category are just as well arguments against the IL category. Which is a bad thing. I think. Unless you also want to get rid of that category.[/quote]
Not really; the IL categories are generally different from the standard segmented runs (different gear in levels, stuff not carrying over). Also they are made to enable players to improve just one level, which is a HUGE difference from the obsoletion of a standard segmented run. OSPL is exactly the same as the standard segmented, you'd still have to obsolete the entire run. Most of the time you can't really redo a level well if you need to end up with the same stats for continuity.

OSPL works in Quake, because we have tools to automatically make the demos fit. The same probably holds for Doom. It would not in an overwhelming majority of OSPL categories, and hence would be awfully similar to the current way segmentation is defined.

This is also important: ILs add something (can obsolete single levels, in addition to the differences due to different starting gear). Dedicated OSPL does not. That's why ILs are limited mostly to games where you can choose the level out of the menu or the stuff doesn't carry over (I think the only exception is the Max Payne run, but again, that's probably just a mistake from the old years that's left unfixed).

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

Spider-Waffle

Edit history:

Spider-Waffle: 2009-07-14 03:40:00 pm

2009-07-14 03:16:38 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

Quote:

Evidence? What, most people saying they wouldn't prefer it in a thread isn't as good an evidence as a poll

There were still a good number of people in this thread saying they did prefer OSPL or that they appreciated runs which were OSPL. And seeing as groobo and I are basically the only people who segment MS runs to minimize time instead of reducing the number of segments, it seemed people wanted longer segments. I'm still a bit confused as to why the vast majority of runners prefer longer segments but viewers don't have the same representation. I think it's because most runners haven't found a way to easily start off from a segment break during game play, or the way people like to run games and view games is just simply different, or they're just lazy in an ironic sense.

Regardless, I still firmly believe a poll is a better way to get stats on the majority, not waiting for forum responses from people who see this thread and care enough to read it and respond. Also people opposed to an idea are more inclined to go to the trouble to make a response than people for it, for the same reason people are more inclined to read a negative news story than a positive one. So a properly made poll like I did gives you more unbiased result.

Quote:

The OSPL category is simply *convenient* to do *team projects* in, and that's the reason they are used, whereas ILs are the convenient way to compete fairly. Not because they are more impressive or purer, or more popular.

Then why are most OSPL runs not team projects? OSPL isn't a convenient way to compete fairly as well?

The reason I like OSPL runs is because they are more impressive and purer. Everyone I've talked to personally thinks this as well, Hell my brother even said he wanted a quake run done SS, when I told him there was none for nightmare he thought for awhile and then said he'd like to see a one segment per episode run then. There's been many people expressing similar opinions on segment length and impressiveness. There's so much evidence that people appreciate longer segments. I don't know how you can be so blind to it.

Quote:

If you wanted to make the thread asking just what run you should do, you could have added ONLY the options you were considering, and not mix it up with OSPL matters.

I did add only the runs I was considering plus one of my other runs to get accurate representation and give me an interesting stat on how it compares for my own curiosities sake. I would have made the exact same poll even if I never brought up discussion about OSPL.

Quote:

Also, you're searching for theories that I think you have ill will, when you should rethink your forum behaviour instead.

Quote:

Surely you understand that creating that thread reeks of ill intent

I'm not going to deny my forum behavior could be better, I still think it's better than a lot peoples' whom never get any warnings. Surely you'll let me post links to this thread in other parts of the forum though? I don't want to get another warning for doing that. I see people directing people from part of the forum to another all the time and they never get warnings. I don't want to spread debate to other parts of the forum and I'll be careful to avoid that.

Quote:

Argh; we're talking about SDA, not about 'mod runs'.

I'm talking about all speedruns, not just ones SDA is currently hosting. Besides these mod runs are more popular than most runs on SDA.

Quote:

Mod runs are generally done for fun in a rather quick manner, without much attention to detail. Since it's easier to segment a lot, they are segmented a lot.

I don't think you've even seen the runs so it's strange you would generally know much time, effort or attention to detail the runners used.

Quote:

Most arguments against this OSPL category are just as well arguments against the IL category. Which is a bad thing. I think. Unless you also want to get rid of that category.

Not really; the IL categories are generally different from the standard segmented runs (different gear in levels, stuff not carrying over). Also they are made to enable players to improve just one level, which is a HUGE difference from the obsoletion of a standard segmented run. OSPL is exactly the same as the standard segmented, you'd still have to obsolete the entire run. Most of the time you can't really redo a level well if you need to end up with the same stats for continuity.

You've just made a new argument. I think the OP's statement that most of the opposing arguments in this thread are just as well arguments against ILs is still true.

Quote:

In my opinion the best way would be first seeing what people think in this thread

In opinion that's the best way to get the same 5-10 people repeating the same arguments about what they think the majority of people want. My idea is to go out and actually find what the majority of people want.

[quote]Evidence? What, most people saying they wouldn't prefer it in a thread isn't as good an evidence as a poll[/quote]

There were still a good number of people in this thread saying they did prefer OSPL or that they appreciated runs which were OSPL.  And seeing as groobo and I are basically the only people who segment MS runs to minimize time instead of reducing the number of segments, it seemed people wanted longer segments.  I'm still a bit confused as to why the vast majority of runners prefer longer segments but viewers don't have the same representation.  I think it's because most runners haven't found a way to easily start off from a segment break during game play, or the way people like to run games and view games is just simply different, or they're just lazy in an ironic sense.

Regardless, I still firmly believe a poll is a better way to get stats on the majority, not waiting for forum responses from people who see this thread and care enough to read it and respond.  Also people opposed to an idea are more inclined to go to the trouble to make a response than people for it, for the same reason people are more inclined to read a negative news story than a positive one.  So a properly made poll like I did gives you more unbiased result.

[quote]The OSPL category is simply *convenient* to do *team projects* in, and that's the reason they are used, whereas ILs are the convenient way to compete fairly. Not because they are more impressive or purer, or more popular.[/quote]
Then why are most OSPL runs not team projects?  OSPL isn't a convenient way to compete fairly as well?

The reason I like OSPL runs is because they are more impressive and purer.  Everyone I've talked to personally thinks this as well,  Hell my brother even said he wanted a quake run done SS, when I told him there was none for nightmare he thought for awhile and then said he'd like to see a one segment per episode run then.  There's been many people expressing similar opinions on segment length and impressiveness.  There's so much evidence that people appreciate longer segments.  I don't know how you can be so blind to it.

[quote]If you wanted to make the thread asking just what run you should do, you could have added ONLY the options you were considering, and not mix it up with OSPL matters.[/quote]I did add only the runs I was considering plus one of my other runs to get accurate representation and give me an interesting stat on how it compares for my own curiosities sake.  I would have made the exact same poll even if I never brought up discussion about OSPL.

[quote]Also, you're searching for theories that I think you have ill will, when you should rethink your forum behaviour instead.[/quote]
[quote]Surely you understand that creating that thread reeks of ill intent[/quote]
I'm not going to deny my forum behavior could be better, I still think it's better than a lot peoples' whom never get any warnings.  Surely you'll let me post links to this thread in other parts of the forum though?  I don't want to get another warning for doing that.  I see people directing people from part of the forum to another all the time and they never get warnings.  I don't want to spread debate to other parts of the forum and I'll be careful to avoid that.

[quote]Argh; we're talking about SDA, not about 'mod runs'.[/quote]I'm talking about all speedruns, not just ones SDA is currently hosting.  Besides these mod runs are more popular than most runs on SDA.

[quote]Mod runs are generally done for fun in a rather quick manner, without much attention to detail. Since it's easier to segment a lot, they are segmented a lot.[/quote]
I don't think you've even seen the runs so it's strange you would generally know much time, effort or attention to detail the runners used.

[quote][quote]Most arguments against this OSPL category are just as well arguments against the IL category. Which is a bad thing. I think. Unless you also want to get rid of that category.[/quote]
Not really; the IL categories are generally different from the standard segmented runs (different gear in levels, stuff not carrying over). Also they are made to enable players to improve just one level, which is a HUGE difference from the obsoletion of a standard segmented run. OSPL is exactly the same as the standard segmented, you'd still have to obsolete the entire run. Most of the time you can't really redo a level well if you need to end up with the same stats for continuity.
[/quote]You've just made a new argument.  I think the OP's statement that most of the opposing arguments in this thread are just as well arguments against ILs is still true.

[quote]In my opinion the best way would be first seeing what people think in this thread[/quote]In opinion that's the best way to get the same 5-10 people repeating the same arguments about what they think the majority of people want.  My idea is to go out and actually find what the majority of people want.

arkarian

2009-07-14 04:44:12 pm

gamelogs.org

numbers are better than paragraphs from numerous users stating their opinion?

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-07-14 04:46:36 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

Quote from Arkarian:

numbers are better than paragraphs from numerous users stating their opinion?

yes, in many ways

arkarian

2009-07-14 04:48:58 pm

gamelogs.org

what are those ways?

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-07-14 04:55:15 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

Quote from Arkarian:

what are those ways?

sigh... read

arkarian

2009-07-14 05:12:31 pm

gamelogs.org

Quote from spider-waffle:

Regardless, I still firmly believe a poll is a better way to get stats on the majority, not waiting for forum responses from people who see this thread and care enough to read it and respond.

not really a reason.

Quote from spider-waffle:

Also people opposed to an idea are more inclined to go to the trouble to make a response than people for it, for the same reason people are more inclined to read a negative news story than a positive one.

you're not opposed to the idea, but you've spent this entire topic trying to refute those who are. surely if others were firm supporters of adding the ospl category they would speak up to support you— after all, you're doing it, right?. in the rules change thread there were plenty of people defending both sides of most arguments.
also, i could argue that those who support ospl are opposed to the idea of not adding ospl, so under your logic they'd surely have a reason to post here anyway.

debating an issue on a forum has little to do with succumbing to human nature by reading negative news stories, by the way.

Quote from spider-waffle:

So a properly made poll like I did gives you more unbiased result.

i voted single-segment in the hl topic solely to counter your ospl position and spite you, and i suspect many others did the same. i don't actually care what sorts of runs you do. that's unbiased?

if you still want to count the above as reasons, fine. what are the others?

[quote="spider-waffle"]Regardless, I still firmly believe a poll is a better way to get stats on the majority, not waiting for forum responses from people who see this thread and care enough to read it and respond.[/quote]

not really a reason.

[quote="spider-waffle"]Also people opposed to an idea are more inclined to go to the trouble to make a response than people for it, for the same reason people are more inclined to read a negative news story than a positive one.[/quote]

you're not opposed to the idea, but you've spent this entire topic trying to refute those who are. surely if others were firm supporters of adding the ospl category they would speak up to support you— after all, you're doing it, right?. in the rules change thread there were plenty of people defending both sides of most arguments.
also, i could argue that those who support ospl are opposed to the idea of [i]not[/i] adding ospl, so under your logic they'd surely have a reason to post here anyway.

debating an issue on a forum has little to do with succumbing to human nature by reading negative news stories, by the way.

[quote="spider-waffle"]So a properly made poll like I did gives you more unbiased result.[/quote]

i voted single-segment in the hl topic solely to counter your ospl position and spite you, and i suspect many others did the same. i don't actually care what sorts of runs you do. that's unbiased?

if you still want to count the above as reasons, fine. what are the others?

dex

Edit history:

dex: 2009-07-14 05:26:21 pm

2009-07-14 05:15:20 pm

Invisible avatar

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

There were still a good number of people in this thread saying they did prefer OSPL or that they appreciated runs which were OSPL.

The clear majority of people said they prefer the categories stay the way they are. And the few people who kinda agreed either had additional qualms, or (in Lag's case) want a drastic CHANGE, not a new category. This should have given you the idea that maybe your suggestion is not good.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Regardless, I still firmly believe a poll is a better way to get stats on the majority, not waiting for forum responses from people who see this thread and care enough to read it and respond.

If people don't care enough to post in the thread, then clearly there's *no significant demand for the new category*. Don't you understand? Also, like I said; polls can be very biased, polls can be very stupid, and a binary or ternary decision is almost never a way to go - certainly not the way to go without listening to opinions first.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Then why are most OSPL runs not team projects?

Because people doing them choose to do them alone. Again, it's at the runner's discretion. Why would this be of any relevance, anyway?

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

OSPL isn't a convenient way to compete fairly as well?

Not in a sense of giving the possibility of obsoleting a single level (used ambiguous language there, but I hoped you were able to read that much from the context... apparently not), outside of the Quake example where we have tools that let us make the demos fit even after such treatment.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

The reason I like OSPL runs is because they are more impressive and purer.

And yet that's not the reason OSPL runs were done in Quake in the first place. And, again, if someone WANTS to do the run that way, they CAN do the run that way. Nobody is stopping them. Why are you even making this a problem?

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

when I told him there was none for nightmare

Not nice to lie to a brother. We have a marathon for all possible id categories, on all SDA legal difficulties.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

There's been many people expressing similar opinions on segment length and impressiveness. There's so much evidence that people appreciate longer segments. I don't know how you can be so blind to it.

You assume I don't know that people like longer segments - heck, I've told about how the community/verifiers will appreciate longer segments repeatedly. I don't know how you can be so blind to reading posts. I however see no reason to add another category prohibiting certain manners of saving, and so do think most of the posters. AGAIN, the runners CAN segment however they like. If they like OSPL, go ahead. Their choice.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I'm not going to deny my forum behavior could be better, I still think it's better than a lot peoples' whom never get any warnings.

You assume they don't; I send out warning PMs pretty often. It's just that in your case, I know that it's not gonna do any good, so I go straight for the public warning instead (you actually have a reputation for being extraordinarily stubborn). Also, it isn't better than the behaviour of 'a lot of people'. Believe me, it isn't.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Surely you'll let me post links to this thread in other parts of the forum though? I don't want to get another warning for doing that. I see people directing people from part of the forum to another all the time and they never get warnings. I don't want to spread debate to other parts of the forum and I'll be careful to avoid that.

The exception is most people 'directing from part to the forum to another' have a legitimate reason to do that ("this issue has been talked about here [link]/there's a thread about it here [link] on the forum/relevant discussion happened in this thread [link] and I don't want to repeat what was said there") whereas you would post solely to agitate your cause. In random threads. On random boards. That is like the definition of what 'spam' is - posts that add nothing of value to the thread at hand. You "don't want to spread debate" yet the posts you've made in other forums do try to spread the debate there. Rather poorly, I might add.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I'm talking about all speedruns, not just ones SDA is currently hosting. Besides these mod runs are more popular than most runs on SDA.

Funny; I thought we were talking about changing SDA rules, not the rules of how speedruns should be done on every game everywhere on the internet. Also, I wonder where you're pulling those 'popularity' statistics from.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I don't think you've even seen the runs so it's strange you would generally know much time, effort or attention to detail the runners used.

I made an assumption there, yes; an assumption I base on my intuition of how the average runner thinks. When runs are recognised and submitted to a semi-official speedrunning community, the runners would tend to input more effort into their speedruns to make them impressive, I would think. To put this into an example; there are heaps of small Quake projects around that wouldn't be recognised by SDAQuake. The runners (generally) put in less effort in those than even the old projects from the SDA past received. There are exceptions, of course, but the reason they are called 'exceptions' is because they're not what happens generally. I extrapolated towards another, very similar population; I might have been wrong, and I admit that. Yet, I doubt I was THAT far off. Finally, what some runners do on mod runs somewhere is not of actual significance to SDA rules.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

You've just made a new argument. I think the OP's statement that most of the opposing arguments in this thread are just as well arguments against ILs is still true.

How exactly is it still true? In a nutshell, we (the opposition) are arguing that the OSPL category is unnecessary and doesn't add anything. Pretty much all the other arguments are made to further that very specific point. I've shown that IL does add a significantly different experience, and is a beneficial addition for many games (and the new arguments I've made aren't exactly 'new', there's slowbro talking about the ILs letting runners obsolete individual levels and I've made the other argument about how ILs are useful already; you simply chose to ignore them before). How, then, does the argument against OSPL still hold against ILs?

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

And seeing as groobo and I are basically the only people who segment MS runs to minimize time instead of reducing the number of segments, it seemed people wanted longer segments.

See, that's the thing. You're taking something that is NOT a problem, and then you propose a solution to a not-problem. One that is also inferior to different solutions.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

In opinion that's the best way to get the same 5-10 people repeating the same arguments about what they think the majority of people want. My idea is to go out and actually find what the majority of people want.

Again, if people do not care enough to post in the thread voicing their opinion, that means there's no demand for the new category. If there's no demand, it's unnecessary. If it's unnecessary, why add it?

I repeat myself a lot, but that's because you fail to notice what me and most of the posters here are saying. "Very open minded", yeah, right.

Quote from Arkarian:

numbers are better than paragraphs from numerous users stating their opinion?

I wanted to say "That's the question you should consider a lot, Spider". Then you posted this

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

yes, in many ways

And so I feel the need to point this out to you: it was a rhetorical question. You don't answer rhetorical questions. You're supposed to reflect on them. And the idea it is conveying is totally contrary to your 'answer'.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Quote from Arkarian:

what are those ways?

sigh... read

I'm pretty sure he does read; that's why he considers people writing paragraphs better :P.

Numbers give nothing but people's choice from a supplied set; they make sense on a macro scale, when questioning individual people is absolutely impossible. On a relatively micro-scale (like, say, a forum), debating and actually talking about the opinion is inherently more valuable.

Finally, this thread has seriously ran it's course, and similarly to the rules thread, ends up at a point where a certain person (I'm pretty sure you know what person I'm talking about) refuses to take into account what all the other people think and disregards all the arguments put forth against that person. Frankly, I'm very tempted to lock it now, since it adds nothing of significance and it's clearly not getting anywhere, but I'll bite and give Spider a chance to make a coherent argument. In fact, right now, it's hard to see whether Spider is actually trying to get his points through or if he's just arguing for argument's sake (ie. trolling). If nothing new is added to the discussion despite new posts, I will lock the thread.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]There were still a good number of people in this thread saying they did prefer OSPL or that they appreciated runs which were OSPL.[/quote]
The clear majority of people said they prefer the categories stay the way they are. And the few people who kinda agreed either had additional qualms, or (in Lag's case) want a drastic CHANGE, not a new category. This should have given you the idea that maybe your suggestion is not good.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]Regardless, I still firmly believe a poll is a better way to get stats on the majority, not waiting for forum responses from people who see this thread and care enough to read it and respond.[/quote]
If people don't care enough to post in the thread, then clearly there's *no significant demand for the new category*. Don't you understand? Also, like I said; polls can be very biased, polls can be very stupid, and a binary or ternary decision is almost never a way to go - certainly not the way to go without listening to opinions first.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]Then why are most OSPL runs not team projects?[/quote]
Because people doing them choose to do them alone. Again, it's at the runner's discretion. Why would this be of any relevance, anyway?

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]OSPL isn't a convenient way to compete fairly as well?[/quote]
Not in a sense of giving the possibility of obsoleting a single level (used ambiguous language there, but I hoped you were able to read that much from the context... apparently not), outside of the Quake example where we have tools that let us make the demos fit even after such treatment.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]The reason I like OSPL runs is because they are more impressive and purer.[/quote]
And yet that's not the reason OSPL runs were done in Quake in the first place. And, again, if someone WANTS to do the run that way, they CAN do the run that way. Nobody is stopping them. Why are you even making this a problem?
 
[quote="Spider-Waffle"]when I told him there was none for nightmare[/quote]
Not nice to lie to a brother. We have a marathon for all possible id categories, on all SDA legal difficulties.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]There's been many people expressing similar opinions on segment length and impressiveness.  There's so much evidence that people appreciate longer segments.  I don't know how you can be so blind to it.[/quote]
You assume I don't know that people like longer segments - heck, I've told about how the community/verifiers will appreciate longer segments repeatedly. I don't know how you can be so blind to reading posts. I however see no reason to add another category prohibiting certain manners of saving, and so do think most of the posters. AGAIN, the runners CAN segment however they like. If they like OSPL, go ahead. Their choice.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]I'm not going to deny my forum behavior could be better, I still think it's better than a lot peoples' whom never get any warnings.[/quote]
You assume they don't; I send out warning PMs pretty often. It's just that in your case, I know that it's not gonna do any good, so I go straight for the public warning instead (you actually have a reputation for being extraordinarily stubborn). Also, it isn't better than the behaviour of 'a lot of people'. Believe me, it isn't.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]Surely you'll let me post links to this thread in other parts of the forum though? I don't want to get another warning for doing that.  I see people directing people from part of the forum to another all the time and they never get warnings.  I don't want to spread debate to other parts of the forum and I'll be careful to avoid that.[/quote]
The exception is most people 'directing from part to the forum to another' have a legitimate reason to do that ("this issue has been talked about here [link]/there's a thread about it here [link] on the forum/relevant discussion happened in this thread [link] and I don't want to repeat what was said there") whereas you would post solely to agitate your cause. In random threads. On random boards. That is like the definition of what 'spam' is - posts that add nothing of value to the thread at hand. You "don't want to spread debate" yet the posts you've made in other forums do try to spread the debate there. Rather poorly, I might add.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]I'm talking about all speedruns, not just ones SDA is currently hosting.  Besides these mod runs are more popular than most runs on SDA.[/quote]
Funny; I thought we were talking about changing SDA rules, not the rules of how speedruns should be done on every game everywhere on the internet. Also, I wonder where you're pulling those 'popularity' statistics from.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]I don't think you've even seen the runs so it's strange you would generally know much time, effort or attention to detail the runners used.[/quote]
I made an assumption there, yes; an assumption I base on my intuition of how the average runner thinks. When runs are recognised and submitted to a semi-official speedrunning community, the runners would tend to input more effort into their speedruns to make them impressive, I would think. To put this into an example; there are heaps of small Quake projects around that wouldn't be recognised by SDAQuake. The runners (generally) put in less effort in those than even the old projects from the SDA past received. There are exceptions, of course, but the reason they are called 'exceptions' is because they're not what happens generally. I extrapolated towards another, very similar population; I might have been wrong, and I admit that. Yet, I doubt I was THAT far off. Finally, what some runners do on mod runs somewhere is not of actual significance to SDA rules.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]You've just made a new argument.  I think the OP's statement that most of the opposing arguments in this thread are just as well arguments against ILs is still true.[/quote]
How exactly is it still true? In a nutshell, we (the opposition) are arguing that the OSPL category is unnecessary and doesn't add anything. Pretty much all the other arguments are made to further that very specific point. I've shown that IL does add a significantly different experience, and is a beneficial addition for many games (and the new arguments I've made aren't exactly 'new', there's slowbro talking about the ILs letting runners obsolete individual levels and I've made the other argument about how ILs are useful already; you simply chose to ignore them before). How, then, does the argument against OSPL still hold against ILs?

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]And seeing as groobo and I are basically the only people who segment MS runs to minimize time instead of reducing the number of segments, it seemed people wanted longer segments.[/quote]
See, that's the thing. You're taking something that is NOT a problem, and then you propose a solution to a not-problem. One that is also inferior to different solutions.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]In opinion that's the best way to get the same 5-10 people repeating the same arguments about what they think the majority of people want.  My idea is to go out and actually find what the majority of people want.[/quote]
Again, if people do not care enough to post in the thread voicing their opinion, that means there's no demand for the new category. If there's no demand, it's unnecessary. If it's unnecessary, why add it?

I repeat myself a lot, but that's because you fail to notice what me and most of the posters here are saying. "Very open minded", yeah, right.

[quote="Arkarian"]
numbers are better than paragraphs from numerous users stating their opinion?
[/quote]
I wanted to say "That's the question you should consider a lot, Spider". Then you posted this

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]
yes, in many ways
[/quote]
And so I feel the need to point this out to you: it was a rhetorical question. You don't answer rhetorical questions. You're supposed to reflect on them. And the idea it is conveying is totally contrary to your 'answer'.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]
[quote="Arkarian"]
what are those ways?
[/quote]

sigh... read
[/quote]
I'm pretty sure he does read; that's why he considers people writing paragraphs better :P.

Numbers give nothing but people's choice from a supplied set; they make sense on a macro scale, when questioning individual people is absolutely impossible. On a relatively micro-scale (like, say, a forum), debating and actually talking about the opinion is inherently more valuable.

Finally, this thread has seriously ran it's course, and similarly to the rules thread, ends up at a point where a certain person (I'm pretty sure you know what person I'm talking about) refuses to take into account what all the other people think and disregards all the arguments put forth against that person. Frankly, I'm very tempted to lock it now, since it adds nothing of significance and it's clearly not getting anywhere, but I'll bite and give Spider a chance to make a coherent argument. In fact, right now, it's hard to see whether Spider is actually trying to get his points through or if he's just arguing for argument's sake (ie. trolling). If nothing new is added to the discussion despite new posts, I will lock the thread.

ExplodingCabbage

2009-07-14 06:01:43 pm

I agree that this thread has run its course since even my compromise suggestion of a subtle wording change has met with opposition (to my surprise) and there's no longer any real chance of progress being made here.

Before the lock, though, I want to reply to zoonel's post which got drowned out by those that followed.

Quote from zoonel:

You guys seems a lot against the ospl because its either a sub-optimised run ...:

Not exactly. Unless I've misunderstood people's views here, the opposition is primarily based on the fact that the difference between OSPL and MS generally isn't enough to cause any changes of route, so the result would be, for the vast majority of games, that the OSPL run would be a direct copy of the MS run, just slightly less optimally executed. The issue is with the similarity to MS, not the sub-optimality per se.

As such, the examples you go on to give -

Quote:

why allow a single segment run when a segmented one will beat the time ? obviously for some greatness of doing the game in one shot. Same goes for 100%, low% why allow it, its just playing the game with some constraints so why allowing it as its oviously sub-optimal ?

- aren't quite comparable, since all those categories are sufficiently different to justify existing.

Quote:

And what's that IL table for games like doom/quake/whatever ? its just individual levels played with a naked character nothing to do with the "normal" way of playing the game where you carry more powerfull weapons, must manage your ammo and can pull off faster routes.

I agree this is odd. I'd rather see OSPL runs than IL runs for those games. Of course, as has already been pointed out, there's nothing stopping people making OSPL runs and submitting them to the 'segmented' category that already exists, and the vast majority of people at SDA will not look less favourably on them simply because the category allows for more segmentation than the runner chose to use.

Quote:

The per level statement is absolutly not vague because its exactly the same as IL except you do the entire game this way allowing you to carry whatever the games offer you to carry between levels.

I agree, while there are some cases where arguments could arise I really don't think this is a major issue.

Quote:

And the too much category is just a silly argument when you see all the current possible categories.It will just make more work for the administrators and verifiers; viewers will just pick the first video if they dont know the game and if they are interested well they can choose between more option to watch which is a + .

It may not be a +. I don't like having to choose between very similar runs with no information on which is better since I end up wondering whether I made the wrong choice, so for me this is a definite -.

Quote:

The metroid exemple is a good exemple :p because i never played it and i decided to see the run because of some top 10 list i read; as a lambda viewer and new to sda (i didnt know the site well at this time) i came across all those categories with no meaning of what they ment. But you dont have to bee a genious to figure out the first video is what you want

Why? I want the best run, whatever category it may be in.

Quote:

If i take the wc3 game i would rather see a OSPL

Yet, WC3 is a perfect example of why the OSPL category is not necessary. Stupid has already done an OSPL run, and is submitting it, and it will probably be on the site within the next couple of updates. And nobody's going to come along and beat it with a MS run because nobody would be enough of a douchebag to do that, and if they did we'd reject it anyway.

Quote:

The ospl category is a just balance between single segment and multi-segment

I disagree. For the vast, vast majority of games, it's virtually identical to MS. Calling it a 'balance', as though it's somewhere roughly midway between the two, is misguided, I think.

I agree that this thread has run its course since even my compromise suggestion of a subtle wording change has met with opposition (to my surprise) and there's no longer any real chance of progress being made here.

Before the lock, though, I want to reply to zoonel's post which got drowned out by those that followed.

[quote="zoonel"]You guys seems a lot against the ospl because its either a sub-optimised run ...:[/quote]

Not exactly. Unless I've misunderstood people's views here, the opposition is primarily based on the fact that the difference between OSPL and MS generally isn't enough to cause any changes of [i]route[/i], so the result would be, for the vast majority of games, that the OSPL run would be a direct copy of the MS run, just slightly less optimally executed. The issue is with the similarity to MS, not the sub-optimality per se.

As such, the examples you go on to give -

[quote]why allow a single segment run when a segmented one will beat the time ? obviously for some greatness of doing the game in one shot. Same goes for 100%, low% why allow it, its just playing the game with some constraints so why allowing it as its oviously sub-optimal ?[/quote]

- aren't quite comparable, since all those categories are sufficiently different to justify existing.

[quote]And what's that IL table for games like doom/quake/whatever ? its just individual levels played with a naked character nothing to do with the "normal" way of playing the game where you carry more powerfull weapons, must manage your ammo and can pull off faster routes.[/quote]

I agree this is odd. I'd rather see OSPL runs than IL runs for those games. Of course, as has already been pointed out, there's nothing stopping people making OSPL runs and submitting them to the 'segmented' category that already exists, and the vast majority of people at SDA will not look less favourably on them simply because the category allows for more segmentation than the runner chose to use.

[quote]The per level statement is absolutly not vague because its exactly the same as IL except you do the entire game this way allowing you to carry whatever the games offer you to carry between levels.[/quote]

I agree, while there are some cases where arguments could arise I really don't think this is a major issue.

[quote]And the too much category is just a silly argument when you see all the current possible categories.It will just make more work for the administrators and verifiers; viewers will just pick the first video if they dont know the game and if they are interested well they can choose between more option to watch which is a + .[/quote]

It may not be a +. I don't like having to choose between very similar runs with no information on which is better since I end up wondering whether I made the wrong choice, so for me this is a definite -.

[quote] The metroid exemple is a good exemple :p because i never played it and i decided to see the run because of some top 10 list i read; as a lambda viewer and new to sda (i didnt know the site well at this time) i came across all those categories with no meaning of what they ment. But you dont have to bee a genious to figure out the first video is what you want[/quote]

Why? I want the best run, whatever category it may be in.

[quote]If i take the wc3 game i would rather see a OSPL[/quote]

Yet, WC3 is a perfect example of why the OSPL category is [i]not[/i] necessary. Stupid has already done an OSPL run, and is submitting it, and it will probably be on the site within the next couple of updates. And nobody's going to come along and beat it with a MS run because nobody would be enough of a douchebag to do that, and if they did we'd reject it anyway.

[quote]The ospl category is a just balance between single segment and multi-segment[/quote]

I disagree. For the vast, vast majority of games, it's virtually identical to MS. Calling it a 'balance', as though it's somewhere roughly midway between the two, is misguided, I think.