AGDQ 2016 Game Submissions Information (Submissions are now closed)

2015-10-18 06:37:56 am

Goofing off in a game can make it more entertaining. Generally, the better your skill at a game is, usually the more entertaining it gets.
Speedrunning itself can be seen as a talent. Being able to remember the game inside out and have good enough reflexes/memory/button mashing skills to complete the challenges of the game can be seen as talents.

People generally get amazed at "superplay".

wfp

Edit history:

wfp: 2015-10-18 06:58:42 pm

2015-10-18 08:18:29 am

Quote from race_out:

Quote from Antilles58:

I don't believe that "popular" is one of the criteria for getting in to these events.

but it is, at least according to this reddit post by CoolMatty:

coolmatty specifically says "category" in that quote, and doing a google search coolmatty specifically said that here: https://www.reddit.com/r/speedrun/comments/3ocsrd/yoshis_story_all_melons_turned_down_every_year_so/ which in context seems more referring to a category of a game's popularity than the popularity of a game or runner (though all runs of yoshi's story appear to have been rejected, but that can be understandable considering the number of mario games i imagine were submitted).

meanwhile i completely agree with you, race_out, that unless there's some glitch that can speed up a rhythm game which isn't outside the realm of possibility as to my knowledge guitar hero 2, actually does have one (not that it'd make for an interesting run though as you just play the shortest song in the game 40 times in a row instead of the normal setlist), a rhythm game has no place in the marathon.

[quote="race_out"][quote="Antilles58"]I don't believe that "popular" is one of the criteria for getting in to these events.[/quote]
but it is, at least according to this reddit post by CoolMatty:

[img]http://i.imgur.com/FgEP0BE.png[/img]
[/quote]

coolmatty specifically says "category" in that quote, and doing a google search coolmatty specifically said that here: https://www.reddit.com/r/speedrun/comments/3ocsrd/yoshis_story_all_melons_turned_down_every_year_so/ which in context seems more referring to a category of a game's popularity than the popularity of a game or runner (though all runs of yoshi's story appear to have been rejected, but that can be understandable considering the number of mario games i imagine were submitted).

meanwhile i completely agree with you, race_out, that unless there's some glitch that can speed up a rhythm game which isn't outside the realm of possibility as to my knowledge guitar hero 2, actually does have one (not that it'd make for an interesting run though as you just play the shortest song in the game 40 times in a row instead of the normal setlist), a rhythm game has no place in the marathon.

znernicus

2015-10-18 09:33:19 am

I'm really dissapointed DK64 any% wasn't taken... if it's because any% was in AGDQ 2014 its a really stupid reason as the routes are nothing alike

penta

2015-10-18 09:46:14 am

I had to add the same level of dissapointment for Borderlands 2 coop. Nowadays the route is 40min faster than it was at AGDQ 2014, the game still has a good viewership base and of course, it's very interesting to watch as it is very broken.

JoshButro

2015-10-18 10:04:26 am

I guess I'll ask for an opinion, thanks for a response. Was wondering why Q*Bert 3 (SNES) was rejected. Run is almost as optimized as can be and is within 3 minutes of the current TAS (1:05:04 vs 1:02:59). Run may be improved very slightly, so I am looking for feedback if this run is worth investing more time into to submit to further events. Run has been rejected for 3 GDQs in a row, just looking for feedback. Thanks.

DarkTerrex

2015-10-18 12:35:38 pm

Quote from gyre:

The final boss of IronSword isn't particularly random. It looks crazy because the bosses are offscreen most of the time so you can't see their orbits. Once we figured out the patterns the fight got a lot more consistent. The normal enemies in levels will randomly spawn on your head and kill you but we've agreed to collect 1ups during the race so that lives are not an issue.

yeah exactly, Wizards and Warriors 1 has a muuuuch more RNG heavy boss and did just fine as a race. So if it is determined to not be a race, this should not be the reason for it.

TonyOgbot

Edit history:

TonyOgbot: 2015-10-18 06:52:02 pm

2015-10-18 06:45:22 pm

I would like to respectfully rescind my submissions. The incompetence in handling submissions makes me unhappy as a member of the community, and in turn, I'd like to sit out on AGDQ 2016. Please take the time to invest enough of yourself in each game to be comfortable with your decision, instead of declining it then progressing it later when a different person submits. Kirby 64 had no business being flipped between declined and progressing. If the games submission team were to actually take the time they need to properly assess and make a decision on the run, mixed messages like these would be a non-issue. I’m going to give the submissions team the benefit of the doubt in terms of why it ended up being switched over to progressing, because there’s no need for me to instigate on that end of things.

I’ve also heard from various community members that their submission videos had either been viewed for a few minutes, or not even looked at, before making an executive decision on whether or not their game would be in the marathon. You can thank Youtube analytics and observant submitting speedrunners for that knowledge. I know you’re hurting for manpower, but that’s a terrible excuse. There’s more than enough helpful community members that would be more than happy to lend you their opinion, and in turn, help you make informed decisions on these games. You don’t need to watch every single second of the run, but come on, submission team. We, being the speedrunning community as a whole, trust that you’ll take the time to acknowledge and respect our efforts by giving our submissions more than just a nod and a stamp of approval or denial.

Also, please have the professionalism and respect to not air everything out in a public social media outlet. Thank you Sumichu for taking the time to parse the reasoning for progressing/denying runs to people through Twitter, but if anyone has any kind of behavioral issues that are deemed “not GDQ safe”, can you please just leave it at that. Here are a few tweets that I felt crossed the line a bit.

https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/653812549910003712
https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/653699101255581697

I don’t want this portion of my revocation to seem like I am picking on Sumichu, though, because there are many more examples of where she was concise and to the point in a public facing outlet.

https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/654097070471536640
https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/654198730938122240
https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/654098593544966144
https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/653788870291525632

This issue begs the question as to why behavior scrutiny during VODs is even a thing since this is a speedrunning marathon, and the VODs are being used as a source for getting a feel for the gameplay of the submission, but that’s a different can of worms altogether. All I can say is that some of us have pretty terrible online presences, but once we’re all in the same building working toward the same cause, we’re actually reasonable, and dare I even say, likable people at these events.

Also, please bring back notes on progression/denial on the “All Game Submissions” page. Sumichu isn’t the voice of the marathon, and she doesn’t deserve to be the martyr for the submission team when it can just be a part of the submission process. Everyone appreciates feedback, especially when it is delivered in a constructive way.

I hope that my thoughts are taken into consideration for future GDQ dealings. We’re all human, but when you’re the public facing hub for the speedrunning hobby in its entirety, I’d hope that you’d take these notes to heart. Good luck with AGDQ, and maybe I'll see you all around at SGDQ.

I would like to respectfully rescind my submissions.  The incompetence in handling submissions makes me unhappy as a member of the community, and in turn, I'd like to sit out on AGDQ 2016.  Please take the time to invest enough of yourself in each game to be comfortable with your decision, instead of declining it then progressing it later when a different person submits.  Kirby 64 had no business being flipped between declined and progressing.  If the games submission team were to actually take the time they need to properly assess and make a decision on the run, mixed messages like these would be a non-issue.  I’m going to give the submissions team the benefit of the doubt in terms of why it ended up being switched over to progressing, because there’s no need for me to instigate on that end of things.

I’ve also heard from various community members that their submission videos had either been viewed for a few minutes, or not even looked at, before making an executive decision on whether or not their game would be in the marathon.  You can thank Youtube analytics and observant submitting speedrunners for that knowledge.  I know you’re hurting for manpower, but that’s a terrible excuse.  There’s more than enough helpful community members that would be more than happy to lend you their opinion, and in turn, help you make informed decisions on these games.  You don’t need to watch every single second of the run, but come on, submission team.  We, being the speedrunning community as a whole, trust that you’ll take the time to acknowledge and respect our efforts by giving our submissions more than just a nod and a stamp of approval or denial.

Also, please have the professionalism and respect to not air everything out in a public social media outlet.  Thank you Sumichu for taking the time to parse the reasoning for progressing/denying runs to people through Twitter, but if anyone has any kind of behavioral issues that are deemed “not GDQ safe”, can you please just leave it at that.  Here are a few tweets that I felt crossed the line a bit.

https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/653812549910003712
https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/653699101255581697

I don’t want this portion of my revocation to seem like I am picking on Sumichu, though, because there are many more examples of where she was concise and to the point in a public facing outlet.

https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/654097070471536640
https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/654198730938122240
https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/654098593544966144
https://twitter.com/sumichu/status/653788870291525632

This issue begs the question as to why behavior scrutiny during VODs is even a thing since this is a speedrunning marathon, and the VODs are being used as a source for getting a feel for the gameplay of the submission, but that’s a different can of worms altogether.  All I can say is that some of us have pretty terrible online presences, but once we’re all in the same building working toward the same cause, we’re actually reasonable, and dare I even say, likable people at these events.

Also, please bring back notes on progression/denial on the “All Game Submissions” page. Sumichu isn’t the voice of the marathon, and she doesn’t deserve to be the martyr for the submission team when it can just be a part of the submission process.  Everyone appreciates feedback, especially when it is delivered in a constructive way.

I hope that my thoughts are taken into consideration for future GDQ dealings.  We’re all human, but when you’re the public facing hub for the speedrunning hobby in its entirety, I’d hope that you’d take these notes to heart.  Good luck with AGDQ, and maybe I'll see you all around at SGDQ.

Cool Matty

2015-10-18 08:06:29 pm

Crawlathon WR, get down on my level.

Quote from TonyOgbot:

I would like to respectfully rescind my submissions. The incompetence in handling submissions makes me unhappy as a member of the community, and in turn, I'd like to sit out on AGDQ 2016. Please take the time to invest enough of yourself in each game to be comfortable with your decision, instead of declining it then progressing it later when a different person submits. Kirby 64 had no business being flipped between declined and progressing. If the games submission team were to actually take the time they need to properly assess and make a decision on the run, mixed messages like these would be a non-issue. I’m going to give the submissions team the benefit of the doubt in terms of why it ended up being switched over to progressing, because there’s no need for me to instigate on that end of things.

I’ve also heard from various community members that their submission videos had either been viewed for a few minutes, or not even looked at, before making an executive decision on whether or not their game would be in the marathon. You can thank Youtube analytics and observant submitting speedrunners for that knowledge. I know you’re hurting for manpower, but that’s a terrible excuse. There’s more than enough helpful community members that would be more than happy to lend you their opinion, and in turn, help you make informed decisions on these games. You don’t need to watch every single second of the run, but come on, submission team. We, being the speedrunning community as a whole, trust that you’ll take the time to acknowledge and respect our efforts by giving our submissions more than just a nod and a stamp of approval or denial.

Decisions are not finalized until the cuts are completely finished, this is explicitly stated. You're welcome to withdraw of course.

The committee is already familiar with a great deal of games and runners. Watching a larger portion of these runs would not affect the results. In many cases, the committee might have already watched the runner's stream, and not even need to see the VOD. Additional manpower is not required, or the committee would seek it out. In the end, ultimately they are responsible for the reception of the event's schedule. Regardless of opinions offered, the judges must make the final analysis. We also expect runners to respect the committee's experience in making these decisions.

Quote:

Also, please have the professionalism and respect to not air everything out in a public social media outlet. Thank you Sumichu for taking the time to parse the reasoning for progressing/denying runs to people through Twitter, but if anyone has any kind of behavioral issues that are deemed “not GDQ safe”, can you please just leave it at that. Here are a few tweets that I felt crossed the line a bit.

The submission form says to contact the management email address. We were more than happy to provide private communications if it was requested in the same manner. Otherwise, we replied on the same medium we were questioned.

Quote:

This issue begs the question as to why behavior scrutiny during VODs is even a thing since this is a speedrunning marathon, and the VODs are being used as a source for getting a feel for the gameplay of the submission, but that’s a different can of worms altogether. All I can say is that some of us have pretty terrible online presences, but once we’re all in the same building working toward the same cause, we’re actually reasonable, and dare I even say, likable people at these events.

We understand people may act differently on their own streams, but when submitting to the event, you should expect to be held to the same standard you would if you were at the event. We didn't communicate this prior, which is why we haven't been as strict as we would like. That will not be the case for future events.

Quote:

Also, please bring back notes on progression/denial on the “All Game Submissions” page. Sumichu isn’t the voice of the marathon, and she doesn’t deserve to be the martyr for the submission team when it can just be a part of the submission process. Everyone appreciates feedback, especially when it is delivered in a constructive way.

Mike will return to do this himself once he feels he's in the capacity to do so, likely for SGDQ. His medical issues are the only reason we are acting as a medium right now, as we've covered in the past.

[quote="TonyOgbot"]I would like to respectfully rescind my submissions.  The incompetence in handling submissions makes me unhappy as a member of the community, and in turn, I'd like to sit out on AGDQ 2016.  Please take the time to invest enough of yourself in each game to be comfortable with your decision, instead of declining it then progressing it later when a different person submits.  Kirby 64 had no business being flipped between declined and progressing.  If the games submission team were to actually take the time they need to properly assess and make a decision on the run, mixed messages like these would be a non-issue.  I’m going to give the submissions team the benefit of the doubt in terms of why it ended up being switched over to progressing, because there’s no need for me to instigate on that end of things.

I’ve also heard from various community members that their submission videos had either been viewed for a few minutes, or not even looked at, before making an executive decision on whether or not their game would be in the marathon.  You can thank Youtube analytics and observant submitting speedrunners for that knowledge.  I know you’re hurting for manpower, but that’s a terrible excuse.  There’s more than enough helpful community members that would be more than happy to lend you their opinion, and in turn, help you make informed decisions on these games.  You don’t need to watch every single second of the run, but come on, submission team.  We, being the speedrunning community as a whole, trust that you’ll take the time to acknowledge and respect our efforts by giving our submissions more than just a nod and a stamp of approval or denial.
[/quote]

Decisions are not finalized until the cuts are completely finished, this is explicitly stated. You're welcome to withdraw of course.

The committee is already familiar with a great deal of games and runners. Watching a larger portion of these runs would not affect the results. In many cases, the committee might have already watched the runner's stream, and not even need to see the VOD. Additional manpower is not required, or the committee would seek it out. In the end, ultimately they are responsible for the reception of the event's schedule. Regardless of opinions offered, the judges must make the final analysis. We also expect runners to respect the committee's experience in making these decisions.

[quote]
Also, please have the professionalism and respect to not air everything out in a public social media outlet.  Thank you Sumichu for taking the time to parse the reasoning for progressing/denying runs to people through Twitter, but if anyone has any kind of behavioral issues that are deemed “not GDQ safe”, can you please just leave it at that.  Here are a few tweets that I felt crossed the line a bit.  
[/quote]

The submission form says to contact the management email address. We were more than happy to provide private communications if it was requested in the same manner. Otherwise, we replied on the same medium we were questioned.

[quote]
This issue begs the question as to why behavior scrutiny during VODs is even a thing since this is a speedrunning marathon, and the VODs are being used as a source for getting a feel for the gameplay of the submission, but that’s a different can of worms altogether.  All I can say is that some of us have pretty terrible online presences, but once we’re all in the same building working toward the same cause, we’re actually reasonable, and dare I even say, likable people at these events.[/quote]

We understand people may act differently on their own streams, but when submitting to the event, you should expect to be held to the same standard you would if you were at the event. We didn't communicate this prior, which is why we haven't been as strict as we would like. That will not be the case for future events.

[quote]
Also, please bring back notes on progression/denial on the “All Game Submissions” page. Sumichu isn’t the voice of the marathon, and she doesn’t deserve to be the martyr for the submission team when it can just be a part of the submission process.  Everyone appreciates feedback, especially when it is delivered in a constructive way.
[/quote]

Mike will return to do this himself once he feels he's in the capacity to do so, likely for SGDQ. His medical issues are the only reason we are acting as a medium right now, as we've covered in the past.

Billnye_Fan

2015-10-18 08:51:27 pm

[quote="Cool Matty"]
We also expect runners to respect the committee's experience in making these decisions.
[quote]

How can you expect runners to respect the "committee's" experience when those members are completely anonymous outside of Mike Uyama?

PvtCb

2015-10-18 09:07:18 pm

This is not the giant

Over the past few years Games Done Quick has become a shadowy organization. Is it too much to ask for transparency on issues that actually matter, such as committee names and run criteria? I understand that you guys (see, I can't address specific people because you all are just a black box that decides what's best for speedrunning) make mistakes. Despite trying to appear as all-knowing gods, you are only human. Then again, you all are professionals entrusted with a large amount of money and managing a ton of employees. Personally, I wouldn't want to keep an air traffic controller who looks at the radar for 5 minutes then says they've seen enough planes and they know the pilots and can trust them to be safe. Is this comparison unfair? Maybe, but so is the way you've treated the speedrun community at large. You guys are the public face of speedrunning, even if you don't want to show your faces. Act as such.

Wallyaldo

2015-10-18 09:11:44 pm

gonna drop a hot word on the post above me

tekkie

2015-10-18 09:20:03 pm

~

Quote from Cool Matty:

Decisions are not finalized until the cuts are completely finished, this is explicitly stated.

wording this, checking to see if my boy Notch wants to see Silent Hill 3 at AGDQ ;3

Meowtain_Dew

2015-10-18 09:21:03 pm

Quote from Wallyaldo:

gonna drop a hot word on the post above me

Quote from tekkie:

wording this, checking to see if my boy Notch wants to see Silent Hill 3 at AGDQ ;3

wording these words

TonyOgbot

2015-10-18 09:23:45 pm

Quote from Cool Matty:

The committee is already familiar with a great deal of games and runners. Watching a larger portion of these runs would not affect the results. In many cases, the committee might have already watched the runner's stream, and not even need to see the VOD. Additional manpower is not required, or the committee would seek it out. In the end, ultimately they are responsible for the reception of the event's schedule. Regardless of opinions offered, the judges must make the final analysis. We also expect runners to respect the committee's experience in making these decisions.

I would be much more comfortable with this answer if the lack of VOD attention wasn't as widespread of an issue as it is for this submission period. I've got multiple sources, that I would rather keep nameless, that have told me that they can confirm that there was little or no attention given to their submission VODs. Even if the panelists are familiar with a large amount of the submissions, I doubt that the submissions team as a whole has enough time in their day to be familiar with the "many cases" submitted by the community to permit the lack of VOD attention.

Quote:

The submission form says to contact the management email address. We were more than happy to provide private communications if it was requested in the same manner. Otherwise, we replied on the same medium we were questioned.

As a group trying to make a professional broadcast and name for yourselves, why do you even allow for gray area? Make it black and white so the professionalism of the GDQ brand as a whole doesn't fall under any kind of scrutiny. You may be happier to just let it all out when asked, but when it comes to some things, they are certainly best left unsaid.

Quote:

We understand people may act differently on their own streams, but when submitting to the event, you should expect to be held to the same standard you would if you were at the event. We didn't communicate this prior, which is why we haven't been as strict as we would like. That will not be the case for future events.

Again, don't leave gray area.

Quote:

Mike will return to do this himself once he feels he's in the capacity to do so, likely for SGDQ. His medical issues are the only reason we are acting as a medium right now, as we've covered in the past.

I understand that Mike has been sick, and wish him the best in his recovery.

[quote="Cool Matty"]
The committee is already familiar with a great deal of games and runners. Watching a larger portion of these runs would not affect the results. In many cases, the committee might have already watched the runner's stream, and not even need to see the VOD. Additional manpower is not required, or the committee would seek it out. In the end, ultimately they are responsible for the reception of the event's schedule. Regardless of opinions offered, the judges must make the final analysis. We also expect runners to respect the committee's experience in making these decisions.
[/quote]

I would be much more comfortable with this answer if the lack of VOD attention wasn't as widespread of an issue as it is for this submission period.  I've got multiple sources, that I would rather keep nameless, that have told me that they can confirm that there was little or no attention given to their submission VODs.  Even if the panelists are familiar with a large amount of the submissions, I doubt that the submissions team as a whole has enough time in their day to be familiar with the "many cases" submitted by the community to permit the lack of VOD attention.

[quote]
The submission form says to contact the management email address. We were more than happy to provide private communications if it was requested in the same manner. Otherwise, we replied on the same medium we were questioned.
[/quote]

As a group trying to make a professional broadcast and name for yourselves, why do you even allow for gray area?  Make it black and white so the professionalism of the GDQ brand as a whole doesn't fall under any kind of scrutiny.  You may be happier to just let it all out when asked, but when it comes to some things, they are certainly best left unsaid.

[quote]
We understand people may act differently on their own streams, but when submitting to the event, you should expect to be held to the same standard you would if you were at the event. We didn't communicate this prior, which is why we haven't been as strict as we would like. That will not be the case for future events.
[/quote]

Again, don't leave gray area.

[quote]
Mike will return to do this himself once he feels he's in the capacity to do so, likely for SGDQ. His medical issues are the only reason we are acting as a medium right now, as we've covered in the past.
[/quote]

I understand that Mike has been sick, and wish him the best in his recovery.

Cool Matty

Edit history:

Cool Matty: 2015-10-18 09:48:11 pm

2015-10-18 09:44:09 pm

Crawlathon WR, get down on my level.

Quote from TonyOgbot:

I would be much more comfortable with this answer if the lack of VOD attention wasn't as widespread of an issue as it is for this submission period. I've got multiple sources, that I would rather keep nameless, that have told me that they can confirm that there was little or no attention given to their submission VODs. Even if the panelists are familiar with a large amount of the submissions, I doubt that the submissions team as a whole has enough time in their day to be familiar with the "many cases" submitted by the community to permit the lack of VOD attention.

Quote from PvtCb:

Over the past few years Games Done Quick has become a shadowy organization. Is it too much to ask for transparency on issues that actually matter, such as committee names and run criteria? I understand that you guys (see, I can't address specific people because you all are just a black box that decides what's best for speedrunning) make mistakes. Despite trying to appear as all-knowing gods, you are only human. Then again, you all are professionals entrusted with a large amount of money and managing a ton of employees. Personally, I wouldn't want to keep an air traffic controller who looks at the radar for 5 minutes then says they've seen enough planes and they know the pilots and can trust them to be safe. Is this comparison unfair? Maybe, but so is the way you've treated the speedrun community at large. You guys are the public face of speedrunning, even if you don't want to show your faces. Act as such.

Announcing the names of the committee would not help submissions. Instead it would result in leaving them open to direct personal attacks (Sumi and I know this very well). That doesn't help anyone.

Also, there's no need to be secretive, Tony. We've openly stated that submissions are not going to be viewed in their entirety, or even at all if it's not necessary. If you disagree with that method, that's fine, you're welcome to do so, but it wouldn't affect submissions. We know people put a lot of effort into their submissions, but people's runs are going to get cut. That's life. We have only 150 hours to work with, and we unfortunately have to be extremely picky. If your run was cut with little to no viewing of the VOD, it simply did not merit viewing. I posted a lengthy explanation of the criteria they use, and you'll note a lot of them don't even need the VOD to make a determination (For instance, was the game poorly received at a previous event? Don't need to watch the VOD then, it's rejected). There's a dozen reasons to reject a game, and eventually it's going to come down to personal preference. There's no way around that, there's just way too many excellent submissions.

We know people put a lot of effort into their submissions, and watching a VOD isn't really a good way of saying "thanks". The best way of saying thanks is to give people the best event we can manage.

[quote="TonyOgbot"]
I would be much more comfortable with this answer if the lack of VOD attention wasn't as widespread of an issue as it is for this submission period.  I've got multiple sources, that I would rather keep nameless, that have told me that they can confirm that there was little or no attention given to their submission VODs.  Even if the panelists are familiar with a large amount of the submissions, I doubt that the submissions team as a whole has enough time in their day to be familiar with the "many cases" submitted by the community to permit the lack of VOD attention.[/quote]

[quote="PvtCb"]Over the past few years Games Done Quick has become a shadowy organization. Is it too much to ask for transparency on issues that actually matter, such as committee names and run criteria? I understand that you guys (see, I can't address specific people because you all are just a black box that decides what's best for speedrunning) make mistakes. Despite trying to appear as all-knowing gods, you are only human. Then again, you all are professionals entrusted with a large amount of money and managing a ton of employees. Personally, I wouldn't want to keep an air traffic controller who looks at the radar for 5 minutes then says they've seen enough planes and they know the pilots and can trust them to be safe. Is this comparison unfair? Maybe, but so is the way you've treated the speedrun community at large. You guys are the public face of speedrunning, even if you don't want to show your faces. Act as such.[/quote]

Announcing the names of the committee would not help submissions. Instead it would result in leaving them open to direct personal attacks (Sumi and I know this very well). That doesn't help anyone.

Also, there's no need to be secretive, Tony. We've openly stated that submissions are not going to be viewed in their entirety, or even at all if it's not necessary. If you disagree with that method, that's fine, you're welcome to do so, but it wouldn't affect submissions. We know people put a lot of effort into their submissions, but people's runs are going to get cut. That's life. We have only 150 hours to work with, and we unfortunately have to be extremely picky. If your run was cut with little to no viewing of the VOD, it simply did not merit viewing. I posted a lengthy explanation of the criteria they use, and you'll note a lot of them don't even need the VOD to make a determination (For instance, was the game poorly received at a previous event? Don't need to watch the VOD then, it's rejected). There's a dozen reasons to reject a game, and eventually it's going to come down to personal preference. There's no way around that, there's just way too many excellent submissions.

We know people put a lot of effort into their submissions, and watching a VOD isn't really a good way of saying "thanks". The best way of saying thanks is to give people the best event we can manage.

ButtersBB

2015-10-18 09:44:28 pm

Its a charity event where people play video games. Its the discretion of the organizers as to who gets in, and really... Its not life altering decisions they are making. We are just playing video games.

Regardless, I see way more transparency for this than I do for something like job interviews, and that actually has a bearing on LIVELIHOOD.

Its not something worth getting so caught up in semantics and conspiracies, because really... We are just playing video games.

Stay cool and have fun, people.

TrUShade

2015-10-18 09:49:17 pm

The TrUest of Shades

Quote from Cool Matty:

Announcing the names of the committee would not help submissions. Instead it would result in leaving them open to direct personal attacks (Sumi and I know this very well). That doesn't help anyone.

This is why I don't mind the committee to be a little bit secretive.

TonyOgbot

2015-10-18 09:56:16 pm

Quote from Cool Matty:

The best way of saying thanks is to give people the best event we can manage.

In the end, that's all that we can ask for.

I will agree to disagree, and will still be pulling my submissions for the reasons I have already mentioned. Hopefully the submission process for SGDQ will follow with less mixed messages and a more tactful approach on feedback.

Thank you for the work you all do, and may AGDQ be a successful event.

PvtCb

2015-10-18 10:01:48 pm

This is not the giant

Quote:

If your run was cut with little to no viewing of the VOD, it simply did not merit viewing.

That's an incredibly hubristic statement. I can understand not looking at a few notorious submissions, but to write of someone's efforts multiple times just because you didn't want to put the effort in to properly judging a short video is just plain arrogance. You're not all-knowing psychics. You can't make a snap judgement that quickly, especially when you're being paid to do this.

Quote:

eventually it's going to come down to personal preference

Like how you preffered a submission of a game that was already rejected for the WR holder just because a streamer with name recognition submitted the same game? What does that say about the committee as a whole when you drop the ball like that numerous times?

I'd appreciate an honest answer to these complaints instead of dancing around the issues using flowery language.

Cool Matty

2015-10-18 10:24:20 pm

Crawlathon WR, get down on my level.

Quote from PvtCb:

That's an incredibly hubristic statement. I can understand not looking at a few notorious submissions, but to write of someone's efforts multiple times just because you didn't want to put the effort in to properly judging a short video is just plain arrogance. You're not all-knowing psychics. You can't make a snap judgement that quickly, especially when you're being paid to do this.

Like how you preffered a submission of a game that was already rejected for the WR holder just because a streamer with name recognition submitted the same game? What does that say about the committee as a whole when you drop the ball like that numerous times?

I'd appreciate an honest answer to these complaints instead of dancing around the issues using flowery language.

I understand how you feel, but that's not how it works, which is why I made the effort to explain the criteria that is examined earlier. There's simply a lot of reasons to reject a run, or a category, before the runner's particular run even needs to be considered. That's just an unfortunate truth when you're faced with this many games and only 150 hours to finish with.

Your run, in the VOD, might be the most amazing run of that game ever made, but if the game was, for instance, already at the last SGDQ with a poor reception, it's going to get cut anyway.

Finally, I can't even begin to touch on what you're referring to on this WR nonsense, because I have no idea what game you're even referring to. If it's not your game, then let the runner who is having issues bring it up with us.

[quote="PvtCb"]
That's an incredibly hubristic statement. I can understand not looking at a few notorious submissions, but to write of someone's efforts multiple times just because you didn't want to put the effort in to properly judging a short video is just plain arrogance. You're not all-knowing psychics. You can't make a snap judgement that quickly, especially when you're being paid to do this.

Like how you preffered a submission of a game that was already rejected for the WR holder just because a streamer with name recognition submitted the same game? What does that say about the committee as a whole when you drop the ball like that numerous times?

I'd appreciate an honest answer to these complaints instead of dancing around the issues using flowery language.[/quote]

I understand how you feel, but that's not how it works, which is why I made the effort to explain the criteria that is examined earlier. There's simply a lot of reasons to reject a run, or a category, before the runner's particular run even needs to be considered. That's just an unfortunate truth when you're faced with this many games and only 150 hours to finish with.

Your run, in the VOD, might be the most amazing run of that game ever made, but if the game was, for instance, already at the last SGDQ with a poor reception, it's going to get cut anyway.

Finally, I can't even begin to touch on what you're referring to on this WR nonsense, because I have no idea what game you're even referring to. If it's not your game, then let the runner who is having issues bring it up with us.

AnonymousUser

Edit history:

AnonymousUser: 2015-10-18 10:33:32 pm

2015-10-18 10:30:43 pm

Quote from Cool Matty:

The committee is already familiar with a great deal of games and runners. Watching a larger portion of these runs would not affect the results. In many cases, the committee might have already watched the runner's stream, and not even need to see the VOD. Additional manpower is not required, or the committee would seek it out. In the end, ultimately they are responsible for the reception of the event's schedule. Regardless of opinions offered, the judges must make the final analysis. We also expect runners to respect the committee's experience in making these decisions.

Why should we respect this anonymous committee when one of the confirmed members (Sumi) isn't even a speedrunner? I have nothing against Sumi and I'm sure she's a fine person, but a non-speedrunner has no place on a speedrunning selection committee. I'm also not going to respect the committee when submissions are outright determined by streamer popularity instead of runner skill. If you guys planned on accepting Kirby 64, then Supreme's run should have been accepted from the getgo. Instead, it was rejected and only re-accepted when a more popular and less-skilled speedrunner, Kungfufruitcup, put her submission, that's when you guys flip-flopped. It's BS that the WR holder got his run rejected and only got re-accepted because a more popular streamer submitted the same game, it should have been accepted from the start or stayed rejected with no flip-flopping. And I use the term speedrunner lightly, Kungfufruitcup is barely one and only got her run accepted because she's a popular streamer.

There's tons of other cases like this throughout the history of GDQs. Stuff like Mario Maker and Twitch Plays Scribblenauts (the latter of which isn't even a speedrun), have no place at a speedrunning event. It's all about what will bring in the money, not what games deserved to be showcased

Also, I'm sure Geoff's third straight run of Monkey Ball Deluxe is going to get in over SMB1, Banana Splitz, and Kororinpa, all because of his popularity. And I'd like to mention Koroinpa is one of the best speedruns I've ever seen and most people aren't even aware the game exists. The fact that this run wasn't accepted is absolutely mindboggling.

Quote from Cool Matty:

We understand people may act differently on their own streams, but when submitting to the event, you should expect to be held to the same standard you would if you were at the event. We didn't communicate this prior, which is why we haven't been as strict as we would like. That will not be the case for future events.

So you guys rejected people's runs because of a rule nobody was informed about beforehand? That's complete BS. Also, said rule incredibly stupid. Why should my own personal stream be held to the same standards as a GDQ run? Runners are informed about the (admittedly stupid) GDQ rule of no swearing well before their runs. Hell, at SGDQ we even got a pamphlet detailing these rules in great detail. If someone breaks these rules at a GDQ that's on them, but using offensive language on their own stream should not be taken in account, period. And again, the no swearing rule is stupid as hell. ESA allows for swearing during their marathon and it's working out fine for them. But I guess that's because they're focused on the speedruns instead of the charity.

Quote from Cool Matty:

Mike will return to do this himself once he feels he's in the capacity to do so, likely for SGDQ. His medical issues are the only reason we are acting as a medium right now, as we've covered in the past.

Nobody has Mono for nearly 2 years, there's something else going on. And if Mike or Romscout aren't running AGDQ, who is then? It's sad that we're even asking questions about who's running a event that's only 3 months away, the complete lack of basic transparency is astounding.

[quote="Cool Matty"]
The committee is already familiar with a great deal of games and runners. Watching a larger portion of these runs would not affect the results. In many cases, the committee might have already watched the runner's stream, and not even need to see the VOD. Additional manpower is not required, or the committee would seek it out. In the end, ultimately they are responsible for the reception of the event's schedule. Regardless of opinions offered, the judges must make the final analysis. We also expect runners to respect the committee's experience in making these decisions. 
[/quote]
Why should we respect this anonymous committee when one of the confirmed members (Sumi) isn't even a speedrunner? I have nothing against Sumi and I'm sure she's a fine person, but a non-speedrunner has no place on a speedrunning selection committee. I'm also not going to respect the committee when submissions are outright determined by streamer popularity instead of runner skill. If you guys planned on accepting Kirby 64, then Supreme's run should have been accepted from the getgo. Instead, it was rejected and only re-accepted when a more popular and less-skilled speedrunner, Kungfufruitcup, put her submission, that's when you guys flip-flopped. It's BS that the WR holder got his run rejected and only got re-accepted because a more popular streamer submitted the same game, it should have been accepted from the start or stayed rejected with no flip-flopping.  And I use the term speedrunner lightly, Kungfufruitcup is barely one and only got her run accepted because she's a popular streamer.

There's tons of other cases like this throughout the history of GDQs. Stuff like Mario Maker and Twitch Plays Scribblenauts (the latter of which [b]isn't even a speedrun[/b]), have no place at a speedrunning event. It's all about what will bring in the money, not what games deserved to be showcased

Also, I'm sure Geoff's third straight run of Monkey Ball Deluxe is going to get in over SMB1, Banana Splitz, and [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jgq_NUJJxI] Kororinpa[/url], all because of his popularity. And I'd like to mention Koroinpa is one of the best speedruns I've ever seen and most people aren't even aware the game exists. The fact that this run wasn't accepted is absolutely mindboggling.

[quote="Cool Matty"]
We understand people may act differently on their own streams, but when submitting to the event, you should expect to be held to the same standard you would if you were at the event. We didn't communicate this prior, which is why we haven't been as strict as we would like. That will not be the case for future events.
[/quote]
So you guys rejected people's runs because of a rule [b]nobody[/b] was informed about beforehand? That's complete BS. Also, said rule incredibly stupid. Why should my own personal stream be held to the same standards as a GDQ run? Runners are informed about the (admittedly stupid) GDQ rule of no swearing well before their runs. Hell, at SGDQ we even got a pamphlet detailing these rules in great detail. If someone breaks these rules at a GDQ that's on them, but using offensive language on their own stream should not be taken in account, period. And again, the no swearing rule is stupid as hell. ESA allows for swearing during their marathon and it's working out fine for them. But I guess that's because they're focused on the speedruns instead of the charity.

[quote="Cool Matty"]
Mike will return to do this himself once he feels he's in the capacity to do so, likely for SGDQ. His medical issues are the only reason we are acting as a medium right now, as we've covered in the past.[/quote]
Nobody has Mono for nearly 2 years, there's something else going on. And if Mike or Romscout aren't running AGDQ, who is then? It's sad that we're even asking questions about who's running a event that's only [b]3 months away[/b], the complete lack of basic transparency is astounding.

TheMG2

2015-10-18 10:35:03 pm

It's swordsmankirby who has the kirby 64 record not supreme

AnonymousUser

2015-10-18 10:36:33 pm

Quote from TheMG2:

It's swordsmankirby who has the kirby 64 record not supreme

Fair enough. My point still stands that a significantly better runner got his run rejected and only got re-accepted because a more popular streamer also submitted the game.

Cool Matty

2015-10-18 10:39:59 pm

Crawlathon WR, get down on my level.

Quote from AnonymousUser:

Why should we respect this anonymous committee when one of the confirmed members (Sumi) isn't even a speedrunner? I have nothing against Sumi and I'm sure she's a fine person, but a non-speedrunner has no place on a speedrunning selection committee. I'm also not going to respect the committee when submissions are outright determined by streamer popularity instead of runner skill. If you guys planned on accepting Kirby 64, then Supreme's run should have been accepted from the getgo. Instead, it was rejected and only re-accepted when a more popular and less-skilled speedrunner, Kungfufruitcup, put her submission, that's when you guys flip-flopped. It's BS that the WR holder got his run rejected and only got re-accepted because a more popular streamer submitted the same game, it should have been accepted from the start or stayed rejected with no flip-flopping. And I use the term speedrunner lightly, Kungfufruitcup is barely one and only got her run accepted because she's a popular streamer.

I've already gone over the rest of everything you posted, so I'll just re-establish that neither Sumi nor I are responsible for any submissions. Again, if the runners have issues with the Kirby submission, they are more than welcome to approach us. Let the runners speak for themselves.

[quote="AnonymousUser"]
Why should we respect this anonymous committee when one of the confirmed members (Sumi) isn't even a speedrunner? I have nothing against Sumi and I'm sure she's a fine person, but a non-speedrunner has no place on a speedrunning selection committee. I'm also not going to respect the committee when submissions are outright determined by streamer popularity instead of runner skill. If you guys planned on accepting Kirby 64, then Supreme's run should have been accepted from the getgo. Instead, it was rejected and only re-accepted when a more popular and less-skilled speedrunner, Kungfufruitcup, put her submission, that's when you guys flip-flopped. It's BS that the WR holder got his run rejected and only got re-accepted because a more popular streamer submitted the same game, it should have been accepted from the start or stayed rejected with no flip-flopping.  And I use the term speedrunner lightly, Kungfufruitcup is barely one and only got her run accepted because she's a popular streamer.
[/quote]

I've already gone over the rest of everything you posted, so I'll just re-establish that neither Sumi nor I are responsible for any submissions. Again, if the runners have issues with the Kirby submission, they are more than welcome to approach us. Let the runners speak for themselves.

Cyberdemon531

2015-10-18 10:41:45 pm

Well, if we're still allowed to inquire on submission details, may I know why Doom 2 UV Max was rejected?