Username:
B
I
U
S
"
url
img
#
code
sup
sub
font
size
color
smiley
embarassed
thumbsup
happy
Huh?
Angry
Roll Eyes
Undecided
Lips Sealed
Kiss
Cry
Grin
Wink
Tongue
Shocked
Cheesy
Smiley
Sad
1 page
--
--
List results:
Search options:
Use \ before commas in usernames
Game Page: http://speeddemosarchive.com/Contra.html

Contra (ntscus) (nes) [Any %] [Single Segment]

Decision: Accept

Congratulations to Jeremy 'DK28' Doll!
Thread title:  
Run Information

Contra (ntscus) (nes) [Any %] [Single Segment]

Verification Files

http://v.speeddemosarchive.com/Contra-20150630/

Please refer to the Verification Guidelines before posting.

Please post your opinions about the run and be certain to conclude your post with a verdict (Accept/Reject). This is not a contest where the majority wins - I will judge each verification on its content. Please keep your verification brief unless you have a good reason otherwise.
For anyone wondering, this was moved from private verification due to untimely replies. I can also mention that there are four runs in this submission:
- any% 1p
- low% 1p
- any% 2p
- low% 2p

The only reply received in private verification was the following:

Quote from zallard1:
1p low%: An incredibly strong improvement to a really brutal category. This run comes down to raw mashing power, incredible luck, and tight execution. All of which comes together masterfully for this run. Definite accept.

1p any%: This run... is one of the best I've ever seen. I didn't think we'd ever see anything topple the 9:58... let alone by 5 seconds. One of the strongest accept votes imaginable.
The Looney Bin
A/V Quality - Good
No cheating here.

All of these are incredibly strong runs that are also improvements to all of the current categories. If the 1p any% is anything to measure by, then the other runs are pretty much par for the course at this point.

Accept x 4
A/V good (although things looked weird on the 1p runs in VLC for me, but fine with other programs, so maybe I have a rogue messed-up setting or something?), no cheating detected

These are all easy accepts.  What more needs to be said, really?
A/V: Good, old nes-quality all around

Gameplay: The master piece of this lot is obviously the 1p any%. Definitely one of the best runs that has ever been submitted to sda. The other three runs are also very impressive. They don't contain all the time savers from the 1p any% since some of them were found only quite recently, but it would require a considerable effort to beat these runs even with what's known today.

I'd also like to quickly comment on the 2p any%. It's slower than the 1p any% and therefore not acceptable by the traditional sda-rules. However, I'd like to argue that at the level these runs have been pushed to, I don't think that rule can be accurately applied. I would argue for keeping the two categories independent of each other unless something radical new happens to the route.

4x Accept
General Kong - Bullets and Bananas
One thing I will comment, not sure if we said it in the audio track, but about the 2P any%...

You can NOT do the screen scroll in Snow Field to trigger the Tanks' vulnerability early.  So in 2P, you're forced to lose that 4-5 seconds between both tanks.  That is a huge amount of time with how optimized this game has become.  So that, I feel, does warrant an exception to the '2P must be faster than 1P' mentality.  Smiley
Thanks for the clarification. I remember that the snow filed tanks were mentioned in one of the audio commentaries, but I don't think it was mentioned how much it saved in 1p.
Not a walrus
Yeah, if something about multiplayer makes it slower (skips that don't work, extra enemies that slow you down, etc), then multiplayer doesn't have to be faster than 1p, and it sounds like that's the case here.
Willing to teach you the impossible
So really the only one that needs to be verified is the any% 2 player run. This is my first time seeing it so this is all new to me. And honestly, this is what some extra time does to analyze the current best run and find improvements can really do. The only real flaw in planning I saw was the start of stage 8, but then again I am sure testing was done. By spawning player 2 that early is causes the screen to start moving later rather than having player 2 spawn during the fight to save the screen scrolling time. The testing question would be that verses being closer to the head faster thus a quicker fight maybe?

This is an easy accept. The rng in this run was WAY too good as well. Very well done my brothers, very well done.
Decision posted.
Willing to teach you the impossible
Quote from DK28:
So that, I feel, does warrant an exception to the '2P must be faster than 1P' mentality.  Smiley

As a side note, mike said a long while ago that 1p vs 2p no longer compete with one another. So that mentality no longer is an issue officially. That wont stop individuals from that though, but sda officially could care less.