Crystals For Life 2014

2013-10-14 05:40:40 pm

My feelings on The Demon Rush

So I've been talking to to Poxnor in PMs and basically he misinterpreted something I said (I'm one of the multiple people). I've been asking him to let withhelde attend the marathon because she's been fine in past marathons.

While withhelde and I don't always see eye to eye, at the very least she should be allowed to attend C4L. She's even helped out on the donation tracker at past marathons. As for the games and SO3, I don't have much to say except I've seen her stream it in the past, but it's up to Poxnor whether the game is back in.

I have no name

Edit history:

I have no name: 2013-10-14 05:46:55 pm

2013-10-14 05:46:29 pm

Obscure games ftw

Haven't met Withhelde in person (though AGDQ may change that? I hope anyway), but when I was first doing races on SRL Withhelde was one of the people who helped out quite a bit. We had a Threads of Fate race which I was emulating, and when my game started lagging a lot she was kind enough to let me stop my stream in order to continue the race (we were in a call and she was nothing but kind). Then there were the 3 Labyrinth of Touhou races which were really fun, even if I got my butt kicked on 2 of them, and only won the 2nd race by remembering the optimal paths through the teleport maze Tongue

I've never played SO3, but I have watched her do attempts and I've seen the time go down quite a bit. It was an entertaining watch and I definitely trust her to do a good run.

stauken

2013-10-14 05:47:23 pm

splixel I'm inclined to agree here. Something egregious has happened recently and it's quite disturbing. We're turning marathons to raise money for charity into a mudslinging event, on multiple levels. It was unnecessary and childish, and several people involved that I'd previously respected simply no longer have it. I don't care whose side you're on. you don't have to undermine the marathon just because you don't personally like somebody. I'd suggest that anyone who has been removed strictly because of here-say gets a serious re-evaluation. A lot of these people have put damn hard work into their runs, and I believe they care more about displaying that work to the public an dhelping the charity than they do about whatever petty arguments might have been going on between them. And if not, they don't deserve to go anyway.

stauken

2013-10-14 05:52:43 pm

Also, don't be hasty to make assumptions about who said what about who. Every single person here who has a 'piece' of the puzzle has just that, a 'piece'. But when we start letting spite, especially potentially phantom spite that isn't even directed at the deserving party, drive decisions in charity marathons, we run the risk of turning ourselves into hypocritical jackasses. I'd prefer avoid that if possible.

Boxfat

2013-10-14 06:18:05 pm

Arbitrary forum emu

I'm having a hard time coming up with a response that doesn't sound angry, because this whole thing's pissing me off quite a bit.

Withhelde is really nice. I highly doubt that anyone that says otherwise has legitimate proof otherwise without taking something she's said far out of context. Any time I've spoken to her, she's been VERY friendly.

And what the hell? When I first heard of her a ways back, I remember bugging friends in PSO2 saying "HEY LOOK SPEEDRUNS OF STAR OCEAN 3." So she's definitely practiced it.

Without posting your sources, Pox, I feel like this is pretty unprofessional to exclude her from the marathon. It gives these people that you seem to trust so much the power to point at anyone they don't like and make up some dumb reason as to why they shouldn't be allowed to participate. Let her run.

Reiska

2013-10-14 06:32:01 pm

On the whole, I've got to agree with Stauken here; we really need to focus on what the point of Crystals for Life is - raising as much money as possible for the JDRF (or any other charity Poxnor chooses for which to raise money).

To be clear, I've never really had much direct interaction with Withhelde. She lurks in an IRC room that I also lurk in from time to time, I've watched her streams a few times, and we have a shared interest in Touhou. I've also seen her runs at both AGDQ and SGDQ and much of what she played during her time on the bonus stream. Nothing I've seen in that period of time has given me any reason to believe, as an outside observer, that she's anything remotely resembling "belligerent" (quite the opposite, really). So I have no idea where THAT came from.

I am, however, more familiar with the allegation of lack of time spent practicing. There were allegations that Withhelde inadequately practiced for Super Marisa World at SGDQ13. Not having a personal relationship with Withhelde I cannot really speak to the truth or falsehood of these allegations, but I have observed them. I've also played SMW and can concur with Funkdoc's statements in the thread that the game's controls are really awful - frankly, I think it was a very poor game choice for a marathon run of a Touhou fangame, but that's not particularly material to the accusation. And really, when you get back to Stauken's point, it doesn't really matter. People have had crappy runs of games in marathons in the past, and we don't ban them from marathons for it. People have failed to practice for runs adequately in the past, and we don't ban them from marathons for that either, we just tell them "please practice this time".

Last but not least, of all games, SO3 is one I would definitely trust Withhelde to do justice to.

That all said, she's also not the only person on the "not attending" list whose presence there I am utterly mystified about, or whom has had baseless accusations slung in their direction. I certainly feel those people ought to have equal opportunity to defend themselves publicly too, now that this sordid mess has gone public at all. :/

Bottom line, everyone involved needs to let bygones be bygones and remember what we're all here for: running (or watching runs of) awesome games to raise money for a good cause.

On the whole, I've got to agree with Stauken here; we really need to focus on what the point of Crystals for Life is - raising as much money as possible for the JDRF (or any other charity Poxnor chooses for which to raise money).

To be clear, I've never really had much direct interaction with Withhelde.  She lurks in an IRC room that I also lurk in from time to time, I've watched her streams a few times, and we have a shared interest in Touhou.  I've also seen her runs at both AGDQ and SGDQ and much of what she played during her time on the bonus stream.  Nothing I've seen in that period of time has given me any reason to believe, as an outside observer, that she's anything remotely resembling "belligerent" (quite the opposite, really).  So I have no idea where THAT came from.

I am, however, more familiar with the allegation of lack of time spent practicing.  There were allegations that Withhelde inadequately practiced for Super Marisa World at SGDQ13.  Not having a personal relationship with Withhelde I cannot really speak to the truth or falsehood of these allegations, but I have observed them.  I've also played SMW and can concur with Funkdoc's statements in the thread that the game's controls are really awful - frankly, I think it was a very poor game choice for a marathon run of a Touhou fangame, but that's not particularly material to the accusation.  And really, when you get back to Stauken's point, it doesn't really matter.  People have had crappy runs of games in marathons in the past, and we don't ban them from marathons for it.  People have failed to practice for runs adequately in the past, and we don't ban them from marathons for that either, we just tell them "please practice this time".

Last but not least, of all games, SO3 is one I would definitely trust Withhelde to do justice to.

[b]That all said[/b], she's also not the only person on the "not attending" list whose presence there I am utterly mystified about, or whom has had baseless accusations slung in their direction.  I certainly feel those people ought to have equal opportunity to defend themselves publicly too, now that this sordid mess has gone public at all. :/

Bottom line, everyone involved needs to let bygones be bygones and remember what we're all here for: running (or watching runs of) awesome games to raise money for a good cause.

Felly

Edit history:

Felly: 2013-10-14 06:43:09 pm

2013-10-14 06:42:09 pm

I support Withhelde as well, even though I've not been that huge in the community outside of watching streams. My interest increased when I watched her and Funkdoc do their things. I probably could've begun my effort to join in 2012, but I was rather unsure of myself.

Also, I was rather lukewarm on coming to C4L2 since I don't have a job / finances right now. I probably should've been more open about that in the first place, and not go 'yeah, sure I'll come', hoping things will work out soon.

Sorry Poxnor for the confusion...>.<;;

romscout

2013-10-14 06:43:02 pm

that Metroidvania guy

I don't know what the full situation is here, so I don't have too much to add. I'm just going to reiterate something that's probably been said a bunch already. To get banned from a marathon, you need to have done some really serious shit. Like, unforgivable. The ban list for GDQs is less than 5 people. And with all the time I've spent around Withhelde at different marathons/meetups, I have a really hard time believing she did anything in the same league that warrants that discussion. I'll vouch for SO3 as well, even though I don't think it really needs that since out of all the game suggestions she had, it's quite obviously the one she's the most experienced with and has streamed a ton over the last couple years.

stauken

2013-10-14 06:43:26 pm

Well said Reiska. And if this was all brought about to 'air all of this out', it really is time for all parties to just speak their peace, make up like adults, and move on. Usually in these affairs, one side is already willing to do such a thing. It's called the "Path of Lesser Resistance", and it works really well in these situations. You don't have to like each other to work towards a common goal that is a greater good.

I love the SDA and SRL communities, even if I am an absolutely godawful speedrunner and only marginally better at marketing SEGA products to it than SEGA was to everyone themselves (which means I have no career as a marketer in my future). I have no vested interest in a run or attendance of C4L myself. I've never observed Withhelde as being belligerent, and I have watched her SO3 runs enough to know that at the very least, she's capable of doing it more justice than anybody else could. (I say it like that ONLY because I've never seen anybody else run it, but I bet it wouldn't be as low time-wise as hers Wink

That said, what Reiska says is true, too. There are other mystifying, "he-said she-said" cuts. If there is a public discussion of Withhelde's situation, then there should be for the rest, if they were on a 'he-said she-said' basis. Especially given the disparity of the gravity of said allegations. This was meant to be for something bigger than our egos, and Poxnors (and the other moderators) ever increasing excederin headache. If a game is cut, a game got cut. But to cut a person from attending outright, and not have a "your run got rejected reasoning and we have limited attendence space" without vetting facts is a black eye on the event.

Well said Reiska. And if this was all brought about to 'air all of this out', it really is time for all parties to just speak their peace, make up like adults, and move on. Usually in these affairs, one side is already willing to do such a thing. It's called the "Path of Lesser Resistance", and it works really well in these situations. You don't have to like each other to work towards a common goal that is a greater good.

I love the SDA and SRL communities, even if I am an absolutely godawful speedrunner and only marginally better at marketing SEGA products to it than SEGA was to everyone themselves (which means I have no career as a marketer in my future). I have no vested interest in a run or attendance of C4L myself. I've never observed Withhelde as being belligerent, and I have watched her SO3 runs enough to know that at the very least, she's capable of doing it more justice than anybody else could. (I say it like that ONLY because I've never seen anybody else run it, but I bet it wouldn't be as low time-wise as hers ;)

That said, what Reiska says is true, too. There are other mystifying, "he-said she-said" cuts. If there is a public discussion of Withhelde's situation, then there should be for the rest, if they were on a 'he-said she-said' basis. Especially given the disparity of the gravity of said allegations. This was meant to be for something bigger than our egos, and Poxnors (and the other moderators) ever increasing excederin headache. If a game is cut, a game got cut. But to cut a person from attending outright, and not have a "your run got rejected reasoning and we have limited attendence space" without vetting facts is a black eye on the event.

dballin

Edit history:

dballin: 2013-10-14 07:14:24 pm

2013-10-14 06:43:27 pm

Balls jerky

If Withhelde is classified as belligerent, then I wholly accept my designation as literally worse than Hitler for my sgdq transgressions.

I should be banned from marathons actually. I signed up for a game, didn't practice and then dropped out. Next year I complained way too much about game choice on the forum. then I turned on sub mode as a joke for 5 minutes at sgdq.

Withhelde pointed a stuffed caterpillar at me one time. Sad

That's all I got.

Dana Crysalis

2013-10-14 06:46:39 pm

Let's Dance!

Regarding Withhelde's charges:

Charge 1 - Lack of Practice: She did not stream pretty much at all prior to SGDQ, this is true. She was also traveling most of the summer with Funkdoc, who previously stated she was practicing offstream, and I can believe that, Super Marisa World is ridiculously hard about its controls and really easy to mess up on even when good at the game. So this one boils down to believing what she did while offstream, which would be one word versus another's. For the record, I'd believe Funkdoc and Withhelde on that one.

Charge 2 - Belligerence: I can't believe this one, at ALL. Withhelde is the single reason I was able to attend AGDQ this year, she was nothing but kind and helpful, she found me and Branch bus tickets, helped us with room situations, basically it would have been completely impossible for me to attend without her help. She is one of the nicest people I know, who's had to put up with some of the worst people, and yet still manages to smile her way through it. This, quite frankly, is a bogus charge.

Regarding Withhelde's charges:

Charge 1 - Lack of Practice:  She did not stream pretty much at all prior to SGDQ, this is true.  She was also traveling most of the summer with Funkdoc, who previously stated she was practicing offstream, and I can believe that, Super Marisa World is ridiculously hard about its controls and really easy to mess up on even when good at the game.  So this one boils down to believing what she did while offstream, which would be one word versus another's.   For the record, I'd believe Funkdoc and Withhelde on that one.

Charge 2 - Belligerence:  I can't believe this one, at ALL.  Withhelde is the single reason I was able to attend AGDQ this year, she was nothing but kind and helpful, she found me and Branch bus tickets, helped us with room situations, basically it would have been completely impossible for me to attend without her help.  She is one of the nicest people I know, who's had to put up with some of the worst people, and yet still manages to smile her way through it.  This, quite frankly, is a bogus charge.

Blechy

2013-10-14 07:06:34 pm

Dana summed up my sentiments quite nicely, but I'd be angry at myself if I didn't still speak up for & defend Withhelde, given what I know of her. I've spent multiple visits with Withhelde, and they've always been a ton of fun, with no animosity whatsoever. The worst I could possibly say about her is that she's a bad liar when playing a board game. I can't personally speak about SO3, but truly she's just a genuine & generous person, and I hope that she's allowed to attend C4L so everyone can experience that first-hand.

Driscollad

2013-10-14 09:24:13 pm

My opinion might not hold much weight, having been active for less than a year. I will provide it regardless.

I remember a conversation I had with Poxnor during C4L, detailing how that first meeting with JDRF went. His retelling led me to believe they were quite skeptical about us raising even $5000. Perhaps they misunderstood the power this community can harness, or maybe they simply chose to abide by a preconceived notion. It doesn't matter in the end, because we took that cautious pessimism, bundled it into a ball, tied on a note that read "send more Sun-Rype fruit snacks please" and hurled it right through the window of corporate HQ.

It's very obvious to me, reading the testimony of some serious heavyweights in the community, that this should be reconsidered. It would feel great to smash expectations 2 years in a row, in every way we can. Especially if there are negative ones.

Namisyx

Edit history:

Namisyx: 2013-10-14 09:50:33 pm

Namisyx: 2013-10-14 09:50:31 pm

2013-10-14 09:48:18 pm

twitch.tv/namisyx

I would ask in advance that you forgive any inability to be coherent on my part, I have some difficulties putting my thoughts into words.

I'm going to speak my mind here, for whatever that may be worth.

First of all, I think it's really quite sad that among a group of adults, a situation like this has arisen at all. I don't want to be that jerk that pulls that card, but there it is. I think if you have a problem with someone, there are far more mature ways of dealing with that than by trying to blackball someone. (I will admit, I have brought forth personal concerns, but never once have I said "[person] should not be allowed to attend", or "I'm not going if [person] goes" because quite frankly, my concerns are purely subjective, and apply exclusively to only me.)

I haven't yet met anyone from SDA in person, so I can only judge someone's character based on what I've seen of them in chats, on their streams, and how they have interacted with me. (Not that I watch anyone's stream ever....>.>) I can honestly say that I have never known Withhelde to be anything less than pleasant, I have never known her to be anything less than cheerful, smiley, and happy. I honestly and truly can not even fathom how someone could perceive her actions as being even REMOTELY malicious or belligerent. But I've never been to a marathon. I don't see and I don't know what goes on off camera. It's entirely possible, and I am perfectly willing to accept that perhaps something she did or said rubbed someone the wrong way...we've all been in those sorts of situations. You can not please everyone.

If that is the case, I ask aloud, to anyone who might care or be listening: Assuming Withhelde upset somebody, in doing so, do you think she is a threat to the success of a marathon? Do you think she is, in any way, a threat to the venue, or personal safety and well being of anyone who might attend? Has she deliberately and/or blatantly broken any absolute, zero tolerance rules?

If the answer is "no", then I ask what the fuck the problem is.

Again, I can only speak from my own (lack) of experience, and my own personal knowledge. There may be more things at play here that I don't know... But I think it's a fair and safe assumption judging by this thread and how many people have vouched for her character that the problem lies in the accuser and not the accused. When it comes to events like these, which are for CHARITY...shouldn't petty, personal differences be left at the door?

Please, do correct me if I am wrong.

I don't want names, personally that is of no concern to me. However, I do think that something to back up the accusation(s) might shed some light on the situation...because there are a lot of people to whom none of this makes sense.

I would ask in advance that you forgive any inability to be coherent on my part, I have some difficulties putting my thoughts into words.

I'm going to speak my mind here, for whatever that may be worth.

First of all, I think it's really quite sad that among a group of adults, a situation like this has arisen at all. I don't want to be that jerk that pulls that card, but there it is. I think if you have a problem with someone, there are far more mature ways of dealing with that than by trying to blackball someone. (I will admit, I have brought forth personal concerns, but never once have I said "[person] should not be allowed to attend", or "I'm not going if [person] goes" because quite frankly, my concerns are purely subjective, and apply exclusively to only me.)

I haven't yet met anyone from SDA in person, so I can only judge someone's character based on what I've seen of them in chats, on their streams, and how they have interacted with me. (Not that I watch anyone's stream ever....>.>) I can honestly say that I have never known Withhelde to be anything less than pleasant, I have never known her to be anything less than cheerful, smiley, and happy. I honestly and truly can not even fathom how someone could perceive her actions as being even REMOTELY malicious or belligerent. But I've never been to a marathon. I don't see and I don't know what goes on off camera. It's entirely possible, and I am perfectly willing to accept that perhaps something she did or said rubbed someone the wrong way...we've all been in those sorts of situations. You can not please everyone.

If that is the case, I ask aloud, to anyone who might care or be listening: Assuming Withhelde upset somebody, in doing so, do you think she is a threat to the success of a marathon? Do you think she is, in any way, a threat to the venue, or personal safety and well being of anyone who might attend? Has she deliberately and/or blatantly broken any absolute, zero tolerance rules?

If the answer is "no", then I ask what the fuck the problem is.

Again, I can only speak from my own (lack) of experience, and my own personal knowledge. There may be more things at play here that I don't know... But I think it's a fair and safe assumption judging by this thread and how many people have vouched for her character that the problem lies in the accuser and not the accused. When it comes to events like these, which are for CHARITY...shouldn't petty, personal differences be left at the door?

Please, do correct me if I am wrong.

I don't want names, personally that is of no concern to me. However, I do think that something to back up the accusation(s) might shed some light on the situation...because there are a lot of people to whom none of this makes sense.

Sir VG

2013-10-14 10:03:24 pm

Fucking Weeaboo

I have my suspicions that the anti-Withheldeness isn't because of any of the stated reasons. They're probably fronts for some people. Given some of the stuff I've seen in GDQ chats, I'm sure some people don't like her for a different reason. And in this day and age, it's a really wrong reason.

Let her come. I want so see her there when I come up to rock the house.

Reiska

2013-10-14 10:23:59 pm

I was actually worrying the same thing, Sir VG :/

The closed-mindedness of some people makes me really sad.

Raelcun

2013-10-14 10:24:01 pm

We require more minerals

Given that the sentiment seems pretty strong across the board, maybe we should wait for a response from Poxnor before we start throwing around any actual accusations?

Poxnor

Edit history:

Poxnor: 2013-10-14 10:32:22 pm

2013-10-14 10:29:11 pm

Moo! Flap! Hug!

Everyone stop this thread of talk right now. Point well taken. There was some stuff misinterpreted, and I'm almost entirely at fault. I will address this issue tomorrow in the most equitable way I can.

Withhelde, if you have Skype, please add me (same username as on SDA) and let's talk this through so that I can best resolve this issue.

Poxnor

2013-10-15 06:44:24 pm

Moo! Flap! Hug!

Good evening everyone,

First off, I'd like to thank everyone for their patience as I composed this message. Let's call this Round 1.5 of the review process.

As the first step, let's address the big, ugly elephant in the room. I screwed up. Based on my misinterpretation of some things that were told to me by various people, I cut Withhelde and System Error from C4L 2014. I would like to very humbly apologize to them, and to all the people who were upset by my mistake. If you can accept my apology, I hope that this whole mess can be water under the bridge, and we can get back to gaming.

System Error offered one game. As for Withhelde, she offered multiple games; it's not worth the time to dig up what the Round One reviewers said, though, because I remember the Star Ocean one was the clear (unanimous, if I recall correctly) favourite. I have added both of those games back to the schedule.

There's one more change I have to make at this, the "Round 1.5" stage. rinimt and MetaSigma offered to do a co-op run of Xillia. They made an honest and good-faith effort to prepare this run, including Meta travelling over 8 hours round-trip to where rini lives to practice. Unfortunately, even though the co-op route is similar enough to a single-player route, the execution (and hence the practice involved) is completely different. In other words, they can't practice individually most of the time, and just schedule a few practice sessions together to solidify the co-op run (as was their honest plan). Since a co-op run would, in fact, require frequent and extensive travel, I pulled Xillia and gave them their SO and SoE games. It's a shame (there was a fair amount of Round One hype for a rini/Meta co-op run), but such is life.

Now, some people have asked me what Round Two is going to look like. Previously, I said that we would be adding ~10 hrs of games back in (since everyone got one, and there was time left over for some people to get additional games). However, with those changes I described above as "Round 1.5," we unfortunately don't get to add any games back in.

So, what will Round Two be like? Unsurprisingly, some of my Round One decisions were unpopular (shocking, I know; News at 11 Wink

). So, what I'm going to do is draft some questions to the people who have volunteered to be Round Two reviewers (since the whole "track" system I had planned is, ultimately, unnecessary given the perfect length this all came out to). I think I got a good number of volunteers, so I'll use everyone who has volunteered to-date, but need no more Round Two reviewers. These questions are simply a review of my "less-than-popular decisions," or decisions where I simply didn't have enough knowledge to feel that I decided properly, asking what (if anything) need be changed.

So that you're not all sitting on the edge of your seats (?), here is what I'm going to ask. For the love of all that's good, don't start spamming replies into the public thread (I have Round Two reviewers lined up). I'm just letting people know what I'm asking as an acknowledgement that I've heard the concerns and they are being addressed; and, I know if I just posted the Round Two results without telling people the questions in advance, then people would spam the thread at that point even worse.

1) Should any space open back up (e.g., someone becoming unable to attend), which games would you prioritize to add back in, and why? Keep in mind that someone may drop out last-minute, so ideally these would be games that the runner is already good at and could pick up on little notice (i.e., avoid games that people offered to learn).

2) The "closest" decision for me, personally, was giving puwexil FF6 instead of KH2. Would you change that decision and give him KH2 instead? Why or why not? Here, think of yourself as a gridiron football referee -- do you feel there's sufficient reason to overrule the Round One decision, or should we just leave well enough alone and let it stand as-is?

3) I completely misinterpreted one of the Round One referee's comments regarding Potato Handle's Wonderboy run. It was never meant to imply that there was any inappropriate content in Wonderboy (which I -- obviously -- couldn't find in any gameplay videos, so I disregarded that referee's comment and chose Wonderboy). Rather, the comment was meant to mean that Wonderboy is too obscure. In the light of what the Round One referee actually meant, would you overrule my Round One decision and give Lost Odyssey to Potato Handle, or let it stand as-is with Wonderboy? Why or why not? (Again, think gridiron football.)

4) Is Brave Fencer Musashi an RPG (i.e., does it have any place in an RPG marathon)? Why or why not? Do not interpret my Round One choice of this game as a decision that it is an RPG; rather, interpret it as me not knowing the game well enough to feel like I could unilaterally cut it (like I did to Link's Awakening). So, I'm going to decide this question based on the Round Two referees' input alone (as opposed to treating this situation as a Round One decision I intentionally made that the referees could overrule).

5) Is Skylanders Spyro's Adventure an RPG (i.e., does it have any place in an RPG marathon)? Why or why not? Again, as with Question 4, this is going to be decided by the Round Two referees' input alone.

6) Given that Lag.Com has the shortest game by a fairly significant margin, I personally think it would be fair to give him Ultima Underworld 2 (the sequel to the game he got, which is roughly the same length as the first) as well. However, I did not want unilaterally to give "special treatment" to someone (especially someone who is my friend) by giving him two games. So, I ask: do you think it is fair to give Lag.Com both the game he originally received and its sequel, to be played back-to-back?

7) Perhaps the most controversial decision I made (though that's a bit of a multi-horse race) was giving Caracarn X2. I have since learned something that I did not know before: that the English version of X2 is inherently marathon unsafe, so the game would have to be played in Japanese. I have also since learned that the route for X has changed since last year. As such, I ask: would you let the Round One decision stand, even though it would have to be the Japanese version of X2 played; or, would you overrule the Round One decision for one of FF7 or FFX. If so, which one? Why?

I feel it's worth mentioning that there are some questions that I am not putting to the Round Two reviewers:

- Illusion of Gaia: many people (but not, to the best of my knowledge, the player) have complained about this game being cut. It would have been cool to have the entire trilogy. However, IoG was none of the reviewers first choice for puwexil, and the other two games in the trilogy are already making an appearance in C4L 2014. As such, I am confident in that aspect of my decision on puwexil's game. The Round Two reviewers are more than welcome to put IoG on their Question 1 list, however, should they wish.

- Seiken Densetsu 3 co-op: many people (but not, to the best of my knowledge, the players) have complained about this game being cut. It would have been cool to have another trilogy (SD1 and SD2 being represented), and it would have made a great co-op run. However, I felt DQ3 was a really strong choice for romscout (and what other marathons would ever have an old-school DQ game, if we look at C4L as a unique home for games that might not make other marathons?). Additionally, puwexil had other strong choices. I am confident in that decision. The Round Two reviewers are more than welcome to put SD3 on their Question 1 list, however, should they wish.

- Kingdom Hearts: Birth By Sleep vs. diehard% FF4: This one was actually a no-brainer for me, and I'm surprised by the blowback. As before, Round Two reviewers are more than welcome to put FF4 diehard% on their Question 1 list.

- Any other decision where there wasn't even any meaningful disagreement on which game was the best. Yeesh, leave me alone about those ones Smiley

Cheers
--Poxnor

Good evening everyone,

First off, I'd like to thank everyone for their patience as I composed this message.  Let's call this Round 1.5 of the review process.

As the first step, let's address the big, ugly elephant in the room.  I screwed up.  Based on my misinterpretation of some things that were told to me by various people, I cut Withhelde and System Error from C4L 2014.  I would like to very humbly apologize to them, and to all the people who were upset by my mistake.  If you can accept my apology, I hope that this whole mess can be water under the bridge, and we can get back to gaming.

System Error offered one game.  As for Withhelde, she offered multiple games; it's not worth the time to dig up what the Round One reviewers said, though, because I remember the Star Ocean one was the clear (unanimous, if I recall correctly) favourite.  I have added both of those games back to the schedule.

There's one more change I have to make at this, the "Round 1.5" stage.  rinimt and MetaSigma offered to do a co-op run of Xillia.  They made an honest and good-faith effort to prepare this run, including Meta travelling over 8 hours round-trip to where rini lives to practice.  Unfortunately, even though the co-op route is similar enough to a single-player route, the execution (and hence the practice involved) is completely different.  In other words, they can't practice individually most of the time, and just schedule a few practice sessions together to solidify the co-op run (as was their honest plan).  Since a co-op run would, in fact, require frequent and extensive travel, I pulled Xillia and gave them their SO and SoE games.  It's a shame (there was a fair amount of Round One hype for a rini/Meta co-op run), but such is life.

Now, some people have asked me what Round Two is going to look like.  Previously, I said that we would be adding ~10 hrs of games back in (since everyone got one, and there was time left over for some people to get additional games).  However, with those changes I described above as "Round 1.5," we unfortunately don't get to add any games back in.

So, what will Round Two be like?  Unsurprisingly, some of my Round One decisions were [b][i]unpopular[/i][/b] (shocking, I know; News at 11 ;) ).  So, what I'm going to do is draft some questions to the people who have volunteered to be Round Two reviewers (since the whole "track" system I had planned is, ultimately, unnecessary given the perfect length this all came out to).  I think I got a good number of volunteers, so I'll use everyone who has volunteered to-date, but need no more Round Two reviewers.  These questions are simply a review of my "less-than-popular decisions," or decisions where I simply didn't have enough knowledge to feel that I decided properly, asking what (if anything) need be changed.

So that you're not all sitting on the edge of your seats (?), here is what I'm going to ask.  For the love of all that's good, don't start spamming replies into the public thread (I have Round Two reviewers lined up).  I'm just letting people know what I'm asking as an acknowledgement that I've heard the concerns and they are being addressed; and, I know if I just posted the Round Two results without telling people the questions in advance, then people would spam the thread at that point even worse.

1) Should any space open back up (e.g., someone becoming unable to attend), which games would you prioritize to add back in, and why?  Keep in mind that someone may drop out last-minute, so ideally these would be games that the runner is already good at and could pick up on little notice (i.e., avoid games that people offered to learn).

2) The "closest" decision for me, personally, was giving puwexil FF6 instead of KH2.  Would you change that decision and give him KH2 instead?  Why or why not?  Here, think of yourself as a gridiron football referee -- do you feel there's sufficient reason to overrule the Round One decision, or should we just leave well enough alone and let it stand as-is?

3) I completely misinterpreted one of the Round One referee's comments regarding Potato Handle's Wonderboy run.  It was never meant to imply that there was any inappropriate content in Wonderboy (which I -- obviously -- couldn't find in any gameplay videos, so I disregarded that referee's comment and chose Wonderboy).  Rather, the comment was meant to mean that Wonderboy is too obscure.  In the light of what the Round One referee actually meant, would you overrule my Round One decision and give Lost Odyssey to Potato Handle, or let it stand as-is with Wonderboy?  Why or why not?  (Again, think gridiron football.)

4) Is Brave Fencer Musashi an RPG (i.e., does it have any place in an RPG marathon)?  Why or why not?  Do not interpret my Round One choice of this game as a decision that it is an RPG; rather, interpret it as me not knowing the game well enough to feel like I could unilaterally cut it (like I did to Link's Awakening).  So, I'm going to decide this question based on the Round Two referees' input alone (as opposed to treating this situation as a Round One decision I intentionally made that the referees could overrule).

5) Is Skylanders Spyro's Adventure an RPG (i.e., does it have any place in an RPG marathon)?  Why or why not?  Again, as with Question 4, this is going to be decided by the Round Two referees' input alone.

6) Given that Lag.Com has the shortest game by a fairly significant margin, I personally think it would be fair to give him Ultima Underworld 2 (the sequel to the game he got, which is roughly the same length as the first) as well.  However, I did not want unilaterally to give "special treatment" to someone (especially someone who is my friend) by giving him two games.  So, I ask: do you think it is fair to give Lag.Com both the game he originally received and its sequel, to be played back-to-back?

7) Perhaps the most controversial decision I made (though that's a bit of a multi-horse race) was giving Caracarn X2.  I have since learned something that I did not know before: that the English version of X2 is inherently marathon unsafe, so the game would have to be played in Japanese.  I have also since learned that the route for X has changed since last year.  As such, I ask: would you let the Round One decision stand, even though it would have to be the Japanese version of X2 played; or, would you overrule the Round One decision for one of FF7 or FFX.  If so, which one?  Why?

I feel it's worth mentioning that there are some questions that I am not putting to the Round Two reviewers:

- Illusion of Gaia: many people (but not, to the best of my knowledge, the player) have complained about this game being cut.  It would have been cool to have the entire trilogy.  However, IoG was none of the reviewers first choice for puwexil, and the other two games in the trilogy are already making an appearance in C4L 2014.  As such, I am confident in that aspect of my decision on puwexil's game.  The Round Two reviewers are more than welcome to put IoG on their Question 1 list, however, should they wish.

- Seiken Densetsu 3 co-op: many people (but not, to the best of my knowledge, the players) have complained about this game being cut.  It would have been cool to have another trilogy (SD1 and SD2 being represented), and it would have made a great co-op run.  However, I felt DQ3 was a really strong choice for romscout (and what other marathons would ever have an old-school DQ game, if we look at C4L as a unique home for games that might not make other marathons?).  Additionally, puwexil had other strong choices.  I am confident in that decision.  The Round Two reviewers are more than welcome to put SD3 on their Question 1 list, however, should they wish.

- Kingdom Hearts: Birth By Sleep vs. diehard% FF4: This one was actually a no-brainer for me, and I'm surprised by the blowback.  As before, Round Two reviewers are more than welcome to put FF4 diehard% on their Question 1 list.

- Any other decision where there wasn't even any meaningful disagreement on which game was the best.  Yeesh, leave me alone about those ones :)

Cheers
--Poxnor

Poxnor

Edit history:

Poxnor: 2013-10-15 07:11:57 pm

2013-10-15 07:10:12 pm

Moo! Flap! Hug!

Oh, and for the record: the other people (aside from that Withhelde / System Error debacle) on the cut list simply had their games cut. I have said from day one that I was giving game priority to people who participate in the community (stream, game plan on the SDA boards, etc.). If we had a tonne of extra time to fill, I wouldn't have cut their games.

In either case, they are still more than welcome to attend. I removed them from the attendees list simply on the assumption -- sorry -- that they wouldn't want to attend without a game; but, it sounds, based on PMs, that I might be happily incorrect on that front (in other words, there is exactly zero drama happening there, so please don't invent any). Their cuts shouldn't be viewed as some sort of statement that they were involved in nefarious trafficking of cocaine in baby's stomachs while killing kittens, or anything like that.

[Edit: five bonus points to the first person to post a picture of the above crime, just so we can all have a good laugh on a Monday Smiley

]

Oh, and for the record: the other people (aside from that Withhelde / System Error debacle) on the cut list simply had their games cut.  I have said from day one that I was giving game priority to people who participate in the community (stream, game plan on the SDA boards, etc.).  If we had a tonne of extra time to fill, I wouldn't have cut their games.

In either case, they are still more than welcome to attend.  I removed them from the attendees list simply on the [i]assumption[/i] -- sorry -- that they wouldn't want to attend without a game; but, it sounds, based on PMs, that I might be happily incorrect on that front (in other words, there is exactly zero drama happening there, so please don't invent any).  Their cuts shouldn't be viewed as some sort of statement that they were involved in nefarious trafficking of cocaine in baby's stomachs while killing kittens, or anything like that.

[Edit: five bonus points to the first person to post a picture of the above crime, just so we can all have a good laugh on a Monday :) ]

Raelcun

2013-10-15 07:47:19 pm

We require more minerals

Sorry, couldn't find any suitable pictures, Pox. Too lazy to throw one together right now. Maybe later.

Vulajin

Edit history:

Vulajin: 2013-10-15 07:50:16 pm

2013-10-15 07:48:41 pm

I'm sad about the lack of Tales of Xillia, but I understand. SO4 and SoE will still be awesome runs. And it goes without saying that I'm really glad that we avoided excluding anyone based on misunderstandings. I'm really looking forward to C4L. Smiley

(btw some round 2 reviewer should push for me to get my other Pokemon run in, because it clearly isn't like the exact same game as the one I'm already doing)

(btw that's a joke)

(btw I can invent some drama about stuff if we're short)

Poxnor

2013-10-15 07:50:45 pm

Moo! Flap! Hug!

Quote from Vulajin:

(btw I can invent some drama about stuff if we're short)

Vulajin's cut Wink

Vulajin

2013-10-15 07:51:46 pm

this is bullshit you misunderstood my hilarious wit impeach Poxnor

(I have a fever atm, I'm a little loopy)

Poxnor

2013-10-15 07:52:14 pm

Moo! Flap! Hug!

Quote from Vulajin:

impeach Poxnor

Poxnor's cut.