1-Up!
Game Page: Doesn't exist yet
Final Fantasy Anniversary Edition (Any %) (Single Segment)
Verifier Responses
Decision: Reject
Reason: Not quite the quality we're looking for
This run will be available for a month. After that this link will no longer work.
http://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/queue/verificationfiles/445
Final Fantasy Anniversary Edition (Any %) (Single Segment)
Verifier Responses
Quote:
First off, there was no cheating involved, the large sum of money was due to the use of the equipment glitch.
Audio and video are fine.
However....this run as all sorts of issues that the runner himself comments. Yes there's tons of RNG but even then there's a few things I think the runner could have done to make it better. The Nightmares are a good example -- he comments on how hard they are to run from...yet still tries to run from them all but twice. Considering how quickly they can be taken out, it seems less beneficial to try running at all. But more importantly, the fact he doesn't do it twice makes it look very bad, IMO.
I also think there's a couple spots in Mt. Gulug he could have avoided potential encounter spaces, but I'm willing to assume it's mentally easier to not do that.
I also assume the red mage couldn't learn haste when he was at Elfland the first time.
But yeah, unfortunetly everything adds up. The high encoutnter rate (VERY obvious to anyone who knows the game, especially considering the number of times he comments on it), having SO many bosses giving bad luck (it's not a big deal a couple times....but when like 8 of them do...), bad puzzle time (runner's fault), losing 13 seconds because of forgetting you have something (also runners fault), and just a lot of long lasting ambushes....it really makes me want to put it in the reject pile.
Audio and video are fine.
However....this run as all sorts of issues that the runner himself comments. Yes there's tons of RNG but even then there's a few things I think the runner could have done to make it better. The Nightmares are a good example -- he comments on how hard they are to run from...yet still tries to run from them all but twice. Considering how quickly they can be taken out, it seems less beneficial to try running at all. But more importantly, the fact he doesn't do it twice makes it look very bad, IMO.
I also think there's a couple spots in Mt. Gulug he could have avoided potential encounter spaces, but I'm willing to assume it's mentally easier to not do that.
I also assume the red mage couldn't learn haste when he was at Elfland the first time.
But yeah, unfortunetly everything adds up. The high encoutnter rate (VERY obvious to anyone who knows the game, especially considering the number of times he comments on it), having SO many bosses giving bad luck (it's not a big deal a couple times....but when like 8 of them do...), bad puzzle time (runner's fault), losing 13 seconds because of forgetting you have something (also runners fault), and just a lot of long lasting ambushes....it really makes me want to put it in the reject pile.
Quote:
Cheating: None
A/V : Fine
the run is under SDA and TASvideos standards by a mile. Nightmares are impossible to escape from, he tries to do otherwise only to lose minutes. multiple ambushes, forgetting he had something, bad puzzles, a majority of the bosses being trolls and extremely high encounter rates make the run an easy REJECT. Also, you could have used BANE sword on Chaos, the 4 rematches and Kary 1st battle, which would have put it into the accept pile.
EDIT: Names referring to NES version
A/V : Fine
the run is under SDA and TASvideos standards by a mile. Nightmares are impossible to escape from, he tries to do otherwise only to lose minutes. multiple ambushes, forgetting he had something, bad puzzles, a majority of the bosses being trolls and extremely high encounter rates make the run an easy REJECT. Also, you could have used BANE sword on Chaos, the 4 rematches and Kary 1st battle, which would have put it into the accept pile.
EDIT: Names referring to NES version
Quote:
No cheating, audio/video quality is fine.
This was really hard to decide on. The runner clearly shows new techniques and this is the best known record. On the other hand, it still has a lot of bad luck and some questionable decision making. Here's a little breakdown I made of things which led to time lost. Bear in mind that this is being compared to an impossible ideal.
179 random encounters ~ 14:55
9 ambushes ~ 1:30
11 failures to run ~ 1:50
10 casts of Flare ~ 1:00
2 casts of Blizzaga ~ 0:06
15 melee kills ~ 0:45
6 unnecessary menu uses ~ 0:10
3 hard to run away ~ 0:15
TOTAL ~ 20:31
So, 20 minutes of 'mistakes'... that's quite a lot against the time of this run. Eliminating all random encounters is impossible in a single-segment run anyway, but this run has so many that at least 5 minutes of that delay is still relevant. So about 10 minutes of a 97 minute run...
I'm afraid I have to reject this submission, but it was very, very close to an accept.
This was really hard to decide on. The runner clearly shows new techniques and this is the best known record. On the other hand, it still has a lot of bad luck and some questionable decision making. Here's a little breakdown I made of things which led to time lost. Bear in mind that this is being compared to an impossible ideal.
179 random encounters ~ 14:55
9 ambushes ~ 1:30
11 failures to run ~ 1:50
10 casts of Flare ~ 1:00
2 casts of Blizzaga ~ 0:06
15 melee kills ~ 0:45
6 unnecessary menu uses ~ 0:10
3 hard to run away ~ 0:15
TOTAL ~ 20:31
So, 20 minutes of 'mistakes'... that's quite a lot against the time of this run. Eliminating all random encounters is impossible in a single-segment run anyway, but this run has so many that at least 5 minutes of that delay is still relevant. So about 10 minutes of a 97 minute run...
I'm afraid I have to reject this submission, but it was very, very close to an accept.
Decision: Reject
Reason: Not quite the quality we're looking for
This run will be available for a month. After that this link will no longer work.
http://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/queue/verificationfiles/445
Thread title: