Gemfire - April 24th, 2013

Flip

Edit history:

Flip: 2013-04-24 09:57:52 pm

Flip: 2013-04-24 09:57:24 pm

Flip: 2013-04-10 12:35:56 pm

Flip: 2013-04-10 12:35:17 pm

Flip: 2013-04-10 12:21:56 pm

2013-04-07 02:58:54 pm

1-Up!

Game Page: Doesn't exist yet

Gemfire (Any %) (Single Segment) [Gemfire: Scenario 4]

Decision: Accept

Congratulations to Scott 'Scottimus432' Collins!

Thread title:

Flip

2013-04-07 02:58:55 pm

1-Up!

Run Information

Gemfire (Any %) (Single Segment) [Gemfire: Scenario 4]

Verification Files

http://v.speeddemosarchive.com/gemfire-v_HQ.mp4

Please refer to the Verification Guidelines before posting. Verifications are due by April 21, 2013.

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.

After 2 weeks I will read all of the verifications and move this thread to the main verification board and post my verdict.

ZenicReverie

2013-04-07 10:46:04 pm

Waiting hurts my soul...

This is a hard one to judge. Having never played the game, I don't know all the options available; however, the comments illustrate a solid strategy. Play quality seems good. If it was based solely on that then I'd say accept.

I'm concerned about the video quality. There are a 4 - 5 instances where a couple frames are missing or degraded. A couple remind me of the days of VHS recording where the tape has been recorded over many times and there's some tearing in the video. If no one else finds this very severe, then I'm okay with seeing this accepted, but I have reservations.

Would each family in each scenario be a different category?

UraniumAnchor

Edit history:

UraniumAnchor: 2013-04-08 12:27:08 am

UraniumAnchor: 2013-04-08 12:15:47 am

2013-04-08 12:00:37 am

Not a walrus

First reaction is 'no', but not being familiar with this game I'm not even sure the different scenarios are different categories either. Not sure how different they are. Is it a different map or just a different arrangement of initial claims?

Edit: Video skips:

8:30ish and another shortly after that screws up the audio sync.
Another one at 11:45ish that seems to fix the sync.
Another at 16:00ish.

That's all I've seen so far. None of them look particularly bad (one of the old Duck Tales runs had far worse issues), but I think a flat penalty needs to be applied to each one since we can't tell exactly how much video was lost. The audio sync loss is probably fixable for that one section. I'll have more to say after I've watched the remainder of the run.

Hsanrb

2013-04-08 05:45:42 pm

Outside of video issues at the points listed, theres also 21m, and a bunch between 30-32m and sprinkled bobs (or whatever technical jargon) around the battles. Most of which seemed to have kept in sync with the audio. Pending any penalties. Timing starts around 00:22 and ends at 40:37

Everything looks in place, theres quite alot of menuing issues that could be cleaned up. All the strats look ok, all the AI was manipulated right and units are put in position to capitalize. In terms of video lost, it didn't look like it skipped much. Theres no half second chunks torn out, looked mostly frames at best.

If the video audio sync between 8 and 12 can be fixed its acceptable. Otherwise that issue might hold it back.

PS: Some who actually knows the game audio outside of syncing could probably help b/c this sounds nothing like the Genesis version. Catagory would probably be Scenario 4: Gemfire Family Lyle. Scenarios are enough to be separate catagories. Familes are more case by case but with how powerful gunners turned out to be not sure theres much changes outside of less territories to plunder for 5ths.

Outside of video issues at the points listed, theres also 21m, and a bunch between 30-32m and sprinkled bobs (or whatever technical jargon) around the battles. Most of which seemed to have kept in sync with the audio. Pending any penalties. Timing starts around 00:22 and ends at 40:37

Everything looks in place, theres quite alot of menuing issues that could be cleaned up. All the strats look ok, all the AI was manipulated right and units are put in position to capitalize. In terms of video lost, it didn't look like it skipped much. Theres no half second chunks torn out, looked mostly frames at best.

If the video audio sync between 8 and 12 can be fixed its acceptable. Otherwise that issue might hold it back.

PS: Some who actually knows the game audio outside of syncing could probably help b/c this sounds nothing like the Genesis version. Catagory would probably be Scenario 4: Gemfire Family Lyle. Scenarios are enough to be separate catagories. Familes are more case by case but with how powerful gunners turned out to be not sure theres much changes outside of less territories to plunder for 5ths.

LotBlind

Edit history:

LotBlind: 2013-04-10 03:21:30 am

LotBlind: 2013-04-10 03:18:24 am

LotBlind: 2013-04-10 03:17:43 am

2013-04-09 12:19:21 pm

(FINISHED COMMENT)

Judging by the run commentary, every family in every scenario would definitely have to count for a different category. The other way to look at it would be to say "Here's the game, find the fastest way to beat it, including choosing the fastest scenario and family", but maybe that could be compared to beating a single one of the campaigns for Heroes of Might and Magic X. From my point of view it's too much to ask for to treat all those combinations as "IL's" and ask the runner to fill the table. I think it's not a problem what the runner has done.

The game feels like something fitting a TAS perfectly if as the runner says the order of turns is predetermined. Another category would be "scouting" in a segmented run as in saving/loading/seeing the order/reloading. That would be similar to Diablo [2] runs where the map is surveyed at first. But I digress.

The run commentary gives the impression of knowing the game very well. And he's clearly abusing the AI in the battles a lot. Nice example at around 10:50 when he's making the opposing troops neurotically construct the same fence over and over again while he gets free shots off every turn.

----

A/V STUFF

Based on the way the music skips ahead several beats at a time during the video hassle it IS more than just a couple frames lost here and there.

3:04 - around 4 beats skipped. bpm 176 (map theme 1)
6:00 - 3½ beats at 137 bpm (battle tune)
8:31 - 5 beats 137 bpm
8:52 - 3½ beats 137
11:45 - 5 beats 176
16:00 - 4 beats 137
20:36 - 2 beats 108 (battle tune 2)
21:20 - 2 beats 108
21:42 - 3 beats 108
25:29 - 2 beats 108
26:49 - 3½ beats 108

and no more until the credits, at which point they don't count. So those are all instances of lost footage and have to be taken into account in the timing. The total using my estimate is around

9 beats at 176 + 16 beats at 137 + 12½ beats at 108
~~ 3.06s + 7.01s + 6.94s
~~ 17s

I double-checked everything. That should be a valid estimate. The runner (in the comment below) says his recording device dropped 30 frames during the recording, which would add up to another half a second wouldn't it?

desync 8:52-?
It seems weird how there is a clear desync in the fight starting at 12:03, it improves a bit by the start of the fight at 12:33, and then seems to correct itself by the end of the fight without any skips that I could notice. The troops' marching sound usually starts when they've already moved through around 1 whole square. That's how it is at the start of the video and also when I tried the game in an emulator.

Maybe there's a weird lag in the game itself? Or maybe the... umm... Techies?

So all in all the A/V is a mess. In case this is accepted now, the runner must be expected to overcome the issues for any future submissions. I suggest consulting the tech wizards at the tech forum if necessary.

----

If timing is supposed to start at when the initial options have been selected and the actual game is starting, then it is indeed at 00:22 and the last time you have to hit the X button before the credits seems indeed to be at 40:36 or 7.

And all in all, I'd say this sort of entry is too much of a hassle for the verifiers to be accepted routinely, but in this particular case you can easily tell what happened during the time lost in the video skips. Also the run has generally good execution. I noticed at 36:11, if I learned enough about how the game works from watching the submission, I thought you could probably have won the fight a little sooner by using Chylla first to take out the merc units, then attacking the archers from behind with the cavalry, bringing them down to maybe about 16 units, which is already one-shottable by Chylla the next turn. But that's about the sort of improvement you could find, as far as I can see. Also, I'm biased towards the game because it has really good music Smiley

So I'm ready to

accept.

(FINISHED COMMENT)

Judging by the run commentary, every family in every scenario would definitely have to count for a different category. The other way to look at it would be to say "Here's the game, find the fastest way to beat it, including choosing the fastest scenario and family", but maybe that could be compared to beating a single one of the campaigns for Heroes of Might and Magic X. From my point of view it's too much to ask for to treat all those combinations as "IL's" and ask the runner to fill the table. I think it's not a problem what the runner has done.

The game feels like something fitting a TAS perfectly if as the runner says the order of turns is predetermined. Another category would be "scouting" in a segmented run as in saving/loading/seeing the order/reloading. That would be similar to Diablo [2] runs where the map is surveyed at first. But I digress.

The run commentary gives the impression of knowing the game very well. And he's clearly abusing the AI in the battles a lot. Nice example at around 10:50 when he's making the opposing troops neurotically construct the same fence over and over again while he gets free shots off every turn.

----

A/V STUFF

Based on the way the music skips ahead several beats at a time during the video hassle it IS more than just a couple frames lost here and there.

3:04 - around 4 beats skipped. bpm 176 (map theme 1)
6:00 - 3½ beats at 137 bpm (battle tune)
8:31 - 5 beats 137 bpm
8:52 - 3½ beats 137
11:45 - 5 beats 176
16:00 - 4 beats 137
20:36 - 2 beats 108 (battle tune 2)
21:20 - 2 beats 108
21:42 - 3 beats 108
25:29 - 2 beats 108
26:49 - 3½ beats 108

and no more until the credits, at which point they don't count. So those are all instances of lost footage and have to be taken into account in the timing. The total using my estimate is around

9 beats at 176 + 16 beats at 137 + 12½ beats at 108
~~ 3.06s + 7.01s + 6.94s
~~ 17s

I double-checked everything. That should be a valid estimate. The runner (in the comment below) says his recording device dropped 30 frames during the recording, which would add up to another half a second wouldn't it?

desync 8:52-?
It seems weird how there is a clear desync in the fight starting at 12:03, it improves a bit by the start of the fight at 12:33, and then seems to correct itself by the end of the fight without any skips that I could notice. The troops' marching sound usually starts when they've already moved through around 1 whole square. That's how it is at the start of the video and also when I tried the game in an emulator.

Maybe there's a weird lag in the game itself? Or maybe the... umm... Techies?

So all in all the A/V is a mess. In case this is accepted now, the runner must be expected to overcome the issues for any future submissions. I suggest consulting the tech wizards at the tech forum if necessary.

----

If timing is supposed to start at when the initial options have been selected and the actual game is starting, then it is indeed at 00:22 and the last time you have to hit the X button before the credits seems indeed to be at 40:36 or 7.

And all in all, I'd say this sort of entry is too much of a hassle for the verifiers to be accepted routinely, but in this particular case you can easily tell what happened during the time lost in the video skips. Also the run has generally good execution. I noticed at 36:11, if I learned enough about how the game works from watching the submission, I thought you could probably have won the fight a little sooner by using Chylla first to take out the merc units, then attacking the archers from behind with the cavalry, bringing them down to maybe about 16 units, which is already one-shottable by Chylla the next turn. But that's about the sort of improvement you could find, as far as I can see. Also, I'm biased towards the game because it has really good music :)

So I'm ready to

accept.

scottimu5

2013-04-09 07:24:13 pm

You guys are right about the video skips. At the time I was using my dazzle as a capture card and my snes was in rough shape. I don't have a tremendous amount of experience with video editing so when I noticed the audio/video issues I wasn't sure if it was a syncronization problem or just lost footage. I do remember however that my dazzle recognized approximately 30 frames dropped, apart from the usual 5 or 6. I actually do remember from the run that my Super Nintendo signal was popping from time to time and I could actually see it for a split second while I was playing. Sorry for the quality, I calmed my computer as much as I could while recording.

Hsanrb

2013-04-10 06:34:31 am

Quote from LotBlind:

desync 8:52-?
It seems weird how there is a clear desync in the fight starting at 12:03, it improves a bit by the start of the fight at 12:33, and then seems to correct itself by the end of the fight without any skips that I could notice. The troops' marching sound usually starts when they've already moved through around 1 whole square. That's how it is at the start of the video and also when I tried the game in an emulator.

Maybe there's a weird lag in the game itself? Or maybe the... umm... Techies?

Theres parts of the video where the image seems to shift down and back up (the entire image, not just a sprite) and usually after something like that does the sync go back in line. It happens almost every time A/V resyncs

I'm watching again and I noticed the video/audio desyncs again around 22m If you compare the Fachan at the start of the fight to after the A/V issue at 21:42 the sound to movement timing is different. Also I think another A/V desync is after the music skip you pointed out at 26:49. You can tell b/c you hear a unit moving before the cursor ordering a unit where to go is still on screen.

[quote="LotBlind"]
desync 8:52-?
It seems weird how there is a clear desync in the fight starting at 12:03, it improves a bit by the start of the fight at 12:33, and then seems to correct itself by the end of the fight without any skips that I could notice. The troops' marching sound usually starts when they've already moved through around 1 whole square. That's how it is at the start of the video and also when I tried the game in an emulator.

Maybe there's a weird lag in the game itself? Or maybe the... umm... Techies?
[/quote]

Theres parts of the video where the image seems to shift down and back up (the entire image, not just a sprite) and usually after something like that does the sync go back in line. It happens almost every time A/V resyncs

I'm watching again and I noticed the video/audio desyncs again around 22m If you compare the Fachan at the start of the fight to after the A/V issue at 21:42 the sound to movement timing is different. Also I think another A/V desync is after the music skip you pointed out at 26:49. You can tell b/c you hear a unit moving before the cursor ordering a unit where to go is still on screen.

LotBlind

2013-04-10 11:58:46 am

I see what you're pointing at I think. Yes, there's more desync than just the first time. I didn't really notice cause by then I was just listening for skips in the music.

UraniumAnchor

2013-04-10 12:04:14 pm

Not a walrus

Quote from scottimu5:

You guys are right about the video skips. At the time I was using my dazzle as a capture card and my snes was in rough shape. I don't have a tremendous amount of experience with video editing so when I noticed the audio/video issues I wasn't sure if it was a syncronization problem or just lost footage. I do remember however that my dazzle recognized approximately 30 frames dropped, apart from the usual 5 or 6. I actually do remember from the run that my Super Nintendo signal was popping from time to time and I could actually see it for a split second while I was playing. Sorry for the quality, I calmed my computer as much as I could while recording.

I'm not sure how hard it would be to try to record the run again because you're probably going to get penalized a bit for all the video skips, but I don't think it's reject worthy. At this point I'd say it's up to you if you want to try again with a less temperamental setup.

After watching the rest of the run I didn't spot anything that seemed out of place but I admit I've never played this game before so the precise mechanics are a bit beyond me. Gonna say accept for now unless somebody can point out any large improvements.

[quote="scottimu5"]You guys are right about the video skips. At the time I was using my dazzle as a capture card and my snes was in rough shape. I don't have a tremendous amount of experience with video editing so when I noticed the audio/video issues I wasn't sure if it was a syncronization problem or just lost footage. I do remember however that my dazzle recognized approximately 30 frames dropped, apart from the usual 5 or 6. I actually do remember from the run that my Super Nintendo signal was popping from time to time and I could actually see it for a split second while I was playing. Sorry for the quality, I calmed my computer as much as I could while recording. [/quote]

I'm not sure how hard it would be to try to record the run again because you're probably going to get penalized a bit for all the video skips, but I don't think it's reject worthy. At this point I'd say it's up to you if you want to try again with a less temperamental setup.

After watching the rest of the run I didn't spot anything that seemed out of place but I admit I've never played this game before so the precise mechanics are a bit beyond me. Gonna say accept for now unless somebody can point out any large improvements.

UraniumAnchor

Edit history:

UraniumAnchor: 2013-04-10 12:28:17 pm

UraniumAnchor: 2013-04-10 12:28:06 pm

2013-04-10 12:27:58 pm

Not a walrus

Did you mean to post this one so soon? Second post says April 21st.

Flip

Edit history:

Flip: 2013-04-10 12:36:40 pm

2013-04-10 12:34:29 pm

1-Up!

I'm on fire with the mistakes this week.

...aaaand back to your regularly scheduled verification.

UraniumAnchor

2013-04-10 12:37:43 pm

Not a walrus

Nobody can say you're underworked. Tongue

scottimu5

2013-04-10 08:57:22 pm

I wont have time to redo it, unfortunately. It's up to you guys whether to keep it. I dont mind either way. I think it was the cart giving me trouble and setting off my dazzle. At one point the colors changed on my game. If this is the worst example of a submission you have seen then I understand a rejection.

UraniumAnchor

2013-04-10 10:38:27 pm

Not a walrus

Nah, not even close to worst example. Definitely try to fix it if you do any more runs in the future, though.

The worst example I can think of in recent memory was the infamous Knytt Stories run, which had tin can audio, a giant water mark, a visible mouse pointer in a game that doesn't use a mouse, and a really terrible frame rate. Sadly(?) the files are long gone.

JackintheBox333

2013-04-11 01:59:13 am

Professional Shaq Fu Speedrunner

I have the files for that Knytt Stories "run" still. I can repost them somewhere for a laugh, but the video quality of the files in that are far worse than this. As for the video quality in this? It's okay except for the video skips.

As for this game? I don't know this game at all. I've never heard of it before this either. The combat looks kinda similar to Fire Emblem though. It appears that the runner took advantage of the AI fairly well. I don't really have much to say on the combat, as it looks fairly straightforward and the runner plowed through each battle as quickly as the plodding interface would allow. As someone who plays these type of games, this is not something I could play as it is way too plodding and slow with the interface, but the quality of play demonstrated in this is fine.

Accept

Flip

2013-04-24 09:57:36 pm

1-Up!

Decision Posted... for real this time. >_>