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
<- 1234567
--
--
List results:
Search options:
Use \ before commas in usernames
Totally rad
Rather than doing one fare at a time, you can make the game count it as doing 2 fares at the same time (normally not possible without the glitch).

In GTA3, you can make a single fare count up to 4 times at the same time. It severely breaks several missions late into the game (e.g., making friendly AI aggressive), but does drastically speed up the taxi fares, and breaking the missions is irrelevant if the fares are left till the end.
Breaking the later missions can also be beneficial, such as a counter saying you killed 17382 out of 10 Diablos. It is still irrelevant though, as long as you can get the mission passed screen for each particular mission to show up and the % to be rewarded, it shouldn't matter much how it is done, as long as it is done.

Still I think 'is it allowed?' is a rather unnecessary question to ask, since all the runners say taxi fare duping is allowed.

Just wondering how well it fits within the definition mentioned in that footnote on that page.
Not a walrus
Yeah, if the only thing that actually contributes to the % is the mission as a whole being completed I'd say that's good enough. Not sure how to clarify that in the footnote, though (if it even needs to be). Maybe I should just link this thread in the footnote.
Edit history:
Efreeti: 2014-10-28 07:22:55 am
Clear as a crisp spring morning!
As someone who was a verifier on the submitted run I felt obligated to read through this entire thread after I came back from a weekend business trip. This was a wild ride.

I'd say, if duping not for the sake of mission completion itself, but duping an action that counts toward an individual mission's completion is ok in one case (Jury Fury) it should be okay for taxi fares.
So there's one thing I'm confused about; if this run was always gonna be rejected, why bother putting it through verification?
SEGA Junkie
Well, the point is that the verifiers were the first ones to see the run. Clearly those responses brought up some red flags (seven hours faster run than the one up on site? mission duping?) that got the staff interested, and they determined that the run doesn't beat the game, which is unambiguously grounds for a reject. If it had happened the other way around, you're right, it never would have got to verification. (This has happened in the past...)

On an unrelated note, considering the hostility with which this thread started I'm really pleased that it ended up quite amicable and that a solid understanding was reached. \o/
Heh, amateurs...
The hostility might have been avoided had the staff or moderators posed a question to the verifiers in a private thread if or when there was any doubt. Its not bad that questions were raised when there was such a huge time difference between past runs. All the public posts were an accept decision (with perhaps a minor neutral feeling maybe). After all, SDA does have a sizeable amount of GTA speedrunners, streamers, and fanatics to help with that.