Roll Eyes
Lips Sealed
1 page
List results:
Search options:
Use \ before commas in usernames
Game Page:

Jumper: Redux (Any %) (Single Segment) (Normal)

Verifier Responses

Quote from Lhexa:
Audio is fine, no cheating that I can detect.  However, the gameplay area is a tiny section of the screen, which would require extra editing.  No cheating, by the looks of it.

There are three minutes of aborted attempts at the start.
3:33 -- Timing starts.  (Two seconds early?)

2-3 -- A new strategy, jumping over the entire bottom section of the level.  Nice.
2-5 -- A couple of minor mistakes.
3-3 -- A neat glitch causes the gate to go flying off the screen.
3-4 -- Why can't the same glitch be used here?
3-5 -- Gate glitch again.  Also, Ogmo hits the moving platform while jumping onto it, causing it to change directions early.  Nice trick.
3-6 -- Gate glitch.
4-3 -- Does the gates out of their normal order, saving a bit of time (since you don't have to do the difficult descent after the first).
5-3 -- One death, plus a mistake that forces the player to wait for arrows to refresh.
6-4 -- Two deaths.
6-5 -- One death (well, a reset).
6-6 -- Two deaths (at the same spot, no less).  Also some hesitation.
7-2 -- One death.

14:22 -- Timing ends.

The gate glitch and a couple of new strategies save time over the old run, but the quality of play is lower: seven deaths versus four, and the deaths are more costly on average.  However, it's still an immensely difficult game, and I personally would have accepted these seven deaths in an original submission.  So I'm going to vote a weak accept.

Quote from Onin:
A run like this is always a difficult call. It's faster than the posted run, which should make it an automatic accept. But its increase in speed only comes from the use of a glitch that requires no input from the runner.

Comparing the execution, this run has optimized strats for several individual levels. But, it has several more deaths than the existing run, and some of them are extremely costly and honestly a bit painful. A deathless Jumper run is unlikely to happen, but six deaths costing over a minute of time on a 10-minute run is just not perfect enough.

I know you can get sub-10. I know you want to.

Quote from UraniumAnchor:
A/V is... well, it's mostly ok, but this is an uncropped capture of the player's entire desktop. The relevant stuff could be cropped out so it's not a huge deal, but OBS *does* let you do window specific capture... and some of the busier screens suffer from a not-high-enough bitrate, but not really unwatchably so I suppose. Still, these should probably be corrected in the future.

I say in the future because while there's some nice strategy improvements here that save a fair bit of time, quite a bit of time is lost over the current SDA run because costly deaths, most of them in Sector 6, which means I'm going to reject this. Watching the two side by side, this one had a pretty clear lead up until Sector 6, and after that the gap is much smaller. While there are a lot of little micro-optimizations over the current run, the mistakes are far, far worse on average.

So in short, the time savings mostly come from improved strategy and not better play quality. I have to ask myself if I'd accept this run if I didn't have to compare it to the current run, and that's definitely a no. While normally I'd say it's improvement and should be accepted, this run only saves about 20 seconds off of the current run when it "should" save over a minute. I don't think I can accept a play quality gap that large.

Reject for now, but I definitely think with more polish this would be a worthy replacement.

Quote from Arcanod:
Video: pretty good (except it has to be cropped out)
Audio: excellent
No cheating
Time: ~10:46.750

As I said on the Youtube page, this run is an achievement, but it would be actually slower than mine without taking advantage of the gate glitch. In other words, the final time is better but the execution –better or worse, I'm not sure– includes several costly deaths and mistakes. On the good side, I was hasty "back in the day" and made several planning mistakes (which were pointed out by JaggerG in the verification topic). The runner sets things right on that matter and doesn't reproduce most of them. On the other side, the six deaths cost ~67 s while my four deaths cost ~24 s, and there are a few other important slowdowns.

2-3: right planning.
2-4: excellent.
2-5: small mistake.
3-2: it's a bit harder but very possible to take only the first arrow.
3-5: excellent.
3-6: can be done a bit faster.
4-1: the 3rd jump comes a bit late, but good otherwise.
4-2: very good.
4-3: clever, but it's actually slightly faster to do it the regular way (and it's safe).
4-5: right planning.
4-6: right planning. It's a pretty hard jump.
5-2: small planning mistake.
5-3: death followed by an execution mistake, hardly forgivable (and the runner seems to be undecided between going on or not). Big time loss.
5-4: right planning.
5-6: a bit messed up !
6-1: the hardest jump in the game on the first try, well done.
6-2: good but it's possible to jump over the first flame.
6-3: can be done faster (with more risks, of course).
6-4: two deaths, the first one being very common. Some unecessary moves.
6-5: okay, the reset is allowed by the rules, but it looks pretty ugly IMO. This level need more practice.
6-6: a pretty hard jump, but not that hard. Two deaths is a lot.
7-2: this death is almost as ridiculous as my old one on level 5.1 !
7-3: very good.
7-4: excellent.

Sorry but I'll giving a (rather weak) reject. Despite the positive side, this run is kind of a regression: number of deaths & time lost.
I'm confident that the runner will improve this time significantly.

Decision: Reject

Reason: Despite being an improvement, the improvements come from better routes, the actual execution has some pretty glaring flaws when compared to the incumbent run.

This run will be available for a month. After that these link(s) will no longer work.
Thread title: