Luck vs execution question

2013-05-14 04:39:13 am

Personal text

Hopefully this is the correct board to post this under.

I was just wondering, which of the following runs would you prefer to have on your site?

1. Just decent execution overall, but really good luck, resulting in a great time.
2. Excellent execution all around, but bad luck, resulting in a slightly slower time.

That is all Smiley

Thread title:

Sir VG

2013-05-14 04:55:53 am

Fucking Weeaboo

We want the fastest time, plain and simple. If it's a result of good luck or good execution, doesn't matter. But generally, it should be a mix of both.

Softman25

2013-05-14 05:11:04 am

Funnily enough - one of my runs actually suffers from this "issue"

True Crime: Streets of LA is huge on luck - as cars are retained over missions - so swapping out for the faster cars are preferred...however the trick is whether they spawn or not. Insert RNG here.

Essentially, the run I submitted was not the most perfect execution, however the luck was insane - resulting in a time I believe is incredibly good. I therefore submitted it.

So in direct response - I must echo Sir VG - time is more important - but obviously the execution still has to be above par! Tongue

puwexil

2013-05-14 08:12:04 am

Professional Second Banana

At the end of the day it all comes down to what produces a faster time, though a submitted run with poor execution may get rejected by the verifiers even if the RNG luck is good.

Personally, I value execution a bit more highly, especially in longer runs where getting consistently good luck isn't going to happen.

Bl00dyBizkitz

2013-05-14 08:43:45 am

I suppose it depends from person to person what is valued more. Some games are entirely based on RNG, and some games are just about 99% based on execution. But pretty much what everyone else said, it doesn't matter how you got it, time is the important thing.

MAS8705

2013-05-14 09:03:15 am

SDA Apprentice -- (3-1)

Quote from Sir VG:

We want the fastest time, plain and simple. If it's a result of good luck or good execution, doesn't matter. But generally, it should be a mix of both.

That summarizes one of my failed submittions. Towards the end of my run, I failed to execute a jump and it cost me some time, and during the final fight, I got bombarded with rockets. While it can sometimes be one or the other, like what Sir VG said, it should be a mix of both since you can't be lucky all the time if you can't do the run properly (and how even if you know every single mechanic of the game, if it comes down to a luck of the draw, you better have your fingers crossed.)

zewing

2013-05-14 11:15:29 am

just( •_•)>⌐■-■ ..... (⌐■_■)wing it

Execution over luck. Regardless of how fast the run is if you have poor execution no one will want to watch it.

Onin

2013-05-14 11:24:26 am

If we're talking SS, it can also depend on when the good/bad luck takes place. The first, say, 10 minutes of your run can be expected to be of above-average luck, while one hour into the run a bump of bad luck can be excused if it doesn't ruin the run entirely. Execution, on the other hand, should be expected to be consistent throughout the run, no matter how long it is - though consistent doesn't have to mean perfect.

As for segmented runs, there's really no excuse not to aim for near-perfect luck, or as good as reasonable, anyway.

Flip

Edit history:

Flip: 2013-05-14 11:53:11 am

2013-05-14 11:52:16 am

1-Up!

As others have said, the answer is neither totally 1 or 2. I will say from my experience that a run is much more likely to be rejected for sub-par execution than for sub-par luck. The importance of luck is ultimately decided on by each game's community. It's generally agreed upon that bad luck at the end of an otherwise good run is more permissible than bad luck at the beginning of a run ("Why didn't you just reset?").

edit: Moral of the story is utilize the forums or IRC or something to stay in touch with your game's community. Remember - the people who discuss your run with you often become your verifiers. If you know their standards ahead of time then you won't be in for a nasty surprise during verification.

Blubbler

2013-05-14 04:26:38 pm

So what if someone does something very unlikely like 1:1000000 but otherwise plays really really badly. It's the WR and will most likely never be beaten, but it's very ugly. Accept it or not? Imho yes, only the time matters.

I have no name

2013-05-14 05:40:48 pm

Obscure games ftw

Execution matters more than luck but the final time matters above all else.

Though I get annoyed when my times get beaten by someone who played worse and got luckier and I feel cheap when I get a better time for the same reasons.

Rakuen

2013-05-14 08:15:33 pm

Weegee Time

Quote from Blubbler:

So what if someone does something very unlikely like 1:1000000 but otherwise plays really really badly. It's the WR and will most likely never be beaten, but it's very ugly. Accept it or not? Imho yes, only the time matters.

Improvements can be rejected for poor play quality, regardless of the timing. That said, it's ultimately up to the verifiers. If the performance was near the current run or whatever other measuring stick there is, I'd probably accept. Otherwise I'd lean toward rejection. I couldn't know for sure until I was in that position.

kirbymastah

2013-05-14 08:42:25 pm

<(^_^)>

Quote from Blubbler:

So what if someone does something very unlikely like 1:1000000 but otherwise plays really really badly. It's the WR and will most likely never be beaten, but it's very ugly. Accept it or not? Imho yes, only the time matters.

I hate it when people suggest things like this. They seem to suggest that there isn't "any skill" involved with RNG-heavy speed runs, and they use a ridiculously extreme example that will never ever happen.

Again I think most people would agree execution is more important than RNG, but the most important thing is time. I'm not going to be satisfied with a run with perfect execution but the worst RNG ever, and likewise with crap execution but perfect RNG.

zewing

2013-05-14 09:01:10 pm

just( •_•)>⌐■-■ ..... (⌐■_■)wing it

go watch mmx speedruns. that's where you will see perfect execution don't mean shit unless you get luck. though none of us will ever submit a mmx speedrun unless it has both aspects in check

kirbymastah

2013-05-14 09:04:47 pm

<(^_^)>

Haha yeah zewing, I've seen you lose far too many runs just to luck :/ Honestly though, with execution-based runs, the fact that we say "it just comes down to luck" just shows how optimized we speedrunners are nowadays.

tminator64

2013-05-14 10:18:07 pm

I'd prefer to see good execution. As for the luck aspect, when I watch a run, I cannot really tell what is considered lucky, so that never really phases me.

For Viewtiful Joe though, I've intentionally held back on submitting runs because they just "look" bad even if the time just so happens to be better. And like zewing said, having both execution and luck in check is important to me as well. Probably not as important in VJ as it is in MMX, but the point still stands.

Then again, I'm a fan of trying to make myself look stylish on video Cheesy

Patashu

2013-05-14 10:43:27 pm

One thing to note is that it's not just how good or bad your luck is, but how good or bad the luck makes you LOOK. As in:

1) Does the luck make you look good (gives you a bad pattern forcing you to execute more and look hella awesome)
2) Does the luck make you look neutral (just have to wait longer)
3) Does the luck make you look bad (uncontrollable death/damage/loss)

ahuynh

2013-05-30 10:11:18 pm

If you have the ability to get a fast time with poor luck, then what's preventing you from retrying and getting a faster run with a bit better "luck"? Of course, the answer isn't so simple. I'm doing a run(currently on hiatus unfortunately) where my latest segment ended with an amazing situation that was the first time that happened along with practically perfect execution through the entire segment. However, the previous segment had several mistakes that I want to go back to redo, but that means I need to also redo the segment afterwards. In the end, I am probably going to choose a situation with slightly worse luck because I'm not sure if it's worth resetting over and over for something that is pretty much 100% luck.

Champloo

2013-06-02 10:21:01 am

Getting good RNG vs. getting good execution.

Every good run will have good RNG and good execution. When you see a run with a good time, RNG, and execution, you can say that a runner has essentially practiced enough to the point where all they are doing is repeating the run for good RNG. Few games are execution only, RNG actually makes a game require more execution (in terms of consistency). That being said some games have lower ceilings for execution; there's not as much execution that can be done to save time in an RPG as there is in a platformer, usually.

As far as the entertainment value of the run goes, RNG/execution isn't really intrinsic to the entertainment value of the run. Many games are boring to be ran or watched ran. When you say you prefer to see good rng or good execution you have to really understand that game in order to make that statement and understand the run in that perspective.

So it really doesn't matter, as far as I'm concerned; some games are just boring to watch, even if you know the execution is difficult or the RNG is hard to get perfect.

Getting good RNG vs. getting good execution.

Every good run will have good RNG and good execution. When you see a run with a good time, RNG, and execution, you can say that a runner has essentially practiced enough to the point where all they are doing is repeating the run for good RNG. Few games are execution only, RNG actually makes a game require more execution (in terms of consistency). That being said some games have lower ceilings for execution; there's not as much execution that can be done to save time in an RPG as there is in a platformer, usually.

As far as the entertainment value of the run goes, RNG/execution isn't really intrinsic to the entertainment value of the run. Many games are boring to be ran or watched ran. When you say you prefer to see good rng or good execution you have to really understand that game in order to make that statement and understand the run in that perspective.

So it really doesn't matter, as far as I'm concerned; some games are just boring to watch, even if you know the execution is difficult or the RNG is hard to get perfect.

Hsanrb

2013-06-02 02:56:48 pm

Runners only have so much time waiting around on luck to get a good enough run to submit. I could have waited years for a sub 390 or even a deafening 360 on Mean Bean but at some point I'm gonna vommit beans or I sit on a run, and sit and sit and delete it waiting for something to submit only to never get one to submit.

Then once good luck comes around, you might not be at the best execution to reap the rewards. Your gonna get a bad stage, your gonna get a slow segment, might even have 1 or 2 bad rooms. Regardless whether its the first 2 rooms, the last 2 rooms, any 2 rooms inbetween. If those are your only bad rooms you still get a good time. Theres a reason I hold off reseting when I run games these days, and its usually because 2 sloppy seconds at the beginning, could be the only 2 sloppy seconds you have the entire run.

psychoripper

2013-06-23 01:03:13 am

fast video games

luck can impact a run seriously, so heres what id say. People will consider the run more legitimate if there is higher execution, planning and strats over completion through luck alone (that being said some high execution tricks may rely on types of luck or rng, hence why segmented runs are fantastic)

but if you are doing ss i suggest trying to find a balance or try to find a way to compensate for the possibility of bad rng