New Rules (read first post for new changes)

NK3233

Edit history:

NK3233: 2008-04-03 09:57:17 am

2008-04-03 09:56:37 am

It's-a me, Stalin!

I recommend watching The MK: Double Dash run, it's ace. And recent.

DemonStrate

Edit history:

DemonStrate: 2008-04-03 10:21:18 am

2008-04-03 10:20:41 am

If we were you, we would quit now.

Quote:

Here’s a hypothetical for you: if there was a runner skilled enough to fly through Half-Life 2 just like the current run, but without using scripts, would you still be against it?

I don't think you guys realize how easy it is to fly in HL2. It can easily be done without a script, and its called mouse wheel bound to jump. The script just optimizes efficiency, and makes it easier. If you think that flying is cheap, think about when I was playing through HL2, and I walked down a hallway, grabbed a board, and while holding it, tried to jump down steps. I was just standing in mid air on a board... and i realized that you can just fly, like there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. I don't think its a cheap glitch if its seriously that simple to do, to the point where it seems like the game doesn't think anything wrong of it. The glitches that are 'cheap' (which I like any glitches, no matter how difficult they are) are the ones that require pixel perfect accuracy, some kind of randomness, or a specific series of key presses that one would not possibly achieve on a normal playthrough of the game. Those are the glitches that people should be worried about for their speedruns, because if you don't do it in your speedrun, someone else will do it in theirs, and beat your time because of it.

[quote]
Here’s a hypothetical for you: if there was a runner skilled enough to fly through Half-Life 2 just like the current run, but without using scripts, would you still be against it?[/quote]

I don't think you guys realize how easy it is to fly in HL2. It can easily be done without a script, and its called mouse wheel bound to jump. The script just optimizes efficiency, and makes it easier. If you think that flying is cheap, think about when I was playing through HL2, and I walked down a hallway, grabbed a board, and while holding it, tried to jump down steps. I was just standing in mid air on a board... and i realized that you can just fly, like there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. I don't think its a cheap glitch if its seriously that simple to do, to the point where it seems like the game doesn't think anything wrong of it. The glitches that are 'cheap' (which I like any glitches, no matter how difficult they are) are the ones that require pixel perfect accuracy, some kind of randomness, or a specific series of key presses that one would not possibly achieve on a normal playthrough of the game. Those are the glitches that people should be worried about for their speedruns, because if you don't do it in your speedrun, someone else will do it in theirs, and beat your time because of it.

NK3233

2008-04-03 10:22:32 am

It's-a me, Stalin!

I think he means 'fly through' as in speed through it quickly.

This would be a good time to facepalm.

DemonStrate

2008-04-03 10:48:31 am

If we were you, we would quit now.

Quote:

I think he means 'fly through' as in speed through it quickly.

This would be a good time to facepalm.

I didn't use it on my first playthrough of the game; I discovered it, but I realized I wanted to play through the game normally. So, after I beat it, then I messed around with flying to my heart's delight.

NK3233

Edit history:

NK3233: 2008-04-03 11:11:56 am

2008-04-03 11:09:52 am

It's-a me, Stalin!

Quote:

I didn't use it on my first playthrough of the game; I discovered it, but I realized I wanted to play through the game normally. So, after I beat it, then I messed around with flying to my heart's delight.

I still don't think you understand.

Not fly as in literally fly, but fly as in 'fly through' which means to do something quickly. He's basically proposing an ultrafast speedrun to better a scripted version.

EDIT - Actually, I think I misunderstood. Groobo worded it as fly through as if he meant go through the game quickly. Apologies.

Lag.Com

Edit history:

Lag.Com: 2008-04-03 04:02:10 pm

2008-04-03 12:41:32 pm

sda loyalist

Quote:

but clipping is also allowed now

I don't think that's exactly what you meant. Megatherium is asking about the 'noclip' console cheat that lets you arbitrarily walk through walls. This is obviously different than an ingame trick that lets you fly, and as such is a silly thing to mention. While I respect that Mega has a different opinion, I would ask that he stop assuming everyone wants to go on his crusade and accept that there will be some speedruns he just doesn't like watching.

xXIkuto

Edit history:

xXIkuto: 2008-04-03 02:38:32 pm

2008-04-03 02:17:40 pm

Question about the death abuse and save warping...since it no longer gets its own category, does that mean it's not allowed at all? (I would hope so...)

Because if it's allowed without a seperate category...

(Feel free to laugh at my opinion)

I feel that it would force all runners to use them, and would be completely unfair in my opinion if a run without death abuse was overwritten by one with death abuse...same with save warping.

Also it would be inconsistant to just mark specific games you feel or don't feel can use it...while allowing it in general without its own category...that's like saying "Well in Sonic Adventure you only skip like half a level when you die so it's not so cheap as skipping a whole stage just by dying in Contra."

Personally I think if SDA is going to change it's stance on that, it should either not allow it at all, or leave it with a seperate category.

*Edit* Also, in that case, you might as well allow retries in games that have them to gain full health instantly or some other stat it would give them. Hell, you might as well allow me to get to a boss in Shinobi after I used up all my wind ninpos to fly through the level, then jump off the roof to kill myself, retry, and have a fresh fire ninpo to kill it with. It's faster even when it's manually timed that way.

I'm not a supporter AT ALL of that, in fact I'm completely against it obviously, the point is you can't just say "Well this game you can die in...umm no not that game that would be less skillful and cheap."

Well, you can say that, but it pretty much scars some of the consistancy and intricate fairness that SDA has with runs.

If you guys are just not allowing it at all...then please ignore the above :P....just not sure exactly what it means.

Question about the death abuse and save warping...since it no longer gets its own category, does that mean it's not allowed at all?  (I would hope so...)

Because if it's allowed without a seperate category...

(Feel free to laugh at my opinion)

I feel that it would force all runners to use them, and would be completely unfair in my opinion if a run without death abuse was overwritten by one with death abuse...same with save warping.

Also it would be inconsistant to just mark specific games you feel or don't feel can use it...while allowing it in general without its own category...that's like saying "Well in Sonic Adventure you only skip like half a level when you die so it's not so cheap as skipping a whole stage just by dying in Contra."

Personally I think if SDA is going to change it's stance on that, it should either not allow it at all, or leave it with a seperate category.

*Edit* Also, in that case, you might as well allow retries in games that have them to gain full health instantly or some other stat it would give them.  Hell, you might as well allow me to get to a boss in Shinobi after I used up all my wind ninpos to fly through the level, then jump off the roof to kill myself, retry, and have a fresh fire ninpo to kill it with.  It's faster even when it's manually timed that way.

I'm not a supporter AT ALL of that, in fact I'm completely against it obviously, the point is you can't just say "Well this game you can die in...umm no not that game that would be less skillful and cheap."

Well, you can say that, but it pretty much scars some of the consistancy and intricate fairness that SDA has with runs.

If you guys are just not allowing it at all...then please ignore the above :P....just not sure exactly what it means.

mikwuyma

2008-04-03 02:55:40 pm

My feelings on The Demon Rush

Quote:

Question about the death abuse and save warping...since it no longer gets its own category, does that mean it's not allowed at all? (I would hope so...)

No, it just means it's no longer a separate category. However, there are some games where dying completely breaks the game's timer (PS2 Shinobi, Sonic games) where it obviously wouldn't be allowed.

I don't see why we need to be so black and white about the issue, when we've made exceptions for a lot of rules in the past.

xXIkuto

Edit history:

xXIkuto: 2008-04-03 03:09:53 pm

2008-04-03 03:08:38 pm

Sorry, misunderstood what that would mean.

I guess as long as any death that affects the game timer gets its own category (or isn't allowed altogether) its alright with me then. (Most cases death will result in its own category anyways then)

Gotta run to class now, but thanks for answering Mike <3

Megatherium

Edit history:

Megatherium: 2008-04-03 04:31:50 pm

2008-04-03 04:30:50 pm

yes, america's most blunted

Quote:

I always had the feeling that there are two different communities in here. One is like ss, no scripts, no glitches, no nothing to speed things up because it makes everything easier (which is bullshit btw)

you're right about SS and no-scripts but most glitches are perfectly fine, i don't even mind sequence breaks. it's when the glitch exploitation gets to the point that it changes the nature of the entire game.

i watch a speedrun to see an expert gamer demonstrate the fastest performance in playing through a videogame that they, themselves, are capable of. ideally i could find them on the street and challenge them to do another run of it without them having to say "ok, let me run home and get my scripts". i want to see what is humanly plausible in a game. if you just want to see what is possible, then go watch some frame by frame, saved state, TAS. it is humanly possible that a person COULD play through a given game doing everything pixel perfect if even only by chance. it's possible that in runs that employ luck abuse, a person could radomly receive the best luck output combined with their randomly pixel perfect play (hearkens back to chimps writing shakespeare).

but i want to see the equivalent of videogame olympics. no steroids, no pneumatic limbs, no do-overs, just the best performance that a human gamer can accomplish. period. no additional clauses, no * conditions, no fine print.

Quote:

Megatherium is asking about the 'noclip' console cheat that lets you arbitrarily walk through walls. This is obviously different than ingame trick that lets you fly, and as such is a silly thing to ask about.

but it is not different from an external script that could accomplish the same thing with the push of a button
bind “ < f > ” “ < noclip > ”
my point is that if you are going to set a precedent of being able to open the developer's programming to interpretation by use of external scripts AND remove the OOB rule, what justification is there to stop someone from just flying through walls to all the necessary triggers?

and believe me, i'm well aware that very few in the FPS running community share my views and i'm also well aware that my logic is inevitably going to be trampled by the mob. i just want to make sure it's clear that this ruling is sloppy. if it makes the FPS runners happy, go for it, they'll just have one less viewer and a ton less credibility.

with the moral victory firmly in hand, i retire from this topic.

[quote]I always had the feeling that there are two different communities in here. One is like ss, no scripts, no glitches, no nothing to speed things up because it makes everything [i]easier[/i] (which is bullshit btw)[/quote]
you're right about SS and no-scripts but most glitches are perfectly fine, i don't even mind sequence breaks. it's when the glitch exploitation gets to the point that it changes the nature of the entire game.

i watch a speedrun to see an expert gamer demonstrate the fastest performance in playing through a videogame that they, themselves, are capable of. ideally i could find them on the street and challenge them to do another run of it without them having to say "ok, let me run home and get my scripts". i want to see what is humanly [i]plausible[/i] in a game. if you just want to see what is possible, then go watch some frame by frame, saved state, TAS. it is humanly possible that a person COULD play through a given game doing everything pixel perfect if even only by chance. it's possible that in runs that employ luck abuse, a person could radomly receive the best luck output combined with their randomly pixel perfect play (hearkens back to chimps writing shakespeare).

but i want to see the equivalent of videogame olympics. no steroids, no pneumatic limbs, no do-overs, just the best performance that a [u]human gamer[/u] can accomplish[b].[/b] period. no additional clauses, no * conditions, no [size=10]fine print[/size].

[quote]Megatherium is asking about the 'noclip' console cheat that lets you arbitrarily walk through walls. This is obviously different than ingame trick that lets you fly, and as such is a silly thing to ask about.[/quote]
but it is not different from an external script that could accomplish the same thing with the push of a button
bind “  < f > ” “ < noclip > ”
my point is that if you are going to set a precedent of being able to open the developer's programming to interpretation by use of external scripts AND remove the OOB rule, what justification is there to stop someone from just flying through walls to all the necessary triggers?

and believe me, i'm well aware that very few in the FPS running community share my views and i'm also well aware that my logic is inevitably going to be trampled by the mob. i just want to make sure it's clear that this ruling is sloppy. if it makes the FPS runners happy, go for it, they'll just have one less viewer and a ton less credibility.

with the moral victory firmly in hand, i retire from this topic.

groobo

Edit history:

groobo: 2008-04-03 05:11:34 pm

2008-04-03 04:54:55 pm

boss

There's a difference between a glitch and a cheat (although the outcome would be the same: going through a wall in your case). There's also a difference between a script that lets you hold a button to jump constantly instead of mashing the button and a script that activates a cheat.

Quote:

I don't see why we need to be so black and white about the issue, when we've made exceptions for a lot of rules in the past.

Isn't that what this whole rules update is about? Not having any exceptions because everything is so clear now and something is either allowed or not? The no death abuse in metal slug, no alttp up+a glitch, no autofire controllers (while ahk is fine) rules are bullshit. For everything else: I owe Mike and Enhasa a beer.

Lag.Com

2008-04-03 05:55:23 pm

sda loyalist

Quote:

bind “ < f > ” “ < noclip > ”

Right, and that wouldn't be allowed either. It's not the fact that scripts are used, it is what the scripts do that is important.

Frezy_man

2008-04-03 06:26:27 pm

bläää

Quote:

Death abuse is no longer a separate category, but for a run 'n game like Contra or Metal Slug, don't be surprised if your run gets rejected if you die :P.

P.S. You're not going to change my mind on the Contra or Metal Slug condition.

Im glad that my Contra run made it into the site. It wasnt a no-death speedrun Smiley

But I guess stanski cried when he saw it Wink

I want to say the new rules looks fine. allow more things like fighting games and OOB glitches is great =)

soteos

Edit history:

soteos: 2008-04-03 07:31:38 pm

2008-04-03 07:25:33 pm

Sorry about the confusion when I was talking about flying. I meant it literally.

I forgot to mention that the autohotkey program Enhasa mentioned earlier is something I’m in opposition to, since it is a third party program.

Quote:

but i want to see the equivalent of videogame olympics. no steroids, no pneumatic limbs, no do-overs, just the best performance that a human gamer can accomplish. period. no additional clauses, no * conditions, no fine print.
from this topic.

That doesn’t stop the fact that there are people who like their “videogame olympics” this way. I don’t see why having both categories is worse than having only one. The only people upset with this rule are those who want to wipe out one or the other category in its entirety, and there isn't any reason to do that as long as there are people interested in both.

Quote:

but it is not different from an external script that could accomplish the same thing with the push of a button
bind “ < f > ” “ < noclip > ”
my point is that if you are going to set a precedent of being able to open the developer's programming to interpretation by use of external scripts AND remove the OOB rule, what justification is there to stop someone from just flying through walls to all the necessary triggers?

Like I said before, scripts that alter the way controls are inputted is not a slippery slope that leads to commands that change in-game factors. One deals with controls and the other deals with cheats. OOB is a glitch, not something that can be turned on and off in the game, and is a separate issue from that of scripts.

Quote:

with the moral victory firmly in hand, i retire from this topic.

You are arrogantly crowing victory without willing to consider anyone's replies, and are trying to monopolize your own set of rules over others because they doesn’t please you. That’s neither a victory, nor moral.

Sorry about the confusion when I was talking about flying. I meant it literally.

I forgot to mention that the autohotkey program Enhasa mentioned earlier is something I’m in opposition to, since it is a third party program.

[quote]
but i want to see the equivalent of videogame olympics. no steroids, no pneumatic limbs, no do-overs, just the best performance that a [u]human gamer[/u] can accomplish[b].[/b] period. no additional clauses, no * conditions, no [size=10]fine print[/size].
from this topic.[/quote]
That doesn’t stop the fact that there are people who like their “videogame olympics” this way. I don’t see why having both categories is worse than having only one. The only people upset with this rule are those who want to wipe out one or the other category in its entirety, and there isn't any reason to do that as long as there are people interested in both.

[quote]
but it is not different from an external script that could accomplish the same thing with the push of a button
bind “  < f > ” “ < noclip > ”
my point is that if you are going to set a precedent of being able to open the developer's programming to interpretation by use of external scripts AND remove the OOB rule, what justification is there to stop someone from just flying through walls to all the necessary triggers?[/quote]
Like I said before, scripts that alter the way controls are inputted is not a slippery slope that leads to commands that change in-game factors. One deals with controls and the other deals with cheats. OOB is a glitch, not something that can be turned on and off in the game, and is a separate issue from that of scripts.

[quote]with the moral victory firmly in hand, i retire from this topic.[/quote]
You are arrogantly crowing victory without willing to consider anyone's replies, and are trying to monopolize your own set of rules over others because they doesn’t please you. That’s neither a victory, nor moral.

Megatherium

2008-04-03 08:02:32 pm

yes, america's most blunted

ok, i won't bring up any new issues, but it seems i need to clarify previous statements.

Quote:

Like I said before, scripts that alter the way controls are inputted is not a slippery slope that leads to commands that change in-game factors.

do you not know what the bunnyhopping mod is? valve changed the programming of the HL engine to disallow the bunnyhopping glitch. speedrunners took it upon themselves to interpret that they must have only meant this to affect counterstrike and thus wrote a piece of programming that put bunnyhopping back in. that is a substantial form of game modification, not just making things easier, but putting in something that the devs specifically took out. and as i said, it sets a dirty precedent.

the reason it may seem i came out of nowhere with these arguments is that i saw no immediacy when everything was governed by community consensus. but now that this is the last chance to voice opinions on the formalized rules before they will be translated into other languages, i feel the need to say what i've been thinking all along.

as enhasa stated, there is no requirement for how close a run must resemble a game. there is nothing that limits scripts to bunnyhopping. and apparently modifying the game's engine is entirely tolerable.

the no-clip script example was simply something i brought up in light of the retraction of the OOB rule. we used to have the luxury of being able to decide what glitches were tolerated and which weren't on a case by case basis, but there is now a certain gravity that a finalized set of multi-lingual rules carries and i don't feel like many of you realize that. i've probably alienated too many of you to communicate that effectively, but whatever.

and the moral victory pertains to panzer dragoon zwei's eligibility, sorry if that wasn't clear.

ok, i won't bring up any new issues, but it seems i need to clarify previous statements.
[quote]Like I said before, scripts that alter the way controls are inputted is not a slippery slope that leads to commands that change in-game factors.[/quote]
do you not know what the bunnyhopping mod is? valve changed the programming of the HL engine to disallow the bunnyhopping glitch. speedrunners took it upon themselves to interpret that they must have only meant this to affect counterstrike and thus wrote a piece of programming that put bunnyhopping back in. that is a substantial form of game modification, not just making things easier, but putting in something that the devs specifically took out. and as i said, it sets a dirty precedent.

the reason it may seem i came out of nowhere with these arguments is that i saw no immediacy when everything was governed by community consensus. but now that this is the last chance to voice opinions on the formalized rules before they will be translated into other languages, i feel the need to say what i've been thinking all along.

as enhasa stated, there is no requirement for how close a run must resemble a game. there is nothing that limits scripts to bunnyhopping. and apparently modifying the game's engine is entirely tolerable.

the no-clip script example was simply something i brought up in light of the retraction of the OOB rule. we used to have the luxury of being able to decide what glitches were tolerated and which weren't on a case by case basis, but there is now a certain gravity that a finalized set of multi-lingual rules carries and i don't feel like many of you realize that. i've probably alienated too many of you to communicate that effectively, but whatever.

and the moral victory pertains to panzer dragoon zwei's eligibility, sorry if that wasn't clear.

xXIkuto

Edit history:

xXIkuto: 2008-04-03 08:35:51 pm

2008-04-03 08:33:37 pm

I think more or less the reason there are such serious arguments over scripts is this:

Runners who have run console games or pc games WITHOUT scripts don't like that runners who do use scripts are considered "runners," rather than call it a TAS.

Obviously its better to have 2 categories instead of just 1, no matter what the case, but I think what makes it annoying to some runners is that they don't consider said runner using scripts entitled to the title of "runner," as it more or less means skillful mastery of a game. Not that people who use scripts HAVEN'T mastered the game, but the way some runners look at it is that he wouldn't be able to pull it off ever without the use of scripts.

It's just more of an issue of calling it a run or not, not the fact that SDA accepts them.

I won't mention my own opinion on the subject since I don't want anyone to hurt me, but that's just my 2 cents.

groobo

Edit history:

groobo: 2008-04-03 08:59:57 pm

2008-04-03 08:54:27 pm

boss

Quote:

do you not know what the bunnyhopping mod is? valve changed the programming of the HL engine to disallow the bunnyhopping glitch. speedrunners took it upon themselves to interpret that they must have only meant this to affect counterstrike and thus wrote a piece of programming that put bunnyhopping back in. that is a substantial form of game modification, not just making things easier, but putting in something that the devs specifically took out. and as i said, it sets a dirty precedent.

It's ironic because it seems that you don't know what the mod is really about yourself. Didn't it occur to you that all runs made with it are single-segment runs? It probably also didn't occur to you that the runner could've just used any older version of vanilla hl and be able to bunnyhop without any modifications? You probably also didn't know that the earlier versions of hl suffered not only from random crashes (you wouldn't like the game crashing a couple of minutes before the finish line, now would you?), but from the fact that the game stops recording/corrupts the demo/continues to record input but your character stays in the previous level after each level transition (hl runners record their runs using the build-in demo system), which isn't a problem in the newer versions of the game. So after all, there's no initial benefit from using such modification.

[quote]
do you not know what the bunnyhopping mod is? valve changed the programming of the HL engine to disallow the bunnyhopping glitch. speedrunners took it upon themselves to interpret that they must have only meant this to affect counterstrike and thus wrote a piece of programming that put bunnyhopping back in. that is a substantial form of game modification, not just making things easier, but putting in something that the devs specifically took out. and as i said, it sets a dirty precedent.
[/quote]
It's ironic because it seems that you don't know what the mod is really about yourself. Didn't it occur to you that all runs made with it are single-segment runs? It probably also didn't occur to you that the runner could've just used any older version of vanilla hl and be able to bunnyhop without any modifications? You probably also didn't know that the earlier versions of hl suffered not only from random crashes (you wouldn't like the game crashing a couple of minutes before the finish line, now would you?), but from the fact that the game stops recording/corrupts the demo/continues to record input but your character stays in the previous level after each level transition (hl runners record their runs using the build-in demo system), which isn't a problem in the newer versions of the game. So after all, there's no initial benefit from using such modification.

Megatherium

Edit history:

Megatherium: 2008-04-03 09:20:44 pm

2008-04-03 09:19:06 pm

yes, america's most blunted

i'm well aware of all that, but you seem to be ignoring the point. rules and precedents that apply beyond a single version of a single game. that has been my point for the past several posts but you seem too busy cutting down trees to see the forest.

if it's not clear by now, do it however you want, i surrender.

hhallahh

Edit history:

hhallahh: 2008-04-03 09:31:28 pm

2008-04-03 09:29:28 pm

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

I have a question that arises from the Aquaria thread. For a game that receives bug patches after release, should speedruns be done on the original version, the patched version, or would they both be accepted as separate categories? Maybe the former is implied by the "out of the box runs first" comment, but I'm not sure that I understand it.

In this case in particular there was a design oversight which allowed the player to skip a major area of the game that was patched up. Does this fact not matter? I could see arguments being made either way, really, so I was hoping for some clarification here.

Oh, and obviously I stumbled across this thread late, I guess, I would've registered my disagreement to the "no freeware" rule. Tongue

Any ruleset that excludes Cave Story runs, if only by refusing to grant some games exceptions on a case-by-case basis, is too strict in my book. I basically said that in the Aquaria thread already, no need to rehash it here.

soteos

2008-04-03 10:33:51 pm

Groobo makes a good point that since bunnyhopping was originally in Half-Life, there’s already a precedent for using it. Unless a game never had bunnyhopping, I don’t see why it’s not ok to mod it in. It’s similar to the fact that we don’t use the “Player’s Choice” version of Metroid Prime.
However, patches do present a unique problem, and I wouldn’t be able to effectively answer hhallahh’s question. More and more games now can be fixed after their release, with glitches and shortcuts being removed with patches that may continue to come out years after the game is released. Maybe we should stick to running unpatched versions of games.

Megatherium, I don’t want you to think I’m trying to dismiss you, because you are raising valid issues. I just don’t think they’re as detrimental as you make them out to be.

hhallahh

Edit history:

hhallahh: 2008-04-03 11:18:11 pm

2008-04-03 11:16:39 pm

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Quote:

Maybe we should stick to running unpatched versions of games.

That was my initial thought as well, because it would be dumb to have a different set of runs for every version of the patched game, but then again sometimes the "boxed version" itself can be changed to include patches, which would mean players would have to run on versions that aren't even commercially available anymore. ie. Are the vanilla Starcraft runs done on version 1.00? I kinda doubt it, but significant balance changes have been introduced between the first release and now.

Part of me is sure that this issue has come up before, but since it seems like an obvious topic for the FAQ to address, it means either I'm missing something or maybe the issue just isn't resolved.

andrewg

Edit history:

andrewg: 2008-04-04 12:20:49 am

2008-04-04 12:09:46 am

Hi! I'm andrewg!

EDIT: I think I misinterpreted something. nevermind.

gia

2008-04-04 12:33:29 am

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Quote:

Multiplayer runs are a separate category much like the idea of single-segment vs. segmented: you may use whatever number of players you find optimal, and a faster single-player run will obsolete your run.

what?

DRybes

2008-04-04 12:42:59 am

O Zlda?

Quote:

what?

So a 2 player run of a game is a seperate category in any situation where using 2 players would allow a faster completion than single player (touchstone example: Jet Force Gemini with player 2 as Floyd firing off shots to assist player 1).

But if we have a single player run submitted that is faster than that 2 player run, the 2 player run is removed from the site.

A newly submitted single segment run that beats a segmented run already on the site, would bump that segmented run off... the single segment was harder to do, yet still beat the time of the guy who got to use segments. The exact same situation exists for multiplayer games of this type... the idea is that if one person can beat your multi-player co-op effort, it deserves to replace it.

petrie911

2008-04-04 12:45:20 am

Everybody loves Hypnotoad!

Quote:

Oh, and obviously I stumbled across this thread late, I guess, I would've registered my disagreement to the "no freeware" rule. Tongue

Any ruleset that excludes Cave Story runs, if only by refusing to grant some games exceptions on a case-by-case basis, is too strict in my book. I basically said that in the Aquaria thread already, no need to rehash it here.

This doesn't sound too unreasonable. And I too would like to see a Cave Story run.