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
<- 12345678 ->
--
--
List results:
Search options:
Use \ before commas in usernames
Edit history:
DRybes: 2008-04-04 12:52:01 am
O Zlda?
I wonder what the deal with freeware is. I'm guessing it's to ban the infinite amount of flash/java/whatever clones of classic games and formats, but there's potential to run some of the less obscure "original" freeware games. It may simplify or complicate the situation, but what about older games which are then made available for free? Are these considered part of freeware releases? Must a game not have its source code publicly released to qualify for running (since in such a case, the game code could be arbitrarily altered by a disreputable runner)?
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Well, I'll copy/paste Enhasa's quote from the Aquaria thread:

Quote:
You can discuss it in the "new rules" thread in the site suggestions forum and see how many people agree. Like I said, I would be open to changing it if people care, but it seems they don't.

Like I said before, it's a matter of setting boundaries. Otherwise, if we allow Cave Story, then people will ask for I Wanna Be the Guy and then stuff I've never even heard of or someone will make a game and then run it.

It's not a matter of "deserving" or not. It's obvious many freely available games are superior. Hell, I think Super Demo World crushes Super Mario World, but I don't miss seeing a run of that up on SDA (just an example, forget it's a hack, imagine it's a remake). I think really the issue is: disallowing freeware runs lends some legitimacy, just like requiring real name. Whether or not I think SDA needs that, I don't really know. But certainly if we have it already, and it's not my site, it's probably a bad idea to be rash and remove some of the legitimacy.


I don't really understand the "legitimacy" argument, but I do understand why it would be difficult to allow some freeware games and not others without some sort of objective standard being in place. I think SDA has done a nice job of making tough case-by-case decisions regarding what's permissible and what's not, usually regarding glitches, but this opens a whole new can of worms about which games or mods are worth hosting. But this is assuming that opening up mods/freeware would lead to a crapflood of random runs coming in, and I'm not sure about it. After all, TSA allows mods but pretty much the only one I've ever seen is Super Demo World, which is fine by me. Regardless, here are a few of the ones I'd love to see:

- Cave Story
- Super Demo World (since Enhasa brought it up..)
- Super Metroid Redesign
- Flash Portal
- They Hunger

Speedruns for most of these exist regardless of SDA, of course, but it just seems more professional when they're here rather than on YT, you know? Tongue
Edit history:
gia: 2008-04-04 02:10:58 am
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Ah I missed the "faster" part, it makes sense now, mp runs for coop oriented games would be faster anyway while it bans mp runs on mario like games where its not important.

I'd like sda allowed freeware, but I think it should be only for games that could technically be sold comercially from a legal perspective (and I'm not implying strict use of original IP as a must, I recall reading somewhere that stuff classified as parody can skip IP complications). That bans direct clones, most hacks and stuff, although I guess it bans some from your list up there.
Edit history:
65: 2008-04-04 07:13:24 am
Quote:

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


There already is one on freewareruns.com. The site was rather dead last time I checked, though.
Edit history:
Kibbo: 2008-04-05 11:53:18 pm
TIOLET!
Quote:
Most PC games allow you to use scripts or macros to automate certain actions, either via the game itself or using third-party programs such as AutoHotKey. This is allowed for SDA.

This is a sad thing, indeed. What's next? Allowing aimbots?

Edit: I don't like scripts either, but I can accept them in games where it's possible to use heavy in-game scripting by default. And with that I mean just installing the game and make a .cfg or whatever, like HL.
Edit history:
groobo: 2008-04-06 07:44:46 am
boss
I agree. AHK should be allowed only for games where you already can script a macro into without any third-party shit. That would be at least fair with the no auto-fire controllers rule.
everybody wanna tell you the meaning of music
Quote:
You're just another follower of the "console runners" cult.

If you're talking to me, I'm very much defending script runs being on SDA. Also, about the no death abuse in Contra and Metal Slug, that is 100% Mike and 0% me.


Quote:
I don't think that's exactly what you meant.

From the FAQ: "Glitch categorization: For games where the OOB, warping, or clipping glitches only skip a small portion of the game..." Mega asked why clipping was not allowed when OOB is now allowed, and I was telling him that clipping is allowed now. I'm not sure what you think I meant actually.


Quote:
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.

It has been pointed out that since they were allowed as a separate category, not a single run has been done without them when it was possible. So while your opinion is valid, it seems nobody else agrees with you.

About the inconsistency, I agree it kinda sucks, but Mike is just stubborn and 100% against that. It's funky but a couple of the rules are just like that (such as Radix being against LTTP up+down). I guess it's just something you live with.

Quote:
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.

You're going to hate to hear this, but yeah, we thought about that, and yeah people actually do that. What is saving you here is what is saving Mike with Contra. Here are the rules:
Quote:
In some games where there is an appeal to having a deathless run, such as Contra or Metal Slug, deaths are considered a sign of poor play quality and will probably lead to a rejection. If you are uncertain at all about producing a run with death abuse, please ask on the forum.

In this case, you would ask: hey, I think it would be really retarded to do this, and if people agree, then that would be the standard for the game. Sadly I have not played PS2 Shinobi yet, so I can't tell you, but Mike could. You have a decent chance since suiciding in Contra and suiciding in Shinobi would be the same idea: suiciding for ammo. Suiciding to save backtracking, which is the most common and classic example, seems to be acceptable by almost everyone.

This is why I don't like regulating death abuse. It would be hard to enforce the intent aspect. Let's say a stage is really hard and you need to start with max life to beat it. If you came in with 1% health left, you could suicide for 100%. Or you could just die naturally and it would be all the same. But what if you started with 20%? Now the runner needs to die as fast as possible, but not look like he is suiciding, to prevent death abuse? That is why I think it is better not to look at death abuse or not, but to treat all deaths equally and have the verifiers judge the play quality, which is what they were already doing.


Quote:
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.

Well the reasoning goes like you could just bind mwheel to jump -> that's trivial and banal, so scripts are allowed -> if we can use internal scripts, why not external scripts that do basically the same thing -> the situation right now where AHK could never be banned because 3 of the 4-5 runs are the most popular runs on the entire site. Honestly I think having scripts and scriptless categories separate is the only solution. Oh, that is what you say in the next paragraph. I agree.


Quote:
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?

(this is copy and paste from the other thread)

Mandating the latest version (or a particular version) has been suggested, but this is why that is a terrible idea:

Let's say 1.0 has a glitch that allows for faster times. Someone does a 1.0 run. Then 1.1 comes out and fixes it. If latest was mandated, then we have a problem. Runners can't beat the old run anymore, but it would also be unfair to take the old run down (since it was run on the latest version at the time). Even if a 1.2 came out later and 1.1 was still the recommendation, the problem with the 1.0 run remains.

Sure you could have different versions tracked as a separate category, but at SDA we try to limit superfluous categories. Just like we don't track runs done on every different revision of the PS2, we don't track different versions. So you use whatever version is best, which is what people do now anyway.

About Cave Story, I feel really bad about that (that's why people were so hyped about the PSP release rumor that turned out to be vaporware), and I feel even worse about Within a Deep Forest and Operator Status. Especially in the PC section, people do a lot of runs that never make it on SDA, such as most DOS runs (I was heavily into PC gaming during those days, so that affects me a lot). It sucks but some people will do runs anyway and other people can watch them, like this classic.

The problem with making exceptions is that people will rightfully get very angry when their game is not allowed. This way there is consistency. Ok, we both agree Cave Story is a good game. What about Barkley Gaiden? What about some other random RPG Maker game? There's no way to draw a line, and a game being good or not is totally subjective. (I personally think that some of the popular indie games are not any good and that some more obscure ones are better, and since people would disagree, you wouldn't want me making any decision.)

Maybe you wonder: why disallow anything at all? Well, do you agree that it would be a bad idea for someone to make dozens of his own games, speedrun them, get his friends to verify, and spam SDA with lots of records for himself? If we allow freeware games, I don't think there's any way to prevent such a situation. Every bit of that would be allowable by the rules.


Quote:
It may simplify or complicate the situation, but what about older games which are then made available for free?

Such runs like id games are already on SDA. From the rules: "Any computer or video game that was ever distributed by a third-party retailer." Note that a game can actually be freeware and allowed on the site. There are some free games on XBLA. So "freeware" is really just an oversimplification.


Quote:
Speedruns for most of these exist regardless of SDA, of course, but it just seems more professional when they're here rather than on YT, you know? Tongue

The issue is not how professional the speedruns look, but how professional SDA looks. Tongue If you ask me personally, if I was forming such a site from day one, I would have allowed freeware games. Radix didn't, and given how it turned out, I think it was a very reasonable and smart decision actually. Basically it comes down to, if I was making a site I wouldn't care how professional it is, but I'm a caretaker right now, and that's not for me to throw away.


Quote:
This is a sad thing, indeed. What's next? Allowing aimbots?

I wouldn't allow AHK but it's already on SDA right? Actually going by what groobo said, is he correct and there aren't any runs on SDA using AHK where there isn't already internal scripting? If so, groobo's comparison to auto-fire is a very good one, and we can say that.

Why would someone use external scripting then in these cases? There has to be advantages (sorry I am so ignorant about scripting, even if I have played the games in question) or people wouldn't use it. If there are no advantages (which I doubt), then we can ban external scripts since you can just use built-in scripts anyway and nobody would be affected.
Edit history:
hhallahh: 2008-04-06 03:57:08 pm
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Those are valid points (in regard to the freeware stuff), but I'd still point to the way TAS has handled it. They have a handful of crappy romhacks, but they also have a couple great ones like Demo World and Mario Adventure. imo the good outweighs the bad, and it only "looks bad" for SDA if radix has to regularly plug crappy romhack/freeware runs on the front page.

I think there really are ways to make it manageable (for example, create something similar to TAS' workbench where the community could decide if a proposed run was worth hosting. Or you could have a Newgrounds-like system where runs can be rated and "blammed" and the good ones are mentioned on the front page, etc.), but I don't want to come off as wanting to make everyone restructure the site just so my favorite runs could get pushed through. I think a better solution is workable, it's simply a question of whether the glorious people in charge of the site care to work at it. And that isn't really supposed to be sarcasm, I recognize that there's already a lot of work to be done. I think.
Edit history:
groobo: 2008-04-06 10:16:31 am
boss
Quote:
If you're talking to me, I'm very much defending script runs being on SDA. Also, about the no death abuse in Contra and Metal Slug, that is 100% Mike and 0% me.

That was addressed to Megatherium actually.

Quote:
In this case, you would ask: hey, I think it would be really retarded to do this, and if people agree, then that would be the standard for the game. Sadly I have not played PS2 Shinobi yet, so I can't tell you, but Mike could. You have a decent chance since suiciding in Contra and suiciding in Shinobi would be the same idea: suiciding for ammo. Suiciding to save backtracking, which is the most common and classic example, seems to be acceptable by almost everyone.

So after all it all comes down to whoever verifies a run? That's bullshit. If you get a combo of stanski+mike for veryfing, you're good to hang yourself. But if you get eg me to verify, you'll most probably get a green light as long as your deaths saved any time. Matter of opinion. Another thing is that this wasn't a community choice, it's Mike's point of view (you can't possibly accept two or three random guys on irc agreeing on this as a community choice). Looking at the case from another angle it may look like Mike is trying to prevent people from doing crappy runs, beating his records only because they abused death. If that's the case a good solution would be this: reject every crap run and obsolate the runs only when a quality run appears. Anyway, with such rule you're just putting entertainment/skill showoff above the main idea of speedrunning here at sda, which is TIME.

Quote:
Why would someone use external scripting then in these cases? There has to be advantages (sorry I am so ignorant about scripting, even if I have played the games in question) or people wouldn't use it. If there are no advantages (which I doubt), then we can ban external scripts since you can just use built-in scripts anyway and nobody would be affected.

There are only two games that abuse ahk: hl2 and portal. In both cases you can't make an in-game script similar to which was used with the help of ahk. I can't see an argument for using ahk in games where you can achieve the same results while scripting in-game. Allowing ahk for games that can be scripted like that without any macros was basically just a random idea.

And as for the freeware thing: we could always allow popular freeware games. Which games are allowed and which aren't would be obviously decided case by case.
sda loyalist
Quote:
rated and "blammed"


After my initial experiment with my own 'ratings system' I get the feeling this will absolutely not work at all.

Also, Enhasa, about the clipping thing... I don't mean 'clipping tricks', I specifically meant the console cheat 'noclip'. In your post it sounded like you were equating the two (at least, to me), so I was separating them.
So is the consensus now so, that you can use AHK IF the game itself allows scripting? And, following that logic, you could use a turbo controller for games that support rapid fire innately? Or is that another exception?

Or did I misinterpret you guys?
sda loyalist
No, that sounds fine. f.e. a good bunch of scrolling shooters let you autofire naturally. Not like they are likely to be accepted here, anyway... Smiley
everybody wanna tell you the meaning of music
hhallahh: I'm extremely against a rating system. I actually don't care about most rules, but that is something I would care about.



Quote:
So after all it all comes down to whoever verifies a run? That's bullshit. If you get a combo of stanski+mike for veryfing, you're good to hang yourself. But if you get eg me to verify, you'll most probably get a green light as long as your deaths saved any time. Matter of opinion. Another thing is that this wasn't a community choice, it's Mike's point of view (you can't possibly accept two or three random guys on irc agreeing on this as a community choice). Looking at the case from another angle it may look like Mike is trying to prevent people from doing crappy runs, beating his records only because they abused death. If that's the case a good solution would be this: reject every crap run and obsolate the runs only when a quality run appears.

Actually it comes down to Mike alone, he is just willing to take input. If you're wondering why one man has that much say, it's because he's the judge, simple as that. And yes, this rule wasn't a community choice, it was Mike since he cares about it. Most rules we are flexible but sometimes people have things they really believe in.

I actually agree with you, I don't like the inconsistent rules we have like "no entire game skipping OOB," "no suicides in some games," and "quicksaves have 1/2 sec penalty." We already reject crappy runs like you say.

Is your problem really with the inconsistencies of the rules, or is your problem that you aren't allowed to abuse death in some cases? It would be easy to make it consistent by allowing death abuse in general, but banning it to refill resources (ammo, health, etc). What would you think about that?

Quote:
There are only two games that abuse ahk: hl2 and portal. In both cases you can't make an in-game script similar to which was used with the help of ahk. I can't see an argument for using ahk in games where you can achieve the same results while scripting in-game. Allowing ahk for games that can be scripted like that without any macros was basically just a random idea.

I think we should just ban external scripting like AHK then. I don't know what to do about HL2 and Portal, but I guess they have grandfather clauses.

I'm pretty much against freeware games on SDA now. Basing it on popularity is a dumb idea I think (people like bad games) and basing it on quality is entirely subjective. If we allowed certain freeware games, and I was in charge, I'm sure nobody would like my decisions.



Cremator: Stay tuned, but we are more likely to ban AHK anyway. Allowing AHK only if a game already has scripting is stupid. Either you're gaining an advantage, or you might as well just use the internal scripting. So for your example, just use the built-in rapid fire.
Edit history:
Megatherium: 2008-04-06 11:01:31 pm
yes, america's most blunted
Quote:
From the FAQ: "Glitch categorization: For games where the OOB, warping, or clipping glitches only skip a small portion of the game..." Mega asked why clipping was not allowed when OOB is now allowed, and I was telling him that clipping is allowed now. I'm not sure what you think I meant actually.

as lag said, there is actually a command called "no-clip", it's in almost every FPS. it grants you the ability to fly and go through walls like a ghost. i had said that if you allow out of bounds as well as scripting, then there's no justification for rejecting a run where a runner makes a script that enables no-clip. OOB can be achieved normally, a script just makes it easier, same as bunnyhopping.

secondly, alucard is talking about a trick in shinobi where you are given an extra powerup if you die even if you've already used the maximum of 3 that you can get in each level. i wouldn't care except that the timer doesn't take into account your "failed" attempts. it's like segmenting except that you have to watch the failed segments and if you were to change the way the run is timed to count the deaths, this trick wouldn't save you any time.

edit: and can we just get one thing straight: SPEED IS NOT THE BOTTOM LINE AT SDA, stop quoting it like it's a part of the 10 commandments. speed is the bottom line at sites that host TASs. legitimacy is the bottom line at SDA, that's why we have a verification process.

if you tempt me, i could very easily make a case for why both scripts and multi-segment runs should be considered TAS.
sda loyalist
mega: The justification for not allowing noclip is because it's a cheat.

It is a cheat.

It's cheating.

Please realise this. Getting outside of the game world is not a cheat. It is a trick, or an exploit, or a bug. But it is not a cheat.
yes, america's most blunted
when you get into the area of scripts, terms like "cheat" go straight out the window, please realize that. someone could write an original script that does the same thing as no-clip. if you're going to make formalized rules and you're going to allow scripts, you need to define what those scripts can and cannot do.

so far scripts have gone as far as modifying the game engine, that's beyond cheating, it's modding. if you want to play on that version of HL, play by that version's rules, it is not the place of the runner to try to interpret what the developer intended because obviously, if they didn't put it in the GUI options, they didn't intend for you to fuck with it.
sda loyalist
Quote:
terms like "cheat" go straight out the window


No. They don't. They are still just as important.
yes, america's most blunted
do you really want to get into a yuh-huh/nuh-uh dialog?

i say scripting itself is cheating. if "cheats" by your definition are things that the developer already put into the game, then using scripts is "hacking". i don't even think the most avid scripter can deny that their runs are "tool-assisted".

so lets say a script doesn't tap directly into the no-clip programming, it just makes getting out of bounds a whole lot easier. is that acceptable in your view?
.
The only way to script a noclip function would be to add the noclip command to that script, thus turning that script into a cheat and invalidating it. Cheats and Scripts are two completely different things, and you should give yourself a smack in the face if you can't see the difference.
.
Quote:
i say scripting itself is cheating.


This is your opinion. This opinion is not shared by everyone.

Quote:
if "cheats" by your definition are things that the developer already put into the game, then using scripts is "hacking".


Cheats by the sites definition are commands and functions that are not available in normal play. Noclip removes the collisiondetection on the player. Godmode fixes the players health at it's current value. Cheats/hacks are things that manipulate the game in ways that it was not designed to be played in. Scripts use standard movement commands and thus are not cheats. Of course you can add a cheat to a script, but that would be cheating.

Quote:
i don't even think the most avid scripter can deny that their runs are "tool-assisted".


This is irrelevant.

Quote:
so lets say a script doesn't tap directly into the no-clip programming, it just makes getting out of bounds a whole lot easier. is that acceptable in your view?


It doesn't though does it. It makes the move itself easier on the player to execute but it doesn't change any game variables/disable collision detection/whatever to do so.
Edit history:
Megatherium: 2008-04-07 12:17:26 am
yes, america's most blunted
Quote:
This is your opinion. This opinion is not shared by everyone.

i was merely demonstrating that his opinion is not shared by everyone.


Quote:
Cheats by the sites definition are commands and functions that are not available in normal play.

that rules out bunnyhopping in the HL version that the runs were recorded on.

Quote:
Cheats/hacks are things that manipulate the game in ways that it was not designed to be played in.

that rules out bunnyhopping/woodsurfing.

Quote:
Scripts use standard movement commands and thus are not cheats.

i assume you are talking about bh scripts and not all scripts in general. so what's your stance on the script that old CS players used to make you crouch for a single frame whenever you fired, granting you improved accuracy without the speed reduction of crouching?

Quote:
It doesn't though does it. It makes the move itself easier on the player to execute but it doesn't change any game variables/disable collision detection/whatever to do so.

out of bounds glitches can result from a variety of different causes. it would be easy to write scripts that do not alter the game itself but are built around exploiting such glitches. remember these rules apply beyond HL.
Edit history:
soteos: 2008-04-07 04:02:15 am
Megatherium, I’m going to repeat this for the third time in the hopes that it leaves some impression on you. 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. Controls are inputs that move the character. Cheats are things that change in-game variables. One does not equal the other.

So what is bunnyhopping? By definition, it is a script, since it deals with the way controls are inputted. Your problem with it is not that it’s a cheat, but that it was something put back into the game after the developers took it out. Thus, your issue with bunnyhopping isn’t about scripts and cheating, it’s about the VERSION. Your qualm with bunnyhopping is about reverting a game to a previous version, so stop trying to make it about scripts and cheating. Enhasa addressed this in the topic about patches:
Quote:
Mandating the latest version (or a particular version) has been suggested, but this is why that is a terrible idea:

Let's say 1.0 has a glitch that allows for faster times. Someone does a 1.0 run. Then 1.1 comes out and fixes it. If latest was mandated, then we have a problem. Runners can't beat the old run anymore, but it would also be unfair to take the old run down (since it was run on the latest version at the time). Even if a 1.2 came out later and 1.1 was still the recommendation, the problem with the 1.0 run remains.

Sure you could have different versions tracked as a separate category, but at SDA we try to limit superfluous categories. Just like we don't track runs done on every different revision of the PS2, we don't track different versions. So you use whatever version is best, which is what people do now anyway.


Wood surfing is neither a script nor a cheat, since it can be done without the use of either (scripting just helps). The script about crouching in CS would be allowed, since it’s only about the way controls are inputted.

Quote:
edit: and can we just get one thing straight: SPEED IS NOT THE BOTTOM LINE AT SDA, stop quoting it like it's a part of the 10 commandments. speed is the bottom line at sites that host TASs. legitimacy is the bottom line at SDA, that's why we have a verification process.

Speed and legitimacy aren’t ranked with each other. The bottom line for speedruns is speed, and for SDA it is legitimacy; they're separate things. The bottom line for TAS Videos is not speed, since many TAS get rejected for not being entertaining enough.

Quote:
out of bounds glitches can result from a variety of different causes. it would be easy to write scripts that do not alter the game itself but are built around exploiting such glitches.

So?



I want to echo a question Enhasa raised about Autohotkey. Does it confer some sort of advantage over creating scripts in the game? I’m starting to think we’re a little mistaken, and that AHK doesn’t give any advantage, it just makes it easier to create those same scripts.
Edit history:
Enhasa: 2008-04-07 03:08:50 am
everybody wanna tell you the meaning of music
groobo says that HL2 and Portal runners have gained an extra advantage. I talked to Mike and we are probably going to ban external scripts, and those two games are grandfathered in, just because. It would be unfair to take them down when they got in because the rules weren't clearly defined then.


Yeah and about noclip, yeah sorry guys, I did get that confused with clipping. noclip is obviously a cheat like godmode.
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Quote:
I'm pretty much against freeware games on SDA now. Basing it on popularity is a dumb idea I think (people like bad games) and basing it on quality is entirely subjective. If we allowed certain freeware games, and I was in charge, I'm sure nobody would like my decisions.


Well, no system is going to be perfect, largely because no one is going to agree what decisions a perfect system would make. The question is whether it'd be worse than having no freeware runs at all, which I think is unlikely unless you purposely designed things to allow a crapflood.

Imagine the following, for example:

- A forum is created where users can post proposal threads about freeware runs. The threads are left open for a couple weeks after their creation.

- Users are allowed to vote on whether the run should be allowed. One could say that a game would require a 2/3 majority approval in order to be posted. One could set a quorum as well, say 50 votes or so... if the game doesn't receive this many votes, then it can't be posted. These exact figures can be adjusted in order to raise the bar on the difficulty of getting a run approved... you'd want to start with it being high and then possibly lowering it depending on how things go.

- Votes are only counted if the user has been around the forums for a while or has a certain number of posts. Simple flood prevention.

- Users are advised to only vote on games that they have at least a passing familiarity with and that they believe will contribute positively to the site if posted.

There you go, a fairly legitimate process which would probably yield results that everyone would agree upon if the standards set are high enough. Yes, things could go wrong, but they probably won't. Run a trial and see, who knows. Tongue
yes, america's most blunted
Quote:
Scripts that alter the way controls are inputted is not a slippery slope that leads to commands that change in-game factors.

i've understood you from the first instance. i must not have communicated my multiple points against scripts in a way where people recognized them as distinct arguments. let me address your slippery slope comment directly. if a bunny hopping script (which only affects jump control inputs) can lead to wood surfing, would you be fine with a crouching script that led to being able to glitch out and clip through walls? as i said, clipping errors can result from a lot of different things and even restricting scripts to only "control input modifications" leaves the door wide open to exploitation. there are plenty of 1 in a million chance occurrences that could be turned into reliable tricks with the right input script.

Quote:
Your problem with it is not that it’s a cheat, but that it was something put back into the game after the developers took it out. Thus, your issue with bunnyhopping isn’t about scripts and cheating, it’s about the VERSION. Your qualm with bunnyhopping is about reverting a game to a previous version, so stop trying to make it about scripts and cheating.

i do not have a single qualm with scripting, i have several and will try to better differentiate. in this case it's about the audacity of the scripters to alter the engine of the game they are running regardless of what justifications they can assume to have. i think it's tough luck that the unpatched version of HL didn't record demos correctly, the players should have to play by the game's rules.

Quote:
The script about crouching in CS would be allowed, since it’s only about the way controls are inputted.

that is just awful, you guys don't seem to have any respect for the games you run. you should also check with your constituents to see if they all feel the same way about that one.

what would you say to a run of a PC fighting game where the runner hot-keyed combos and special moves to single keys? that should be perfectly legal and endorsed by the scripting community if you care to avoid hypocrisy.

Quote:
Speed and legitimacy aren’t ranked with each other. The bottom line for speedruns is speed, and for SDA it is legitimacy

i don't care at all what scripts/hacks/tool-assists get used elsewhere on the internet. since these are the SDA forums and we're talking about SDA rules, legitimacy comes first. maybe alucard was right and that a distinction between these types of runners should be made. afterall, you guys could play without scripts (the way most of us are forced to) but you're too lazy or not good enough or something.

i wouldn't have been able to go on so long, single handedly arguing the dubious nature of scripting if they weren't such a pandora's box. if you guys can come up with a set of script restrictions that i can't so easily shoot holes in, then you'll have your rules set (even though i'll obviously still be against them in general).