Official 2009 Rules Reworking Discussion [locked]

2009-06-17 06:07:13 pm

My feelings on The Demon Rush

If there is a new segment penalty (which is really up in the air at this point), it won't be applied rectroactively because all of the timing would make my head explode.

Of course, it would be applied to an old run if someone improves said run, just to see how they compare.

grndino

2009-06-17 09:22:52 pm

Quote from lag:

Segmentation shouldn't be a separate category

Um, as long as we're proposing changes to the practices that made sda grow as fast as it did (and in a half-troll tone)...

Don't remove obsoleted runs.

arkarian

2009-06-17 09:43:46 pm

gamelogs.org

Quote from ExplodingCabbage:

So you'll allow or disallow reloading saves in SS runs depending upon the purpose for which it is done? That sounds too arbitrary to me. Why should one be allowed and not the other?

it would be taken care of by verifiers. reloading a save to attempt a part of the game multiple times would be immediately rejected by all verifiers— this goes against the spirit of a ss run. death warping wouldn't be rejected.

najzere

2009-06-17 10:07:51 pm

I really hadn't thought about most of this stuff until this thread, but reading everyone's arguments has either cemented or changed my thoughts about a few things. Of most concern to me are all the potential categories for runs. As I see it, we have the following options when creating runs:

Category 1
1. Scripted
2. Non-scripted

Category 2
1. Any %
2. 100%
3. Low %

Category 3
1. Single segment
2. Segmented

Disturbingly, by mixing and matching, a game could potentially have 12 different categories. That seems like too many to me. The first thing I'd throw out are scripts, as there is another venue for playing games with tool assistance. After that I'd get rid of segmented runs, as this is using a technique which manipulates forces outside the game world. To me the different percentages are really the only distinct categories of running a game, since they are enforced in-game.

I'm not against segmented runs however, as they are a major component of the site and provide a greater look at what a (non-assisted) human could possibly accomplish. I do think they deserve less leeway though. Because segmented runs are all about speed, I think they should only be valid as Any % runs, which will always be the fastest of the three categories, even if Any % happens to also be Low or 100 %. I'd also like to see some sort of segment penalty, even if minuscule, to stop extreme over-segmentation of runs.

These changes would make for four potential categories. I didn't count IL tables, which I think should always be allowed, with each level being single segment.

By the way, of the three hotly debated issues (scripting, segment penalties and in-game/real timers), it seems to me that using in-game timing whenever possible is the only one reaching any sort of consensus. At some point are the administrators going to just declare some new rules, or are the topics no one agrees upon going to remain unchanged?

I really hadn't thought about most of this stuff until this thread, but reading everyone's arguments has either cemented or changed my thoughts about a few things. Of most concern to me are all the potential categories for runs. As I see it, we have the following options when creating runs:

[u]Category 1[/u]
1. Scripted
2. Non-scripted

[u]Category 2[/u]
1. Any %
2. 100%
3. Low %

[u]Category 3[/u]
1. Single segment
2. Segmented

Disturbingly, by mixing and matching, a game could potentially have 12 different categories. That seems like too many to me. The first thing I'd throw out are scripts, as there is another venue for playing games with tool assistance. After that I'd get rid of segmented runs, as this is using a technique which manipulates forces outside the game world. To me the different percentages are really the only distinct categories of running a game, since they are enforced in-game.

I'm not against segmented runs however, as they are a major component of the site and provide a greater look at what a (non-assisted) human could possibly accomplish. I do think they deserve less leeway though. Because segmented runs are all about speed, I think they should only be valid as Any % runs, which will always be the fastest of the three categories, even if Any % happens to also be Low or 100 %. I'd also like to see some sort of segment penalty, even if minuscule, to stop extreme over-segmentation of runs.

These changes would make for four potential categories. I didn't count IL tables, which I think should always be allowed, with each level being single segment.

By the way, of the three hotly debated issues (scripting, segment penalties and in-game/real timers), it seems to me that using in-game timing whenever possible is the only one reaching any sort of consensus. At some point are the administrators going to just declare some new rules, or are the topics no one agrees upon going to remain unchanged?

LLCoolDave

2009-06-17 10:44:34 pm

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Not at all, you see a turbo script is very different from a script which plays a section of a game for you and I highlighted these points in my arguments. I'll reiterate. For one scripts which play significant sections of games entirely for you should be banned by SDA rules as they are with quake since these scripts are strictly detracting from the display of human skill for the localized section of the speedrun for which they are used. Another reason is a turbo script can be emulated with greatly varying degrees of success with hardware which is accepted and legal.

Where do you draw the line, though? What about a game where pressing the jump key during a jump does something you may not want? In that case you can't just have a script or mousewheel bind to spam jump because it would slow you down: You have to jump right as you land on the ground. That's something far less easy to manipulate with hardware, and all of a sudden the script directly attacks playing skills: Namely, the skill of being able to jump in rhythm while taking care of other things in the game world, such as shooting something.

Quote:

Another point I made is that if the game was designed with any inkling of speedrunning in mind there would already be a built in auto-jump feature and I'm sure you'll find that the vast majority of HL2 gamers would easily agree on this.

We are not really a target audience, usually. We're a small part of the population, it's not really worth considering us much. In fact, I prefer that, most cases of big games somewhat targeting the speedrunning community with some features totally blew them, and most of the effect we have on game design is introduction of invisible walls and other means to beat sequence breaking, a complete non issue in normal game design most of the time. Although I agree that the game would be easier to run with an auto-jump feature, but fact is it doesn't have one. I don't think the runner has any right to say "But this game should have this feature" and promptly implement it on his own in some way.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]
Not at all, you see a turbo script is very different from a script which plays a section of a game for you and I highlighted these points in my arguments.  I'll reiterate.  For one scripts which play significant sections of games entirely for you should be banned by SDA rules as they are with quake since these scripts are strictly detracting from the display of human skill for the localized section of the speedrun for which they are used.  Another reason is a turbo script can be emulated with greatly varying degrees of success with hardware which is accepted and legal.[/quote]

Where do you draw the line, though? What about a game where pressing the jump key during a jump does something you may not want? In that case you can't just have a script or mousewheel bind to spam jump because it would slow you down: You have to jump right as you land on the ground. That's something far less easy to manipulate with hardware, and all of a sudden the script directly attacks playing skills: Namely, the skill of being able to jump in rhythm while taking care of other things in the game world, such as shooting something.

[quote]Another point I made is that if the game was designed with any inkling of speedrunning in mind there would already be a built in auto-jump feature and I'm sure you'll find that the vast majority of HL2 gamers would easily agree on this. 
[/quote]

We are not really a target audience, usually. We're a small part of the population, it's not really worth considering us much. In fact, I prefer that, most cases of big games somewhat targeting the speedrunning community with some features totally blew them, and most of the effect we have on game design is introduction of invisible walls and other means to beat sequence breaking, a complete non issue in normal game design most of the time. Although I agree that the game would be easier to run with an auto-jump feature, but fact is it doesn't have one. I don't think the runner has any right to say "But this game should have this feature" and promptly implement it on his own in some way.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

Spider-Waffle

Edit history:

Spider-Waffle: 2009-06-18 02:41:15 am

2009-06-18 02:27:35 am

Don't think! feeeeeal

>>>ANY script detracts from a display of human skill. The jump script you are talking about is far worse than the example I gave of a Bowser script because it takes care of a critical element of the game--movement--for you throughout the entire game. I really don't see how you think that doing that shows skill. Yes, some skill is required even with the script, but more skill is required without it.<<<

Your first sentence just completely proves my opinion that you have a closed mind and will cling to your preconceived ideals about scripts regardless of how many valid points people who know much more about scripts, use scripts in speedrunning much much more than you, make. Yes, your statement may be correct in some sort of technical sense, but if you really understand the topic you'd know how it's far off it is at the same time. There's a significant amount people I think that will never change their opinion on scripts even if they knew they were the only entity in the universe which had such an opinion while every other entity had a drastically different opinion. Your statements just show how little you know about scripting, turbo jumping, and movement in HL2. You're under some sort impression that a turbo script is a supplement for skill, or can replace skill, when in actuality it is merely a replacement for hardware such as mouse wheels or turbo joysticks. You also seem to think that a turbo jump script is something that you can simply use all the time to move you everywhere without the need for much skill. Your just so far off on all your points there really is no point arguing with you until you have a a clue what your arguing about, and not that your opinion is possible to be changed anyway. I don't believe your opinion is based off intelligent decisions from empirical evidence, you obviously don't even want to take the time to learn and understand it.

>>>ANY script detracts from a display of human skill. The jump script you are talking about is far worse than the example I gave of a Bowser script because it takes care of a critical element of the game--movement--for you throughout the entire game. I really don't see how you think that doing that shows skill. Yes, some skill is required even with the script, but more skill is required without it.<<<

Your first sentence just completely proves my opinion that you have a closed mind and will cling to your preconceived ideals about scripts regardless of how many valid points people who know much more about scripts, use scripts in speedrunning much much more than you, make.  Yes, your statement may be correct in some sort of technical sense, but if you really understand the topic you'd know how it's far off it is at the same time.  There's a significant amount people I think that will never change their opinion on scripts even if they knew they were the only entity in the universe which had such an opinion while every other entity had a drastically different opinion.  Your statements just show how little you know about scripting, turbo jumping, and movement in HL2.  You're under some sort impression that a turbo script is a supplement for skill, or can replace skill, when in actuality it is merely a replacement for hardware such as mouse wheels or turbo joysticks.  You also seem to think that a turbo jump script is something that you can simply use all the time to move you everywhere without the need for much skill.  Your just so far off on all your points there really is no point arguing with you until you have a a clue what your arguing about, and not that your opinion is possible to be changed anyway.  I don't believe your opinion is based off intelligent decisions from empirical evidence, you obviously don't even want to take the time to learn and understand it.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-06-18 02:37:05 am

Don't think! feeeeeal

>>>Where do you draw the line, though? What about a game where pressing the jump key during a jump does something you may not want? In that case you can't just have a script or mousewheel bind to spam jump because it would slow you down: You have to jump right as you land on the ground. That's something far less easy to manipulate with hardware, and all of a sudden the script directly attacks playing skills: Namely, the skill of being able to jump in rhythm while taking care of other things in the game world, such as shooting something.
<<<

I made a very lengthy post about jump timing as a skill vs turbo jumping in the FF forum when curious as to what direction they were going to go in as to prevent their jump mechanics from having the same flaws that HL or HL2 have; it might still be around but I think lost the word file when a HDD died, I'll check. In short if the game has something like that would prevent turbo jumping then such a script or any sort of spam jump method is no longer useful. Then you can officially treat jump timing as a skill rather than a product of hardware or scripts. Q3 is such a game, and it's speed jumping physics and methods are DRASTICALLY different from HL2 or games where you'd want a turbo jump script.

>>>Where do you draw the line, though? What about a game where pressing the jump key during a jump does something you may not want? In that case you can't just have a script or mousewheel bind to spam jump because it would slow you down: You have to jump right as you land on the ground. That's something far less easy to manipulate with hardware, and all of a sudden the script directly attacks playing skills: Namely, the skill of being able to jump in rhythm while taking care of other things in the game world, such as shooting something.
<<<

I made a very lengthy post about jump timing as a skill vs turbo jumping in the FF forum when curious as to what direction they were going to go in as to prevent their jump mechanics from having the same flaws that HL or HL2 have; it might still be around but I think lost the word file when a HDD died, I'll check.  In short if the game has something like that would prevent turbo jumping then such a script or any sort of spam jump method is no longer useful.  Then you can officially treat jump timing as a skill rather than a product of hardware or scripts.  Q3 is such a game, and it's speed jumping physics and methods are DRASTICALLY different from HL2 or games where you'd want a turbo jump script.

Lag.Com

2009-06-18 03:11:13 am

sda loyalist

Quote from LLCoolDave:

What about a game where pressing the jump key during a jump does something you may not want?

I am currently speedrunning such a game. A massive portion of platformers (or 3d action adventures now) contain 'double jump'. Klonoa floats kind of like Yoshi does, with a second jump press. So yeah, if I want to jump repeatedly without floating, it takes some serious timing. I would never try and write a script to make this easier, because that would be cheating.

zoonel

2009-06-18 03:14:36 am

Go play spacechem !

I dont think you should lower the categories, lets face it there are already a lot of possible categories : 100%,any %, Single Segment, multiple segments, game+ with different character, boss attack, Individual Level, easy - medium - hard, ....
The script - no-script should be there (dont know if it is actually).
As a viewer i rather see a any% run with multiple segments on hard difficulty. But i can understand why some people like Single segment, or 100% ; on the other hand i think the runner should run on the hardest difficulty if possible.

Scripting should be a separate categories as i mentionned and only allowed in game where a scripting functionnality is provided (like HL, Quake, ...) so no auto-it ever, no turbo controllers, heavy mouse/keyboard customization (binding a button to a list of commands)

When i played counter strike (uwc3 mod) i used heavy scripting to compensate the lack of ergonomy and the inconveniences of the game. For exemple some CS servers start the game asap without letting you humanly buy your weapons etc... forcing you tu use a buying script to be competitive. Switching from main weapon to the pistol is also vital and done via scripting.
But as a speedrunner i dont like watching a run with heavy scripting used, i was indeed entertained and fascinate with the HL, HL² runs but inside me i wish there was a no-script run.
Using scripts also requires skill to play but its a different play then a non script run, that's why it sould be separate categories. Being able to do a trick consitently via scripting is what i blame. The non scripted runs however could use some scripting functionnalities like some bindings, you could allow them to use CPL config or other tournament configurations.

Scripting is like multi segments, when does one cross the line and start abusing it ?

I'm against scripting because if i see some runs with scripts i dont know if the guy did some incredible moves or if its just a scripted command and the runner had nothing to do but just press one button.
For me there is a lack of ransparence, on a scripted run why not publish the scripts used or better, make a comment on each script used and how it works (and why it is used). That will maybe change my opinon on scripting issues :p

I dont think you should lower the categories, lets face it there are already a lot of possible categories : 100%,any %, Single Segment, multiple segments, game+ with different character, boss attack, Individual Level, easy - medium - hard, ....
The script - no-script should be there (dont know if it is actually).
As a viewer i rather see a any% run with multiple segments on hard difficulty. But i can understand why some people like Single segment, or 100% ; on the other hand i think the runner should run on the hardest difficulty if possible.

Scripting should be a separate categories as i mentionned and only allowed in game where a scripting functionnality is provided (like HL, Quake, ...) so no auto-it ever, no turbo controllers, heavy mouse/keyboard customization (binding a button to a list of commands)

When i played counter strike (uwc3 mod) i used heavy scripting to compensate the lack of ergonomy and the inconveniences of the game. For exemple some CS servers start the game asap without letting you humanly buy your weapons etc... forcing you tu use a buying script to be competitive. Switching from main weapon to the pistol is also vital and done via scripting.
But as a speedrunner i dont like watching a run with heavy scripting used, i was indeed entertained and fascinate with the HL, HL² runs but inside me i wish there was a no-script run.
Using scripts also requires skill to play but its a different play then  a non script run, that's why it sould be separate categories. Being able to do a trick consitently via scripting is what i blame. The non scripted runs however could use some scripting functionnalities like some bindings, you could allow them to use CPL config or other tournament configurations.

Scripting is like multi segments, when does one cross the line and start abusing it ?

I'm against scripting because if i see some runs with scripts i dont know if the guy did some incredible moves or if its just a scripted command and the runner had nothing to do but just press one button.
For me there is a lack of ransparence, on a scripted run why not publish the scripts used or better, make a comment on each script used and how it works (and why it is used). That will maybe change my opinon on scripting issues :p

ExplodingCabbage

2009-06-18 07:00:51 am

Am I the only one who wants the script/no-script category distinction abolished, and replaced by a rule allowing certain limited scripts in all runs? There seem to be people who want to restrict scripting AND keep it as a seperate category, and I don't see the point of that - the categories will look exactly the same, but the scripting category will spam jump with scripts and the non-scripting category will spam jump with a mousewheel. That's pointless. Either have no-scripts versus unlimited scripts (and accept that that means we're in some sense allowing TASes, but so be it because at least they're TASes created using legitimate game features and not emulation, and after all those runs will need a home too if anyone starts making them), or else have one category that allows weapon change scripts, turbo scripts and nothing else.

Kibbo

2009-06-18 07:04:46 am

TIOLET!

Quote:

multi segments, when does one cross the line and start abusing it?

I don't think there is a straight answer to this. Different games and difficulty settings will need different amount of segments in order to produce an optimal run.

UltimateDarius

2009-06-18 10:41:49 am

Back in the game!

Quote from Kibbo:

Different games and difficulty settings will need different amount of segments in order to produce an optimal run.

Agreed.

Lag.Com

2009-06-18 10:45:04 am

sda loyalist

I'm not interested in optimal, I'm interested in great human performances.

Oracion

2009-06-18 11:05:26 am

Quote from lag:

I'm not interested in optimal, I'm interested in great human performances.

Going by this though, wouldn't it be wise for humans to make said optimal performances, so that when they do it it's all the better?

I mean, I wouldn't mind a stylish run at all, but it has to be quick too. I'm sure you've seen runs here where people will do fancy stuff while waiting for timers to finish, or for a certain event, so most of them do their job to make it entertaining, yet fast.

Lag.Com

2009-06-18 12:21:44 pm

sda loyalist

It would be wise for them to try and approach an optimal performance, but that's impossible. So saying you can achieve it through the help of scripts means they're doing something you couldn't. Which is cheating.

arkarian

2009-06-18 12:52:10 pm

gamelogs.org

still not sure why yall are even talking about allowing scripts in the first place. sda is not tasvideos. some old pc runs use them because everyone was using at the time, and no rules banning them were firmly established yet. now that the community's grown, obviously they shouldn't be allowed anymore for any reason— no matter how you look at it, they're cheating.

Chucknob

2009-06-18 02:06:21 pm

I'm a regular poster here, but I'm too lazy to login.

One question about the idea of level-segments: What about the parts of a game with incredibly random moments? I'm sure there are far better examples, but say I was going to produce a multisegment run of Gunstar Heroes (XBLA) and I wanted to segment during the board game section so I didn't have to replay hundreds of times to get good rolls?

Again, I'm sure there are way better examples of this problem. I'm supposing you're answer is that runners would just have to tough it out and play that segment many, many more times than others. I'm just curious.

ninetigerr

Edit history:

ninetigerr: 2009-06-18 04:43:28 pm

2009-06-18 04:32:30 pm

2.) Reworking rules and faq text according to the new proposed rules, rewording parts of the rules and faq that are or have in the past been considered to be inaccurate or hard to understand.

"How are runs timed?" Should not be a FAQ question, it should be a set of *rules*.

Quote:

When the player first gains control of the game's character, timing begins.

I have misinterpreted this rule. I believe it should say "Timing begins when the player first gains control of the game's character's movement in the first segment," or similar. Check out [url=http://speeddemosarchive.com/forum/index.php/topic,10162.0.html this link]http://speeddemosarchive.com/forum/index.php/topic,10162.0.html[/url] for the relevant discussion.

Oh, and it should explicitly stated that for runs with varying difficulty, the run will be categorized as the lowest difficulty the runner ever used.

3.) Reworking the save penalty for manual saves in games that allow you to save anywhere

_Apparently_ if you manually save at an autosave location in order to "save the autosave," it does not count as a manual save (and therefore does not incur the 1/2 second penalty). This seems a bit counterintuitive to me.

But moreover, my opinion is that the "manual save penalty" should not exist at all. In regular gameplay, one would save at many different places. Speedrunning a game in segments, therefore, is no different than regular gameplay. We should not be penalized for playing a game in the manner that it was intended.

4.) Clearly specifying the scripts that are to be allowed.
5.) Dealing with game specific rulings

We can help eliminate game-specific rules by banning all scripts. I'm not in favor of allowing all scripts because then the competition relies entirely on who can write the best script, not who can demonstrate the best gameplay.

5.) Dealing with game specific rulings
6.) Dealing with very similar categories

Again, we can further eliminate game-specific rules by *not* merging very similar categories. Conker's Bad Fur Day, for instance, has an extra rule that "All runs should be 100% because the difference between an any% and 100% run is minimal." But there *is* a difference, and that difference should be acknowledged.

[b]2.) Reworking rules and faq text according to the new proposed rules, rewording parts of the rules and faq that are or have in the past been considered to be inaccurate or hard to understand.[/b]

"How are runs timed?" Should not be a FAQ question, it should be a set of *rules*.

[quote]When the player first gains control of the game's character, timing begins.[/quote]

I have misinterpreted this rule. I believe it should say "Timing begins when the player first gains control of the game's character's movement in the first segment," or similar. Check out [url=http://speeddemosarchive.com/forum/index.php/topic,10162.0.html this link]http://speeddemosarchive.com/forum/index.php/topic,10162.0.html[/url] for the relevant discussion.

Oh, and it should explicitly stated that for runs with varying difficulty, the run will be categorized as the lowest difficulty the runner ever used.

[b]3.) Reworking the save penalty for manual saves in games that allow you to save anywhere[/b]

_Apparently_ if you manually save at an autosave location in order to "save the autosave," it does not count as a manual save (and therefore does not incur the 1/2 second penalty). This seems a bit counterintuitive to me.

But moreover, my opinion is that the "manual save penalty" should not exist at all. In regular gameplay, one would save at many different places. Speedrunning a game in segments, therefore, is no different than regular gameplay. We should not be penalized for playing a game in the manner that it was intended.

[b]4.) Clearly specifying the scripts that are to be allowed.[/b]
[b]5.) Dealing with game specific rulings[/b]

We can help eliminate game-specific rules by banning all scripts. I'm not in favor of allowing all scripts because then the competition relies entirely on who can write the best script, not who can demonstrate the best gameplay.

[b]5.) Dealing with game specific rulings[/b]
[b]6.) Dealing with very similar categories[/b]

Again, we can further eliminate game-specific rules by *not* merging very similar categories. Conker's Bad Fur Day, for instance, has an extra rule that "All runs should be 100% because the difference between an any% and 100% run is minimal." But there *is* a difference, and that difference should be acknowledged.

arkarian

2009-06-18 05:15:17 pm

gamelogs.org

i agree with ninetigerr's last point. an any% run of conker's or banjo-kazooie is faster, but not much faster than 100%. but it's still faster. sure, most runners just do 100%, but an any% would have a lower time. doesn't sda encourage beating games as fast as possible?

Emptyeye

2009-06-18 06:58:42 pm

Talk to the Hand

Some thoughts, perhaps a bit late and unoriginal:

1.) Treatment of currently published or in-submission runs affected by the proposed rule changes.
I'd say leave them up and let anything currently in-submission go through via some sort of grandfather clause. Clearly explain next to the run that it was done under rules that no longer apply. If a run later comes along that would obsolete that run via clearly being faster under the new rules, the grandfathered run should then be taken off the site.

3.) Reworking the save penalty for manual saves in games that allow you to save anywhere
Let's first clearly decide precisely why the penalty is in place in the first place. Ostensibly, it's to discourage excessive segmenting. But the philosophy now seems to be "segment as much as needed to get a high-quality run", which seems to go against that. In that sense, I'm not really sure why we still have it. Without claiming to speak for the administration, I'm willing to take my chances with "allowing" "excessive" segmenting.
4.) Clearly specifying the scripts that are to be allowed.
I'll admit to not being a PC gamer, but I'm not a huge fan of scripts at all. I suppose if the game allows them to be made as a standard feature (IE not, I dunno, external), allow them.

Some thoughts, perhaps a bit late and unoriginal:

[b]1.) Treatment of currently published or in-submission runs affected by the proposed rule changes.[/b]
I'd say leave them up and let anything currently in-submission go through via some sort of grandfather clause. Clearly explain next to the run that it was done under rules that no longer apply. If a run later comes along that would obsolete that run via clearly being faster under the new rules, the grandfathered run should then be taken off the site.

[b]3.) Reworking the save penalty for manual saves in games that allow you to save anywhere[/b]
Let's first clearly decide precisely why the penalty is in place in the first place. Ostensibly, it's to discourage excessive segmenting. But the philosophy now seems to be "segment as much as needed to get a high-quality run", which seems to go against that. In that sense, I'm not really sure why we still have it. Without claiming to speak for the administration, I'm willing to take my chances with "allowing" "excessive" segmenting.
[b]4.) Clearly specifying the scripts that are to be allowed.[/b]
I'll admit to not being a PC gamer, but I'm not a huge fan of scripts at all. I suppose if the game allows them to be made as a standard feature (IE not, I dunno, external), allow them.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

Spider-Waffle

Edit history:

Spider-Waffle: 2009-06-18 11:02:03 pm

2009-06-18 07:08:09 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

Quote from Arkarian:

still not sure why yall are even talking about allowing scripts in the first place. sda is not tasvideos. some old pc runs use them because everyone was using at the time, and no rules banning them were firmly established yet. now that the community's grown, obviously they shouldn't be allowed anymore for any reason— no matter how you look at it, they're cheating.

If you could stop clinging to your preconceived ideals and make an intelligent, open-minded decision based on the facts people who know much more about scripts and use them much more speedrunning, you would probably come to a much different conclusion. But I don't think your mind is capable of change on the matter under ANY circumstance, thus there is no point to reiterate the points laid forth by the people who know many times more about the subject than you do.

TheQuietMan

2009-06-18 09:32:59 pm

Complete. Global. Saturation.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

If you could stop clinging to your preconceived ideals and make an intelligent, open-minded decision based on the facts people who know much more about scripts and use them much more speedrunning, you would probably come to a much different conclusion. But I don't your mind is capable of change on the matter under ANY circumstance, thus there is no point to reiterate the points laid forth by the people who know many times more about the subject than you do.

I've been browsing your highly loony rants for the last three pages, and all this deliriousness just because you can't time your jumps right in a segmented run or buy a cheap mouse with a wheel (which they all come with now)? Seriously?

My favorite part of all this injudicious insanity is the following suggested double standard (both parts come from within the same post):

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I think the restrictions should be as specific and as objective as possible while doing their intended job which is to allow scripts which can enhance speedrunning as a display of human skill and only boycott scripts which are strictly or unnecessarily detracting from speedrunning as a display of human skill.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

I noticed some people were in favor of turbo controllers in separate categories. I would offer to beat the X-men mutant apocalypse speedrun by a significant time if it would instate such a category. For me it just comes down to simple realization that gameplay is vastly superior on certain games with turbo abilities, like HL2 or x-men mutant apocalypse, and if the game makers were more keen on how to make their game better or more suitable for speedrunning they would have built in the turbo function.

Fucking hell Spider-Waffle...

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]
If you could stop clinging to your preconceived ideals and make an intelligent, open-minded decision based on the facts people who know much more about scripts and use them much more speedrunning, you would probably come to a much different conclusion. But I don't your mind is capable of change on the matter under ANY circumstance, thus there is no point to reiterate the points laid forth by the people who know many times more about the subject than you do.[/quote]

I've been browsing your highly loony rants for the last three pages, and all this deliriousness just because you can't time your jumps right in a segmented run or buy a cheap mouse with a wheel (which they all come with now)? Seriously?

My favorite part of all this injudicious insanity is the following suggested double standard (both parts come from within the same post):

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]
I think the restrictions should be as specific and as objective as possible while doing their intended job which is to allow scripts which can enhance speedrunning as a display of human skill and only [b]boycott scripts which are strictly or unnecessarily detracting from speedrunning as a display of human skill.[/b]
[/quote]

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]I noticed some people were in favor of turbo controllers in separate categories. I would offer to beat the X-men mutant apocalypse speedrun by a significant time if it would instate such a category.  [b]For me it just comes down to simple realization that gameplay is vastly superior on certain games with turbo abilities, like HL2 or x-men mutant apocalypse,[/b] and if the game makers were more keen on how to make their game better or more suitable for speedrunning they would have built in the turbo function.[/quote]
Fucking hell Spider-Waffle...

ShadowWraith

2009-06-18 10:38:24 pm

.

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

Quote from Arkarian:

still not sure why yall are even talking about allowing scripts in the first place. sda is not tasvideos. some old pc runs use them because everyone was using at the time, and no rules banning them were firmly established yet. now that the community's grown, obviously they shouldn't be allowed anymore for any reason— no matter how you look at it, they're cheating.

If you could stop clinging to your preconceived ideals and make an intelligent, open-minded decision based on the facts people who know much more about scripts and use them much more speedrunning, you would probably come to a much different conclusion. But I don't your mind is capable of change on the matter under ANY circumstance, thus there is no point to reiterate the points laid forth by the people who know many times more about the subject than you do.

"If you listen to biased people you'll come to the same conclusions as them." -- What?

Preconceived ideals aside, asking someone who uses scripts to speedrun whether scripts are good or bad doesn't seem like the most intelligent way to decide. I'd like to think I know a fair bit about scripts and I'm going to have to say that any kind of script that takes control away from the player is a bad one. Because then it's not the player playing the game.

[quote="Spider-Waffle"]
[quote="Arkarian"]
still not sure why yall are even talking about allowing scripts in the first place. sda is not tasvideos. some old pc runs use them because everyone was using at the time, and no rules banning them were firmly established yet. now that the community's grown, obviously they shouldn't be allowed anymore for any reason— no matter how you look at it, they're cheating.
[/quote]

If you could stop clinging to your preconceived ideals and make an intelligent, open-minded decision based on the facts people who know much more about scripts and use them much more speedrunning, you would probably come to a much different conclusion.  But I don't your mind is capable of change on the matter under ANY circumstance, thus there is no point to reiterate the points laid forth by the people who know many times more about the subject than you do.

[/quote]

"If you listen to biased people you'll come to the same conclusions as them." -- What?

Preconceived ideals aside, asking someone who uses scripts to speedrun whether scripts are good or bad doesn't seem like the most intelligent way to decide. I'd like to think I know a fair bit about scripts and I'm going to have to say that any kind of script that takes control away from the player is a bad one. Because then it's not the player playing the game.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-06-18 11:01:17 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

>>>But moreover, my opinion is that the "manual save penalty" should not exist at all. In regular gameplay, one would save at many different places. Speedrunning a game in segments, therefore, is no different than regular gameplay. We should not be penalized for playing a game in the manner that it was intended.
<<<

It shouldn't exist for the purpose of changing a speedrun's time, but I strongly feel it is necessary to exist to compare the quality of segmented runs for competition purposes. It would really suck for runners if they needed to make all their segments 1-2 seconds long to compete in the segmented category, I think this would really degrade from speedrunning. I believe my HL segmented run is the most densely segmented run on SDA and a lot people wish it was less densely segmented at the cost of optimization. I planned exactly how I would segment every level based on the .5 second penalty, so I would only increase the number of segments for that level if it would take away more than .5 from the final time. If there was no such penalty I would have had probably about 3 times as many segments and I'm sure I could have saved at least .2 seconds for every 10 seconds, thus cutting the final time by over 30 seconds. It would have been much less enjoyable to make, and I'm sure it'd receive at least 3 times the criticism, thus being worse for speedrunning and worse for SDA.

I strongly feel a competition based quotient needs to be calculated taking into account final time and number of segments. I also strongly feel a linear time cost for segments is the best way to do it, simplicity ultimately wins here. The .5 second penalty I feel is a really good fit for all games. I really like idea the idea of it being .5 + the time you gained from anomalies such as small warping from a small breaks between segments, I think this is already being implemented but there isn't an official rule yet. I think everyone agrees that shouldn't be able to gain time just by virtue of there being gaps between your segments.

>>>But moreover, my opinion is that the "manual save penalty" should not exist at all. In regular gameplay, one would save at many different places. Speedrunning a game in segments, therefore, is no different than regular gameplay. We should not be penalized for playing a game in the manner that it was intended.
<<<

It shouldn't exist for the purpose of changing a speedrun's time, but I strongly feel it is necessary to exist to compare the quality of segmented runs for competition purposes.  It would really suck for runners if they needed to make all their segments 1-2 seconds long to compete in the segmented category, I think this would really degrade from speedrunning.  I believe my HL segmented run is the most densely segmented run on SDA and a lot people wish it was less densely segmented at the cost of optimization.  I planned exactly how I would segment every level based on the .5 second penalty, so I would only increase the number of segments for that level if it would take away more than .5 from the final time.  If there was no such penalty I would have had probably about 3 times as many segments and I'm sure I could have saved at least .2 seconds for every 10 seconds, thus cutting the final time by over 30 seconds.  It would have been much less enjoyable to make, and I'm sure it'd receive at least 3 times the criticism, thus being worse for speedrunning and worse for SDA.

I strongly feel a competition based quotient needs to be calculated taking into account final time and number of segments.  I also strongly feel a linear time cost for segments is the best way to do it, simplicity ultimately wins here.  The .5 second penalty I feel is a really good fit for all games.  I really like idea the idea of it being .5 + the time you gained from anomalies such as small warping from a small breaks between segments, I think this is already being implemented but there isn't an official rule yet.  I think everyone agrees that shouldn't be able to gain time just by virtue of there being gaps between your segments.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-06-18 11:26:35 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

TheQuietMan, I probably didn't do a good job of explaining my reasoning behind a lot of these arguments. Sometimes I can do a bad job of this. It can be very hard to write an agreement to an audience with such a different level of understanding of the background information. To do an adequate job I'd need to write several pages pages of background information and use several references.

Since you brought it up, on the simple subject of mouse wheels, I could write pages explaining why mouse wheels vary in effectiveness greatly, going into details of how they work and their specifications. Mouse wheels aren't even the best hardware to use and they have a limited duration on uninterrupted spamming.

About scripts, in short, if a script isn't purely supplementing skill for a localized area, it is likely shifting the focus of human skill onto other highly skill intensive aspects of the game which are more readily appreciated by the viewers, thus is in effect enhancing speedrunning as a display of human skill. SDA needs to draw some lines as which scripts are purely skill supplements and which are effectively enhancing the display of human skill. Speedrunning should never be about who can write the best scripts. I feel SDA should do it's best to make sure all types of acceptable scripts are made publicly available to all runners, and feel the gaming communities should be able to adequately give scripting support to runners who need it. And keep in mind, if you don't want anything to do with scripts because of your ideals, there's always a non-scripted category for you compete in and watch runs from. Everyone really should be able to get what they want.

TheQuietMan, I probably didn't do a good job of explaining my reasoning behind a lot of these arguments.  Sometimes I can do a bad job of this.  It can be very hard to write an agreement to an audience with such a different level of understanding of the background information.  To do an adequate job I'd need to write several pages pages of background information and use several references.

Since you brought it up, on the simple subject of mouse wheels, I could write pages explaining why mouse wheels vary in effectiveness greatly, going into details of how they work and their specifications.  Mouse wheels aren't even the best hardware to use and they have a limited duration on uninterrupted spamming.

About scripts, in short, if a script isn't purely supplementing skill for a localized area, it is likely shifting the focus of human skill onto other highly skill intensive aspects of the game which are more readily appreciated by the viewers, thus is in effect enhancing speedrunning as a display of human skill.  SDA needs to draw some lines as which scripts are purely skill supplements and which are effectively enhancing the display of human skill.  Speedrunning should never be about who can write the best scripts.  I feel SDA should do it's best to make sure all types of acceptable scripts are made publicly available to all runners, and feel the gaming communities should be able to adequately give scripting support to runners who need it.  And keep in mind, if you don't want anything to do with scripts because of your ideals, there's always a non-scripted category for you compete in and watch runs from.  Everyone really should be able to get what they want.