requesting a rule change for the metroid prime series [locked]

Kharay1977

2010-07-15 06:47:05 pm

Quote from MASTER-88:

I like much more see crazy boss fight than borring wall crawls.

Yes, you. But, luckily, there's more people than just you.

Quote from MASTER-88:

I`ll try. But i rarery find point what you talking.

Which, if I may be so bold, probably has more to do with your ... limited understanding of English than it has with my actual point.

VorpalEdge

2010-07-15 06:50:35 pm

welcome to the machine

Quote from arkarian:

one idea i was kicking around in irc awhile ago was "traversal" versus "warping" glitches, only the latter given a separate category:
- traversal means the player navigates through the game, moving according to what the game's engine allows, following the general flow of the map/level/world. metroid prime's "secret worlds" are a good example of this. this would not be considered a separate category from other any% runs.
- warping means the player appears in a remote location on the map/level/world without physically traveling there. the link's awakening map glitch is a good example. this would get its own category for all games.

I disagree. These categories would not cover something such as RBA in OoT, which is practically the definition of a glitch that needs its own category. And even for warp glitches, I don't think, say, the map glitch in DKC should be a separate category. Having two categories for that would be lame, imo (not that this is a very good argument).

Game-breaking glitches/major skips will end up needing to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, I think.

[quote="arkarian"]
one idea i was kicking around in irc awhile ago was "traversal" versus "warping" glitches, only the latter given a separate category:
- traversal means the player navigates through the game, moving according to what the game's engine allows, following the general flow of the map/level/world. metroid prime's "secret worlds" are a good example of this. this would not be considered a separate category from other any% runs.
- warping means the player appears in a remote location on the map/level/world without physically traveling there. the [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiDM4gL8pCI]link's awakening map glitch[/url] is a good example. this would get its own category for all games.[/quote]

I disagree.  These categories would not cover something such as RBA in OoT, which is practically the definition of a glitch that needs its own category.  And even for warp glitches, I don't think, say, the map glitch in DKC should be a separate category.  Having two categories for that would be lame, imo (not that this is a very good argument).

Game-breaking glitches/major skips will end up needing to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, I think.

Manocheese

2010-07-15 06:52:19 pm

Yes, a cucco riding the ground.

Quote from arkarian:

one idea i was kicking around in irc awhile ago was "traversal" versus "warping" glitches, only the latter given a separate category:
- traversal means the player navigates through the game, moving according to what the game's engine allows, following the general flow of the map/level/world. metroid prime's "secret worlds" are a good example of this. this would not be considered a separate category from other any% runs.
- warping means the player appears in a remote location on the map/level/world without physically traveling there. the link's awakening map glitch is a good example. this would get its own category for all games.

I don't think these categories are adequately aligned with the existing non-major/major skips categories. There are plenty of traversal glitches that are huge skips, like backwards long jumping through doors in Super Mario 64 to skip almost all stars. You don't even have to leave the game world. I doubt warping glitches like the ones in Link's Awakening are common enough to be a basis for a category covering all games.

[quote="arkarian"]one idea i was kicking around in irc awhile ago was "traversal" versus "warping" glitches, only the latter given a separate category:
- traversal means the player navigates through the game, moving according to what the game's engine allows, following the general flow of the map/level/world. metroid prime's "secret worlds" are a good example of this. this would not be considered a separate category from other any% runs.
- warping means the player appears in a remote location on the map/level/world without physically traveling there. the [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiDM4gL8pCI]link's awakening map glitch[/url] is a good example. this would get its own category for all games.[/quote]

I don't think these categories are adequately aligned with the existing non-major/major skips categories. There are plenty of traversal glitches that are huge skips, like backwards long jumping through doors in Super Mario 64 to skip almost all stars. You don't even have to leave the game world. I doubt warping glitches like the ones in Link's Awakening are common enough to be a basis for a category covering all games.

Serris

2010-07-15 06:54:37 pm

SWs (or generally out-of-bounds/"mysterious teleportation" glitches) are a separate category for runs that were on the site before the ban on these glitches was lifted; it won't affect future games. Further distinctions are only made between "large skips" and "no large skips" (whether these involve OoB glitches or not doesn't matter anymore since all glitches are allowed now), the definition of which depends on the game. By handling it this way, SDA is taking responsibility for the old mistake of arbitrarily banning certain glitches, which is perfectly fine. It would probably help to mention that this debate is mainly caused by Miles's new Metroid Prime 2 1:27 SS run using glitches the current any% (iirc) wasn't allowed to use, utilizing some new tricks while (understandably) leaving out others (Grapple skip). Having the 1:27 "OoB" run stand next to DJGrenola's 1:38 "non-OoB" run won't hurt anyone - if no one wants to run without SWs anymore, then the SW-free category simply won't see any more improvements. Of course, it's possible DJGrenola will want his run removed when the 1:27 arrives - but that's completely different from forcing it off the site.

Kharay1977

2010-07-15 06:56:11 pm

Quote from VorpalEdge:

I disagree. These categories would not cover something such as RBA in OoT, which is practically the definition of a glitch that needs its own category.

It is entirely possible to generalize a category for even such a severe glitch as OoT's RBA - 'Memory Manipulation Glitches'.

So, we could build up a list of "Separate Category Glitches":

- "Uses Memory Manipulation Glitches"
- "Uses Save Warping/Warp Glitches"
- etcetera...

BioSpark

2010-07-15 06:59:08 pm

ok, let's not get ahead of ourselves. i think it should be decided on a game by game basis, but by using what ark said as a guideline.

tomatobob

2010-07-15 06:59:25 pm

Quote from MASTER-88:

Is 14% hard run more interesting than 21% hard mode run? 14% run not includes quadraxis fight and boss fights are most cool stuff in low-% runs. I like much more see crazy boss fight than borring wall crawls.

Interesting doesn't come into play here, though. Skipping Quadraxis lowers the percentage, it may be ugly and boring but that's just how it goes.

Quote:

Did you even try reading what I wrote?

I`ll try. But i rarery find point what you talking.

This is a fantastic burn.

VorpalEdge

2010-07-15 07:00:14 pm

welcome to the machine

Quote from Kharay1977:

It is entirely possible to generalize a category for even such a severe glitch as OoT's RBA - 'Memory Manipulation Glitches'.

So, we could build up a list of "Separate Category Glitches":

- "Uses Memory Manipulation Glitches"
- "Uses Save Warping/Warp Glitches"
- etcetera...

That's a whole lot of categories when you only need one (and did you just compare warp glitches to save warping?).

Kharay1977

2010-07-15 07:03:10 pm

Quote from tomatobob:

This is a fantastic burn.

Yes, fantastically pathetic.

Quote from VorpalEdge:

(and did you just compare warp glitches to save warping?)

Not compare, merely suggested that they could be considered similar in nature. As they both end up... warping the player.

OK, so, maybe I did compare them. Ah well. Wink

arkarian

2010-07-15 07:23:27 pm

gamelogs.org

my main problem with "uses major skips" is that that's a really meaningless label. who's to judge what a major skip is? it might be necessary to use that in the end though; i'm just trying to bring up some different ways of classifying these glitches.

Axel Ryman

2010-07-15 07:29:06 pm

We all scream for Eyes Cream

Major skips would be something that saves a considerable amount of time compared to a regular shortcut/trick really.

Kharay1977

2010-07-15 07:29:44 pm

Quote from arkarian:

who's to judge what a major skip is?

Exactly, the whole idea of a 'major skip' is arbitrary. There are too many interpretations.

Paraxade

2010-07-15 07:30:02 pm

Quote from arkarian:

who's to judge what a major skip is?

mike.

restricting "major skips" to individual kinds of glitches will ensure that various "major skip" glitches won't be covered. not to mention as long as we're splitting categories based on how major a glitch is there'll always be some subjectivity about whether they're major enough to warrant the new category. the current system sda uses works well enough though.

DJGrenola

2010-07-15 07:33:15 pm

guffaw

I have great sympathy for Miles. His SS is full of little tricks that were missed by my predecessors and I, and it is a greatly accomplished performance. It is precisely the shot in the arm that Echoes needed, which makes what I have to say all the more unfortunate.

My 1:55 17% Echoes run languished for years in obscurity on archive.org because Speed Demos Archive did not allow OoB. Meanwhile, I did fourteen months of backbreaking, unpaid, frequently thankless work posting hundreds of other people's runs to this site. When I started the segmented any% that became the 1:38, I chose not to use OoB techniques even though we knew just a few weeks after the game's release that skipping the echo visor using OoB would save minutes. Why not use OoB? Because secret worlds were not allowed on SDA. Even if SWs had been allowed, I wanted to beat the Silent Echo 1:43; at the time, nobody would have suggested replacing an in-bounds run with an out-of-bounds one. To yank the 1:43, I had to both go faster and play by the same rules -- no OoB. Now I appear to be faced with the ludicrous and impossibly ironic situation where Miles's 1:27 SS threatens to obsolete my 1:38. In effect, one of my runs was disallowed for using OoB and the other disallowed for not using OoB.

This just gets even more ridiculous if you were around to witness the enormous hostility that was shown towards secret worlds by metroid 2002 in the early days. Look around on the forum enough and you will find the same people who are now clamouring for Zoid's run to be taken down trolling secret worlds for all they were worth. It is probably fair to say that my 20% and 17% runs made me the key figure in reversing this attitude. I even single-handedly built the entirety of the metroid 2002 prime 1 secret worlds section.

I am wondering what sane person would possibly want to spend months recording a run and submitting it to this site when they run the risk of having it made either illegal or obsolete two weeks later by a rule change over which they have no control?

I certainly won't be submitting another run to SDA.

I have great sympathy for Miles. His SS is full of little tricks that were missed by my predecessors and I, and it is a greatly accomplished performance. It is precisely the shot in the arm that Echoes needed, which makes what I have to say all the more unfortunate.

My 1:55 17% Echoes run languished for years in obscurity on archive.org because Speed Demos Archive did not allow OoB. Meanwhile, I did fourteen months of backbreaking, unpaid, frequently thankless work posting hundreds of other people's runs to this site. When I started the segmented any% that became the 1:38, I chose not to use OoB techniques even though we knew just a few weeks after the game's release that skipping the echo visor using OoB would save minutes. Why not use OoB? Because secret worlds were not allowed on SDA. Even if SWs had been allowed, I wanted to beat the Silent Echo 1:43; at the time, nobody would have suggested replacing an in-bounds run with an out-of-bounds one. To yank the 1:43, I had to both go faster and play by the same rules -- no OoB. Now I appear to be faced with the ludicrous and impossibly ironic situation where Miles's 1:27 SS threatens to obsolete my 1:38. In effect, one of my runs was disallowed for using OoB and the other disallowed for not using OoB.

This just gets even more ridiculous if you were around to witness the enormous hostility that was shown towards secret worlds by metroid 2002 in the early days. Look around on the forum enough and you will find the same people who are now clamouring for Zoid's run to be taken down trolling secret worlds for all they were worth. It is probably fair to say that my 20% and 17% runs made me the key figure in reversing this attitude. I even single-handedly built the entirety of the metroid 2002 prime 1 secret worlds section.

I am wondering what sane person would possibly want to spend months recording a run and submitting it to this site when they run the risk of having it made either illegal or obsolete two weeks later by a rule change over which they have no control?

I certainly won't be submitting another run to SDA.

MASTER-88

2010-07-15 07:35:40 pm

Master-88

Quote:

my main problem with "uses major skips" is that that's a really meaningless label. who's to judge what a major skip is? it might be necessary to use that in the end though; i'm just trying to bring up some different ways of classifying these glitches.

Yes this is big question what is major skips?

In Echoes it is easy to say. Secret wolrds cut much parts entire game. I counted these major skip

But who care how much it save. I counted MP secret worlds same category as Ocarina of Time with glitches. There is still seperate category with full medallions collected and seperate category with glitches. And all Ocarina of time glitches seems same as secret worlds in Prime series.

Thats fact glitches in Ocarina of time save much more than secret worlds in Prime. But these seems similar looking glitches.

Kharay1977

2010-07-15 07:37:48 pm

Quote from Paraxade:

mike.

Well, if I am any judge of character - there is more to it than that with him. Wink

Quote from Paraxade:

the current system sda uses works well enough though.

Doesn't mean it can't be improved upon.

Quote from DJGrenola:

I certainly won't be submitting another run to SDA.

Miles

2010-07-15 07:40:31 pm

Quote from bartendorsparky:

Finally, one valid complaint is that it will be possible for "worse" runs to out-date "better" runs that weren't allowed to use secret worlds. In prime it isn't so much a problem because secret worlds make a route that's only ~30 seconds faster, so if you have a faster time then you have at least about 30 seconds of other improvement (in corruption they apparently save 4 seconds). In echoes though, there is significant improvement. Thus, i propose grandfathering in the current runs unless the verifiers unanimously decide that the play quality of new runs is noticeably better. If they don't come to that conclusion, then the runs can be listed side by side until eventually a top-quality run exists. It may result in some clutter at first, but once fast enough runs get put up it won't be an issue anymore.

Paraxade

2010-07-15 07:47:21 pm

master-88 can you please explain how glitching items and medallions into your inventory by dropping and collecting bugs in a bottle is even remotely close to jumping out of bounds, navigating down a few rooms and going back in-bounds?

Serris

2010-07-15 07:47:58 pm

SDA doesn't classify glitches because it's simply impossible to derive any consistency from doing so, since every game uses different rules, so of course any general label will be rather lacking in meaning, which is fine since it's just there to indicate that something's different about whatever it's labeling on the game page - if you want to know what's going on you have to do more research (i.e. read the comments and/or ask on the forums). The old "no OoB" rule was derived from the former admin's taste and is an exception that has nothing to do with anything anymore; we just have to live with the consequences, and it's working out fine.

This also reminds me of a post I made a while back:

http://speeddemosarchive.com/forum/index.php?topic=10101.msg283297#msg283297

Mike even agreed. Smiley

Also, what DJGrenola said just shows how disrespectful removing non-OoB runs for no real reason would be to the runners.

Miles

Edit history:

Miles: 2010-07-15 08:04:46 pm

2010-07-15 07:54:28 pm

Quote from MASTER-88:

In Echoes it is easy to say. Secret wolrds cut much parts entire game. I counted these major skip

Jumping off of a slanted surface allows you to skip the Dark Suit, Amorbis, and its 3 keys. Should jumping off of slanted surfaces be either a separate category or banned altogether?

Edit: I don't think this is nearly Major Skip enough to warrant a separate category, but it's about equivalent to what you skip with SWs (Dark Samus 2/Quadraxis, but not the keys since they're skipped in-bounds already).

bartendorsparky

Edit history:

bartendorsparky: 2010-07-15 08:29:02 pm

2010-07-15 08:01:40 pm

the point here isn't "no oob runs suck lets ditch them". the point is that some in the community now feel like it shouldn't be a rule, and wants to find a way to change it without screwing over anybody. while dj's completely right in that in the past the community was largely outspoken against secret worlds, for whatever reasons that's changed now. I personally feel like the rift existed because few on either side would see the other's point of view, and you ended up with things such as "secret worlds suck because they're slow!!" and "secret worlds rock because ibbf!!" you had one side refusing to consider them unless it was shown (by someone else) that they were faster, and one side unable to (or perhaps didn't care enough to) do so.

even though secret worlds were known to be faster soon after echoes came out, the lingering effects of radix's rulings still prevented them from catching on. If some of the current popular speedrunners (for example, kip and i at the time) had argued right then and there about secret worlds being used it probably would have swayed some people. i won't try to speak for kip in any sense, though i know he was all for using the fastest routes (or lowest %) regardless of secret world involvement. In retrospect i do regret not taking a stand there (though i obviously was all for them at the time), but i guess i didn't feel like the fight was worth it, for whatever selfish reasons. It should be clear that people tend to follow what the popular members say though, and unfortunately at the time we were very quiet. however, now it's pretty clear (to me at least) that we can't ignore the rule anymore.

if the only solution is to automatically only keep the lowest time with no regard to the previous rules at all, then i wouldn't agree with it, because dj is absolutely right. i suggested the grandfather clause rule because i personally think it's fair. it would still require a "better" run to obsolete a "worse" run. however, if people happen to think that even that isn't fair, then hopefully we can find some alternative. i really do think an effort should be made to combine the categories though.

the point here isn't "no oob runs suck lets ditch them".  the point is that some in the community now feel like it shouldn't be a rule, and wants to find a way to change it without screwing over anybody.  while dj's completely right in that in the past the community was largely outspoken against secret worlds, for whatever reasons that's changed now.  I personally feel like the rift existed because few on either side would see the other's point of view, and you ended up with things such as "secret worlds suck because they're slow!!" and "secret worlds rock because ibbf!!"  you had one side refusing to consider them unless it was shown (by someone else) that they were faster, and one side unable to (or perhaps didn't care enough to) do so.

even though secret worlds were known to be faster soon after echoes came out, the lingering effects of radix's rulings still prevented them from catching on.  If some of the current popular speedrunners (for example, kip and i at the time) had argued right then and there about secret worlds being used it probably would have swayed some people.  i won't try to speak for kip in any sense, though i know he was all for using the fastest routes (or lowest %) regardless of secret world involvement.  In retrospect i do regret not taking a stand there (though i obviously was all for them at the time), but i guess i didn't feel like the fight was worth it, for whatever selfish reasons.  It should be clear that people tend to follow what the popular members say though, and unfortunately at the time we were very quiet.  however, now it's pretty clear (to me at least) that we can't ignore the rule anymore.

if the only solution is to automatically only keep the lowest time with no regard to the previous rules at all, then i wouldn't agree with it, because dj is absolutely right.  i suggested the grandfather clause rule because i personally think it's fair.  it would still require a "better" run to obsolete a "worse" run.  however, if people happen to think that even that isn't fair, then hopefully we can find some alternative.  i really do think an effort should be made to combine the categories though.

tjp7154

2010-07-15 08:17:42 pm

#Casual

I personally wouldn't mind the Prime games having a separate OOB category, especially for Prime 2, where secret worlds bring ***major changes to the route***. Obviously that's arbitrary, but it's my opinion anyway. My MAIN point follows:

Whatever the final decision is:

For runs that were published before major decisions (certain previously-banned glitches, OOB, etc.; like, say -- Zoid's run) to still remain on the site. Also, there would be no more competition allowed for that "grandfathered" run, because of a new rule change.

So in this way, someone's hard work could STILL go noticed, and SDA could grow and evolve.

arkarian

2010-07-15 08:21:22 pm

gamelogs.org

yes -- i definitely think a grandfather clause like you suggested makes a lot of sense. it's certainly not fair to just wipe old runs such as dj's 1:38 automatically if a sw run has a better time.
i also agree that if a new sw run is deemed better in play quality by the verifiers, the old run should be taken down. sda is about showcasing the best runs.

tjp: if your argument is that sws bring major changes to the route, then i don't think that argument holds any water at all. there were plenty of tricks discovered in both prime and echoes that brought major changes to their respective routes, and they didn't warrant new categories. one example is space jump first. before sjf was discovered, everyone used a totally different route that took a lot longer. when sjf was discovered, everyone just started using that and made better runs. a new category wasn't created because it wouldn't have made any sense.

Radix

2010-07-15 08:23:59 pm

I'm addicted to games

Hi

I don't matter anymore but I wanted to post a quote. It's from an email I sent to Thomas Stubgaard in May 2007 (one of the many good Quake runners this site has demos from). There was once this big ordeal involving a Quake done Quick project that isn't important right now. Anyway, the quote is, because of what's going on here:

Quote:

I didn't create this community for this kind of bullshit drama.
[..]
I guess you forgot what speed running was about. Who makes the demo is irrelevant. Why do you think I was always happy when someone beat some of my old piece of crap demos that I was once proud of? Hell I'm pissed that I still have records at all!

So, basically I wanted to post this to say I'm sorry. I was a jerk to a lot of people for a while, but it did help get the site to where we are now with 500+ games. Unfortunately that involves tough decisions about rules - decisions that I now leave to other people. But it does seem like the decision should be obvious.

bartendorsparky

2010-07-15 08:28:21 pm

thanks.