SDA 2009 Rules Revision

2009-08-28 07:51:02 am

My feelings on The Demon Rush

I'll look at the rules and FAQ drafts later, but I'd rather not have submission information on wiki. There isn't much that needs to be changed, and what little needs to be changed I can probably do myself.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-08-28 02:26:59 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

I think it'd be very good clearly state the all information about the difficulty and the game version. More clear information shouldn't really hurt the way viewers look at the game page, and a lot of viewers would be able to have their questions answers on the spot which I'm sure they would appreciate greatly.

Megaman 2, or Rockman 2 (japanese release) is another good example. The original japanese version features one difficulty, the NA version calls the original difficulty difficult and then adds another much easier difficulty called normal.

I think explaining this is best done in a note. So you'd have what w/e difficulty it was on the version it was done on it just like you normally would do, then maybe an *, and a NOTE somewhere near by by that explains there's another version of the game that has these difficulties and this run would lie here on that version.

HalfMillennium

2009-08-28 02:55:30 pm

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

That's certainly less complicated than a convoluted numerical display, but still not necessary except for a few runs. If two separate versions of a game have the same difficulty level which has a name on one mode and not on another, run at the same speed and compete, yes, mention it. Otherwise, why bother? It can easily be mentioned the way DJGrenola said.

I don't understand the last sentence. What do you mean it would 'lie'?

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-08-28 03:56:58 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

it's also the present tense of lay, English can be confusing like that.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie

9. to be found or located in a particular area or place: The fault lies here.

Spider-Waffle

(user is banned)

2009-08-28 04:06:18 pm

Don't think! feeeeeal

So about the .5s rule. It's a fact that the presence of a .5s is here to stay; however, there still seems to be great confusion over the issue of dropped frames and how the .5s rule applies to this and how run times are displayed. Cabbage and I both seem to be in agreement on what the ideal scenario is, I personally thought this is how it was all along, but there is confusion now, I don't think it'd be hard for SDA be at the ideal scenario, but cabbage thinks it would be somewhat hard. There definitely are obstacles but I feel like we are smart enough to get over them.

Should the issue of dropped frames and .5s rule treatment be debated/talked about here or in another topic?

HalfMillennium

2009-08-28 06:29:09 pm

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Quote from Spider-Waffle:

it's also the present tense of lay, English can be confusing like that.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie

9. to be found or located in a particular area or place: The fault lies here.

Yes, and you said it would 'lie here on that version'. Looks like you got your words mixed up and that's why it didn't come across right.

Kabuto

2009-08-31 04:51:49 am

Rule question: If a game has few rather long and independent levels (such as GTA 2) is it possible to permit "individual levels segmented" as a separate category, replacing the "segmented" category?

DRybes

Edit history:

DRybes: 2009-09-01 08:26:35 am

2009-09-01 08:21:04 am

O Zlda?

Quote from Kabuto:

Rule question: If a game has few rather long and independent levels (such as GTA 2) is it possible to permit "individual levels segmented" as a separate category, replacing the "segmented" category?

Why should it replace "segmented"? If the ideal way to segment the game isn't at the end of each level, this would be a different category of run; if the ideal way to segment the game is at the end of each level, why not just call it "segmented" and include the fun fact in the game description text?

Don't get me wrong, I like your idea for some level-based games, but for other games it would be not very different from a segmented run. The runner would still have to show the save and quit and the load for each level.

ExplodingCabbage

2009-09-01 09:16:59 am

Bwuh? I don't understand.

Quote:

Why should it replace "segmented"?

Because it's exactly the same thing, with the only difference being that levels can be obsoleted individually rather than having to submit runs of all three cities at once.

Quote:

If the ideal way to segment the game isn't at the end of each level, this would be a different category of run

Huh? What would be a different category of run from what, and so what? I have no idea what you're saying here. Huh?

Quote:

if the ideal way to segment the game is at the end of each level, why not just call it "segmented"

Uh, well in that case (which is irrelevent to what's being discussed), it would be an IL run, not a segmented run.

Quote:

for other games it would be not very different from a segmented run

That's precisely the point.

Quote:

The runner would still have to show the save and quit and the load for each level.

Huh? Again I don't know what you mean, or what it has to do with anything.

All Kabuto is asking is whether, in a game where there are only a few levels, and they're long and independent, there could be an IL table for segmented runs of those levels so that they can be obsoleted individually. It's worth pointing out that in the game in question (GTA 2), saving and reloading has useful gameplay effects (specifically, it respawns some extremely useful powerups) so there will certainly be runs made both with and without mid-level saves. There doesn't seem to be any good reason that a run without saving of a single city can be obsoleted individually (because that would be the current IL category), but you have to rerun all three cities to obsolete a run with mid-level saving (because that's the current 'segmented' category). SDA has never come across this issue before because there has never been a game previously with both IL runs and a segmented run using mid-level saves. In this new situation, I support Kabuto's idea.

Bwuh? I don't understand.

[quote]Why should it replace "segmented"?[/quote]

Because it's exactly the same thing, with the only difference being that levels can be obsoleted individually rather than having to submit runs of all three cities at once.

[quote]If the ideal way to segment the game isn't at the end of each level, this would be a different category of run[/quote]

Huh? What would be a different category of run from what, and so what? I have no idea what you're saying here.  ???

[quote]if the ideal way to segment the game is at the end of each level, why not just call it "segmented"[/quote]

Uh, well in that case (which is irrelevent to what's being discussed), it would be an IL run, not a segmented run.

[quote]for other games it would be not very different from a segmented run[/quote]

That's precisely the point.

[quote]The runner would still have to show the save and quit and the load for each level.[/quote]

Huh? Again I don't know what you mean, or what it has to do with anything.

All Kabuto is asking is whether, in a game where there are only a few levels, and they're long and independent, there could be an IL table for segmented runs of those levels so that they can be obsoleted individually. It's worth pointing out that in the game in question (GTA 2), saving and reloading has useful gameplay effects (specifically, it respawns some extremely useful powerups) so there will certainly be runs made both with and without mid-level saves. There doesn't seem to be any good reason that a run without saving of a single city can be obsoleted individually (because that would be the current IL category), but you have to rerun all three cities to obsolete a run [i]with[/i] mid-level saving (because that's the current 'segmented' category). SDA has never come across this issue before because there has never been a game previously with both IL runs and a segmented run using mid-level saves. In this new situation, I support Kabuto's idea.

DRybes

2009-09-01 09:21:11 am

O Zlda?

Quote from ExplodingCabbage:

an IL table for segmented runs of levels

nvm, thinking back to another discussion, I misunderstood "IL segmented" as "segmented specifically by level".

I support the idea.

NMS

2009-09-21 01:15:39 pm

Quote from ExplodingCabbage:

All Kabuto is asking is whether, in a game where there are only a few levels, and they're long and independent, there could be an IL table for segmented runs of those levels so that they can be obsoleted individually... SDA has never come across this issue before because there has never been a game previously with both IL runs and a segmented run using mid-level saves. In this new situation, I support Kabuto's idea.

I like the idea of treating each independent level like its own category (i.e. a faster SS run would obsolete a slower segmented run but not vice versa). It would also be really nice for Oni. Oni has 14 levels, each with 2-5 mid-level save points. The IL runs I've done so far are pretty nice, but some of them could really benefit from segmentation. I can think of one place where loading from a save point skips a short cutscene and another where it enables a glitch that saves about 3 minutes. Also it would be much easier to optimize levels with really long intro cutscenes if I could load from the end of the intro instead of the beginning of the level.

[quote="ExplodingCabbage"]
All Kabuto is asking is whether, in a game where there are only a few levels, and they're long and independent, there could be an IL table for segmented runs of those levels so that they can be obsoleted individually... SDA has never come across this issue before because there has never been a game previously with both IL runs and a segmented run using mid-level saves. In this new situation, I support Kabuto's idea.
[/quote]

I like the idea of treating each independent level like its own category (i.e. a faster SS run would obsolete a slower segmented run but not vice versa). It would also be really nice for Oni. Oni has 14 levels, each with 2-5 mid-level save points. The IL runs I've done so far are pretty nice, but some of them could really benefit from segmentation. I can think of one place where loading from a save point skips a short cutscene and another where it enables a glitch that saves about 3 minutes. Also it would be much easier to optimize levels with really long intro cutscenes if I could load from the end of the intro instead of the beginning of the level.

Kabuto

2009-10-27 04:48:24 pm

I've collected some "administrative decisions" and added them to the FAQ draft, using my own words. These are things that were decided by an admin and are not too game specific. Feel free to change them if something's incorrect, badly spelled, missing or whatever.

The following things still need some final ruling:

* Mike stated in the Giants thread

Quote:

(...) I can count a run with those restarts as a single-segment since you're not loading the game, but the restarts will count against your time (i.e. the time spent getting to the restart point will count against you, whether the game counts it or not).

However, IMO restarting a level in Giants is similar to loading since when you start or restart a level you get weapons and ammo from the previous level, it's just that restarting retains some things of the moment you hit restart (here: the temporary invincibility, making it permanent).

* What about using external tools to *inspect* (in contrast to modify) a game or its savegames? While for savegames in segmented runs I don't see a problem (you can usually gather the same data from doing a test run starting with that save, it's just more time-consuming; isn't that what all the Diablo II runners are doing?). But what when someone e.g. uses a map hack or wall hack that shows its data on a second monitor and thus isn't recorded? It's undetectable (since it doesn't actively affect gameplay) except for the player reacting too well to random enemies and the like.

* What about removing/swapping memory cards during a segment (i.e. while actually running)? Use case: when not needing a save point that's inbetween to avoid the multi-second save delay.

Also, what about treating each individual level as its own category? I don't want to add this unless there's a decision about this.

I've collected some "administrative decisions" and added them to the [url=http://speeddemosarchive.com/kb/FAQ#Other]FAQ draft[/url], using my own words. These are things that were decided by an admin and are not too game specific. Feel free to change them if something's incorrect, badly spelled, missing or whatever.

The following things still need some final ruling:

* Mike stated in [url=http://speeddemosarchive.com/forum/index.php/topic,10681.msg299201.html#msg299201]the Giants thread[/url][quote](...) I can count a run with those restarts as a single-segment since you're not loading the game, but the restarts will count against your time (i.e. the time spent getting to the restart point will count against you, whether the game counts it or not).[/quote]
However, IMO restarting a level in Giants is similar to loading since when you start or restart a level you get weapons and ammo from the previous level, it's just that restarting retains some things of the moment you hit restart (here: the temporary invincibility, making it permanent).

* What about using external tools to *inspect* (in contrast to modify) a game or its savegames? While for savegames in segmented runs I don't see a problem (you can usually gather the same data from doing a test run starting with that save, it's just more time-consuming; isn't that what all the Diablo II runners are doing?). But what when someone e.g. uses a map hack or wall hack that shows its data on a second monitor and thus isn't recorded? It's undetectable (since it doesn't actively affect gameplay) except for the player reacting too well to random enemies and the like.

* What about removing/swapping memory cards during a segment (i.e. while actually running)? Use case: when not needing a save point that's inbetween to avoid the multi-second save delay.

Also, what about treating each individual level as its own category? I don't want to add this unless there's a decision about this.

arkarian

2009-10-27 10:55:03 pm

gamelogs.org

how would anyone know whether you inspect a save or not? seems like that should definitely be allowed.

ExplodingCabbage

2009-10-28 04:37:48 am

My feeling is that using tools to inspect save files during a SS run definitely shouldn't be allowed, although I'm not sure how I'd justify that.

Emptyeye

2009-10-28 03:35:42 pm

Talk to the Hand

I would think it impossible to even get into a situation where you can inspect a save/file/whatever in an SS run, but maybe I'm just not thinking outside the box enough.

ExplodingCabbage

2009-10-28 04:09:22 pm

Quote from Emptyeye:

I would think it impossible to even get into a situation where you can inspect a save/file/whatever in an SS run, but maybe I'm just not thinking outside the box enough.

Well, saving is allowed. And so is alt-tabbing out of the game. And pausing. Heck, even if you don't use tools, there's no rule explicitly forbidding you from leaving the game paused for half an hour while you take the save to your other computer, explore the randomly-generated level you just entered before you paused, finding all the loot and the exit, and then return to the run, unpause and play the level optimally with foreknowledge. And assuming the game has a timer, it would cost you nothing to do so. And if you're on a networked PC with filesharing, you don't even have to alt-tab.

As I said above, I think all inspection of save files during a single-segment run, with or without tools, should be banned, though.

Manocheese

2009-11-17 07:37:27 am

Yes, a cucco riding the ground.

Here's something I wondered about when I first read it, but forgot about until now. Under "What are the different categories like any%, low%, 100%?" is this:

Quote:

A bad example is "all items" in an RPG. Do you need max of each? What about dummy items? Mutually exclusive items? If we're getting all items, why not all skills? Max levels? Max playtime? And so on.

What is a dummy item? The fact that I have to ask is enough reason for me to suggest removing that sentence completely; if I don't know what it means, there are surely many others who don't.

ninetigerr

2009-11-18 08:56:28 pm

Quote from Manocheese:

Here's something I wondered about when I first read it, but forgot about until now. Under "What are the different categories like any%, low%, 100%?" is this:

Quote:

A bad example is "all items" in an RPG. Do you need max of each? What about dummy items? Mutually exclusive items? If we're getting all items, why not all skills? Max levels? Max playtime? And so on.

What is a dummy item? The fact that I have to ask is enough reason for me to suggest removing that sentence completely; if I don't know what it means, there are surely many others who don't.

Plus, the "answer" to the question shouldn't be asking questions itself. +1 to remove the entire quoted paragraph.