Single Segment with Resets Now Accepted [locked]

Aftermath

Edit history:

Aftermath: 2011-08-08 09:37:32 am

Aftermath: 2011-08-08 09:36:14 am

Aftermath: 2011-08-08 09:33:32 am

Aftermath: 2011-08-08 09:33:01 am

2011-08-08 09:32:20 am

Quits halfway

Darksiders has a lot of out of bounds glitching and to get at least one of the rooms to load, you have to reload the game (done from an autosave). It would be great to run, but would need resets in those very specific instances. It saves time over a regular run because you'd otherwise take a very long time doing arena-type fights and progressing normally.

The game is on both console and PC, so I don't think that making resetting banned on one version (especially because it's from an autosave and not an anywhere-save) is warranted.

The whole game might only have 2-3 loads from an autosave, not to fix any mistakes or luck manipulation, but just to trigger rooms to load when you go OoB. I'd like to run the game SS, because segmented would not be fun at all and would only be optimal by segmenting every autosave or even more often.

Edit:

Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow should also be eligible. There's already a run with resets on the site and another category I'd like to do (all bosses) would greatly benefit from save-reset, although it's a special sort of save. You can glitch OoB to get a soul that makes you move about 5x faster, which you do about 6.5 minutes into a ~25 minute run. As you'd guess, that saves crazy amounts of time.

Also one for Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin, the run on the site uses it already. There's another category (NG with major skips/suspend glitch) that would make use of saving/resetting to get OoB and beat the game in about 1/5 the time of a non-SG run. Again, special sort of save, but maybe it should be classified as with resets.

Darksiders has a lot of out of bounds glitching and to get at least one of the rooms to load, you have to reload the game (done from an autosave). It would be great to run, but would need resets in those very specific instances. It saves time over a regular run because you'd otherwise take a very long time doing arena-type fights and progressing normally.

The game is on both console and PC, so I don't think that making resetting banned on one version (especially because it's from an autosave and not an anywhere-save) is warranted.

The whole game might only have 2-3 loads from an autosave, not to fix any mistakes or luck manipulation, but just to trigger rooms to load when you go OoB. I'd like to run the game SS, because segmented would not be fun at all and would only be optimal by segmenting every autosave or even more often.

Edit:

Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow should also be eligible. There's already a run with resets on the site and another category I'd like to do (all bosses) would greatly benefit from save-reset, although it's a special sort of save. You can glitch OoB to get a soul that makes you move about 5x faster, which you do about 6.5 minutes into a ~25 minute run. As you'd guess, that saves crazy amounts of time.

Also one for Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin, the run on the site uses it already. There's another category (NG with major skips/suspend glitch) that would make use of saving/resetting to get OoB and beat the game in about 1/5 the time of a non-SG run. Again, special sort of save, but maybe it should be classified as with resets.

usernameguy

2011-08-08 09:45:57 am

Witcher 2, a PC game, lets you skip a few fights and scenes if you load from autosave first. So SS w/ Resets would be useful there, too.

Something worth noting is that on PC, at least, an SS w/Reset run would basically require the runner to purchase good hardware. I'd think you'd want a fast CPU and an SSD in order to be competitive. Lordy saw a world of difference on the Witcher 2 SS w/Reset style run he was doing when he bought an SSD. It helped speed up both gameplay and "between levels". I think over the two hour run, there was more than 2 or 3 minutes difference from that alone.

Aftermath

Edit history:

Aftermath: 2011-08-08 09:49:40 am

2011-08-08 09:48:04 am

Quits halfway

Loading times are cut out of PC runs when timing, which is done to avoid requiring any PC runners to buy the best hardware. I'd assume that they'd be able to find a way to time the reloads so that it's an even playing field between runner equipment.

Actually, I'm guessing this is part of the reason it's NOT called RTA. If the ban on PCs is overturned, timing won't be strictly real-time in some cases, which is different from how RTA is done. It's an SS with resets and timed accordingly.

usernameguy

2011-08-08 09:51:54 am

Yeah, so, if PC games were approved for SS w/Reset, we'd need a ruling on the timing style, I think.

Side note: I've seen the gameplay itself on Witcher 2 actually change with SSD vs platter drives. The AI's better under an SSD; enemies turn faster, attacks start quicker, etc.

ZenicReverie

2011-08-08 09:59:49 am

Waiting hurts my soul...

I see a lot of game suggestions, is everyone really going to the game(s) they are suggesting? I agree with the "no PC games allowed" rule is a bad idea. It's already in the rule that it'll be decided on a per game basis, and it's also stated that this isn't to be used to manipulate luck or retry a hard trick multiple times, so I believe SDA can avoid having sloppy segmented runs by calling attention to these two points without making a blanket ban over all PC games.

Aphox

2011-08-08 10:14:13 am

Also know as L0rdy

I also agree with most people that you should judge every case, even PC games, on its own if it is worth to use save/reset. There will certainly be cases where its worth it. Also the question will come up for multiplatform games. Would it be ok to save/load on the console version of the same game which is also out for PC?

ridd3r.

2011-08-08 10:25:04 am

we have lift off

Quote from usernameguy:

Yeah, so, if PC games were approved for SS w/Reset, we'd need a ruling on the timing style, I think.

Just cut out the extra loading screens, simple.

Also I'm not convinced with the sloppy segmented run argument, bad runs are weeded out in verification. Adding in saves at strategic points would enable risky tricks to be attempted. Though there would have to be a careful balance between how much time the trick saves vs time lost at multiple attempts. It would be unlikely that there would be many extra saves, just a few at some points in the run. Obviously saving frequently so that deaths cost minimal time would be unacceptable.

ZenicReverie

Edit history:

ZenicReverie: 2011-08-08 10:50:48 am

2011-08-08 10:34:51 am

Waiting hurts my soul...

If you're saving to manipulate luck/tricks/glitches, then you're better off doing a segmented run where failed attempts don't count against you, and don't lead to a final version that could be unrefined or sloppy. I understand that maybe there's only 1 or 2 places in a 2 - 3 hours run that might benefit from it, and segmenting for the rest seems like a waste, but I don't like the trade off of poorer play quality. True, this decision could be left up to the verifiers or even up to Flip to make the final decision when posting the topic of its acceptance or rejection, but why even let it get that far. It'd be a waste of everyone's time (runner, verifiers, admins) if such a thing can be decided beforehand as a good reason to reject a run.

Edit: for what it's worth ridd3r, I see your point as, "if you're already using resets for glitches, why not also use them for some manipulation." I still stand by what I said though, and the run would benefit more from either being fully segmented or played like a single segment in every instance except for when resetting in and of itself saves time (i.e. doesn't "save time overall" because landing a glitch/trick/best luck saves 2 minutes while a reset only costs 1).

If you're saving to manipulate luck/tricks/glitches, then you're better off doing a segmented run where failed attempts don't count against you, and don't lead to a final version that could be unrefined or sloppy. I understand that maybe there's only 1 or 2 places in a 2 - 3 hours run that might benefit from it, and segmenting for the rest seems like a waste, but I don't like the trade off of poorer play quality. True, this decision could be left up to the verifiers or even up to Flip to make the final decision when posting the topic of its acceptance or rejection, but why even let it get that far. It'd be a waste of everyone's time (runner, verifiers, admins) if such a thing can be decided beforehand as a good reason to reject a run.

Edit: for what it's worth ridd3r, I see your point as, "if you're already using resets for glitches, why not also use them for some manipulation." I still stand by what I said though, and the run would benefit more from either being fully segmented or played like a single segment in every instance except for when resetting in and of itself saves time (i.e. doesn't "save time overall" because landing a glitch/trick/best luck saves 2 minutes while a reset only costs 1).

Paraxade

2011-08-08 10:41:57 am

imo a good way to think about this is that this category is for games where resets lead to the run being significantly different - things like significant route changes or huge glitches that are only possible by resetting the game. It's not for games where resetting doesn't do anything that you can't do in-game without resets. I get that bad runs aren't going to be accepted, but I agree that having a new category isn't worth it for games where it won't do anything different.

mikwuyma

Edit history:

mikwuyma: 2011-08-08 11:39:45 am

2011-08-08 11:37:22 am

My feelings on The Demon Rush

I never said all PC games, just a lot. If there's an actual glitch caused by the saving and reloading, or if it resets a trigger that allows you to perform a glitch that's fine, but I don't want it to be used for trying a trick 500 times over (though I guess that's what verification is for).

So in the end, yeah it's a case-by-case basis.

ridd3r.

Edit history:

ridd3r.: 2011-08-08 02:42:49 pm

2011-08-08 02:42:25 pm

we have lift off

Quote from mikwuyma:

I never said all PC games, just a lot.

Yeah you said many won't apply. Everyones response I'm pretty sure relates to the first post:

"Also, PC runs aren't eligible for this category."

As for not allowing you to do things you can't do anyway. In the end it's about the final time, I was thinking purely in terms of numbers. If you can nail a risky trick in a few attempts and it saves 1 minute, then that's worth doing. However, it may be something you just could not risk in a SS where for example a death would be very likely. In my opinion this category should be about cutting the time right down to the best you can do in a single sitting.

It's still very different from a segmented run where you attempt maybe even thousands of times and spend hours on each segment. Segmented runs also have all these save related glitches, so trying to compare a single sitting run to a segmented run just makes no sense to me. Repeating a trick 100 times over just simply could not happen without losing stupid amounts of time.

I think it could be difficult especially for newer runners to really use it effectively and there's always a risk. However, I can pretty much state that I could do a faster run if I was allowed to use quick save to do risky tricks. If you know the game well enough and plan it well so that you know time lost vs time gained, then why not? Frankly you should know whether or not it will be rejected and a bit of simple maths will back you up if need be.

[quote="mikwuyma"]I never said all PC games, just a lot. [/quote]

Yeah you said many won't apply. Everyones response I'm pretty sure relates to the first post:

"Also, PC runs aren't eligible for this category."

As for not allowing you to do things you can't do anyway. In the end it's about the final time, I was thinking purely in terms of numbers. If you can nail a risky trick in a few attempts and it saves 1 minute, then that's worth doing. However, it may be something you just could not risk in a SS where for example a death would be very likely. In my opinion this category should be about cutting the time right down to the best you can do in a single sitting.

It's still very different from a segmented run where you attempt maybe even thousands of times and spend hours on each segment. Segmented runs also have all these save related glitches, so trying to compare a single sitting run to a segmented run just makes no sense to me. Repeating a trick 100 times over just simply could not happen without losing stupid amounts of time.

I think it could be difficult especially for newer runners to really use it effectively and there's always a risk. However, I can pretty much state that I could do a faster run if I was allowed to use quick save to do risky tricks. If you know the game well enough and plan it well so that you know time lost vs time gained, then why not? Frankly you should know whether or not it will be rejected and a bit of simple maths will back you up if need be.

ZenicReverie

2011-08-08 04:47:56 pm

Waiting hurts my soul...

I'm talking from the perspective of deciding to use a trick or not, and if you really want to use a risky trick, then I'd say it's better off in a segmented run.

I see two cases:
1) Someone wants to run a game SS w/ Resets, but only to manipulate luck and tricks.
2) The game already has a w/ resets category, and someone wants to manipulate luck and tricks faster by resetting or needs to reset to attempt the trick again.

Case 1 is what Flip addressed as inappropriate use of the category. I agree and that is the main point I was arguing from. Even in cases where it'd be faster to reset than deal with the luck, I don't think it's worth having the extra category. (As an example, the SMRPG run could benefit from resetting in Bowser's castle when getting a bad door (not sure if there's a benefit elsewhere, but I don't remember mention of it).)

Case 2 is a little more gray, and lends the best opportunity to debate. However, I'd hate to see runs be rejected because the runner might correctly believe this is the best run time yet and the mistakes waste less time than was gained overall, but the verifiers reject it because he didn't get the trick fast enough. It's easier to say "don't use resets to manipulate luck" than it is to say it's okay sometimes, but do so at your own risk.

I'm talking from the perspective of deciding to use a trick or not, and if you really want to use a risky trick, then I'd say it's better off in a segmented run.

I see two cases:
1) Someone wants to run a game SS w/ Resets, but only to manipulate luck and tricks.
2) The game already has a w/ resets category, and someone wants to manipulate luck and tricks faster by resetting or needs to reset to attempt the trick again.

Case 1 is what Flip addressed as inappropriate use of the category. I agree and that is the main point I was arguing from. Even in cases where it'd be faster to reset than deal with the luck, I don't think it's worth having the extra category. (As an example, the SMRPG run could benefit from resetting in Bowser's castle when getting a bad door (not sure if there's a benefit elsewhere, but I don't remember mention of it).)

Case 2 is a little more gray, and lends the best opportunity to debate. However, I'd hate to see runs be rejected because the runner might correctly believe this is the best run time yet and the mistakes waste less time than was gained overall, but the verifiers reject it because he didn't get the trick fast enough. It's easier to say "don't use resets to manipulate luck" than it is to say it's okay sometimes, but do so at your own risk.

slowbro

Edit history:

slowbro: 2011-08-08 05:23:54 pm

slowbro: 2011-08-08 05:22:55 pm

2011-08-08 04:51:51 pm

I'm glad to see SDA add SS with resets to its repertoire, and I am relieved that they will be treated as a new category Roll Eyes

Well I was being pretty dumb to think otherwise since it would be really strange if they competed directly with no-reset SSs.

I know one game that could benefit from a save warp but I'm not planning to run it. (Link's Awakening with major glitches)

ridd3r.

Edit history:

ridd3r.: 2011-08-08 04:57:16 pm

2011-08-08 04:56:36 pm

we have lift off

I agree with your position on case 1. As for case 2, I can see the problem, but just speaking personally I think I could be faster saving for a risky trick (maybe only 3-4 points in the whole run, saving 30s or so). You could argue you could just do it in a SS run, but honestly there's a limit to the risk you can sensibly take in a SS. Technically you could do all the segmented tricks in a SS, but you may well not get the run in your lifetime.

I can see it's much easier to say you can only quicksave for save glitches as a general rule, but I think it's worth seriously considering saving for risky tricks. Honestly though I won't be fussed which way the ruling goes.

Monopoli

2011-08-08 05:51:32 pm

Halo 2 has a camo glitch that can be utilized through resets.

Scurty demonstrates it in the video:

playe

2011-08-08 06:03:35 pm

I think Zelda: MM might be a good candidate for this category because there's 2 resets in the first cycle that can save a bit of time because they both skip cut-scenes. (one is a little short but it still saves some time.)

Also I agree with the whole "PC games aren't eligible for this category" rule being dumb as not all PC games have the save and load anywhere feature.

ExplodingCabbage

2011-08-08 06:51:50 pm

Thoughts:

1) I agree that not allowing this category for PC doesn't make sense. There is nothing console-specific about this category or its reasons for existing. It's true that PC has more save-anywhere games but they're not exclusive to PC and not all PC games are save-anywhere, so it isn't a reason for a console-only rule.

2) As for the question of resets to allow luck-manipulation / retrying tricks, some thoughts:

Basically, a segmented run and a SS run generally differ in three ways:

a) Optimisation (segmented can have tighter movement or micro, for example; SS demands more skill and consistency from the player in this regard)
b) Risk-taking (in most cases a segmented run can attempt tricks with little or no regard to their risk/benefit ratios while SS runs have to significantly restrict their usage of risky tricks)
c) Save-related tricks (e.g. warping. Segmented runs can use them and SSes can't)

a and b are what to me, and I think most people, are the defining differences between a segmented and SS run. The runner gets one shot at everything and if he misses a trick or dies then (obviously subject to the specifics of the game and category in question) it's all over. c is more of a coincidental side-effect. Sure, sometimes the save-warps vs no save warps distinction is interesting but it's definitely not the point of the SS category.

So allowing resets for save-related tricks seems like it would work fine without losing any of the essence of what a SS is. But allowing resets for the sake of enabling greater risk-taking seems, IMO, to eat away at the essence of the SS category for most games since restricting risk-taking is basically half of the point of SS. I'm guessing this is Flip and Mike's rationale for not allowing the category in such cases.

Thoughts:

1) I agree that not allowing this category for PC doesn't make sense. There is nothing console-specific about this category or its reasons for existing. It's true that PC has more save-anywhere games but they're not exclusive to PC and not all PC games are save-anywhere, so it isn't a reason for a console-only rule.

2) As for the question of resets to allow luck-manipulation / retrying tricks, some thoughts:

Basically, a segmented run and a SS run generally differ in three ways:

a) Optimisation (segmented can have tighter movement or micro, for example; SS demands more skill and consistency from the player in this regard)
b) Risk-taking (in most cases a segmented run can attempt tricks with little or no regard to their risk/benefit ratios while SS runs have to significantly restrict their usage of risky tricks)
c) Save-related tricks (e.g. warping. Segmented runs can use them and SSes can't)

a and b are what to me, and I think most people, are the defining differences between a segmented and SS run. The runner gets one shot at everything and if he misses a trick or dies then (obviously subject to the specifics of the game and category in question) it's all over. c is more of a coincidental side-effect. Sure, sometimes the save-warps vs no save warps distinction is interesting but it's definitely not the point of the SS category.

So allowing resets for save-related tricks seems like it would work fine without losing any of the essence of what a SS is. But allowing resets for the sake of enabling greater risk-taking seems, IMO, to eat away at the essence of the SS category for most games since restricting risk-taking is basically half of the point of SS. I'm guessing this is Flip and Mike's rationale for not allowing the category in such cases.

ExplodingCabbage

Flip

Edit history:

Flip: 2011-08-08 11:59:21 pm

2011-08-08 06:54:08 pm

fucking taiga forum.

it's lagging too badly for me to even delete this shit so i'm gonna have to leave the mess for a mod to clear up.

Flip edit: Got rid of your octuple post, even though it was hilarious.

Tranquilite

2011-08-08 06:54:22 pm

Holy septuple post batman!

wersterlobe

2011-08-08 07:34:19 pm

Golden Sun save retreat warping whoo =(

scurty

2011-08-08 07:47:57 pm

I got a good chuckle out of those multiple posts.

I'm assuming the Halo 2 glitch on the previous page (or current page once the posts are deleted) is allowed, correct? The effect wears off for the rest of the game, it's just permanent on the current level the glitch is performed on.

Paraxade

Edit history:

Paraxade: 2011-08-08 07:58:02 pm

2011-08-08 07:57:39 pm

Epic octuple posts lmao.

Quote from scurty:

I got a good chuckle out of those multiple posts.

I'm assuming the Halo 2 glitch on the previous page (or current page once the posts are deleted) is allowed, correct? The effect wears off for the rest of the game, it's just permanent on the current level the glitch is performed on.

Probably depends how much of a difference it makes/how much time it saves?

scurty

2011-08-08 08:07:23 pm

10-20 minutes over the course of 2.5 hours to 3.5 hours.

It only takes 1.5 minutes to restart the console and it makes the level stupidly easy.

ExtremeYoshiFan

Edit history:

ExtremeYoshiFan: 2011-08-08 08:23:02 pm

2011-08-08 08:22:24 pm

YES!

Quote from Greenalink:

Pokémon Diamond and Pearl tweaking glitch runs may accept this rule because unless I'm mistaken it is required to save the game, (menu or Explorers Kit) reset and load up the file to find out where you are after saving it.

[insert youtube link here]

13:43 onwards shows the saving procedure that is required to 'sequence break'

That is an obsoleted method of doing that. I can do it much faster without all the hastle. Best practice time clocked in in under two hours, and I could get it done altogether in under 1:15(with the TAS in under one hour, on a US game). This is great news as now it will not be considered "Segmented." I will be going straight to the Hall of Fame, but saving and resetting is required a few times.

If an exception for quality could be made, I would actually get to recording it ASAP, but that will not happen, so you guys will have to wait a bit.

As for actually reloading to see where one is at, a save and quit is not explicitly required per say, but it is necessary to actual load the true void which is actually structured in a very interesting manner.

YES!

[quote="Greenalink"]Pokémon Diamond and Pearl tweaking glitch runs may accept this rule because unless I'm mistaken it is required to save the game, (menu or Explorers Kit) reset and load up the file to find out where you are after saving it.

[insert youtube link here]

13:43 onwards shows the saving procedure that is required to 'sequence break'[/quote]
That is an obsoleted method of doing that. I can do it much faster without all the hastle. Best practice time clocked in in under two hours, and I could get it done altogether in under 1:15(with the TAS in under one hour, on a US game). This is great news as now it will not be considered "Segmented." I will be going straight to the Hall of Fame, but saving and resetting is required a few times.

If an exception for quality could be made, I would actually get to recording it ASAP, but that will not happen, so you guys will have to wait a bit.

As for actually reloading to see where one is at, a save and quit is not explicitly required per say, but it is necessary to actual load the true void which is actually structured in a very interesting manner.

ZenicReverie

Edit history:

ZenicReverie: 2011-08-08 08:25:22 pm

2011-08-08 08:25:13 pm

Waiting hurts my soul...

Flip: Are runs going to retroactively get the category w/ resets? Some runs have need to reset in order to get 100%. Will future runs requiring this method get the w/ resets category?