Speedrunner Roundtable July 10 at 9 PM EDT [locked]

Yagamoth

Edit history:

Yagamoth: 2013-07-09 09:09:15 am

2013-07-09 09:01:43 am

INTJ

Quote from Cool Matty:

Poxnor: I guess what I find ridiculous is that somehow running a game makes those considerations disappear? Suddenly, if you're running game, now you have time to go, now you can afford it? If you were going just to run the game, there'd be no reason to stay the rest of the marathon (after all, you'd still have to pay for the other nights!).

It seems to me that you're using your run as a justification in the most negative connotation possible: an excuse. Tongue

I believe people can (and for the most part, do) help in way more ways than just running games, and so the justification should really be "I want to go help them run this marathon". A run shouldn't be the overwhelming qualifier for that. If you don't think anything else is as important as your run of the game... yeesh.

I'd say that's a matter of opinion in the end. I can understand anyone who won't go to a marathon because he/she can not run his/her game. I see nothing wrong with that. There are a ton of reasons that are tied to the game you are running. Not all of them are for everyone, but just to name a few:

- Having "something" to do at the event is a fairly strong reason which piggybacks a multitude of others reasons
--> Being the classic nerd combination of shy, socially awkward with low self esteem myself -> you need a reason to get to the event and not be a "burden" just hanging around standing in the way

- The spotlight and recognition you get from participating actively in such a big event is a fairly huge part, no matter how you look at it. Even if you don't care or don't want that, it's a big part. If not for you, it is for a lot of other people undeniably

- Some people don't care about the specific charity all that much. I'm one of them. I believe it's a great cause and I believe SDA made a good choice. But anything beyond that doesn't concern me. For me the passion is about "speedrunning" and "high level gaming", and I want the marathons to be a success because I love these things.. Get a better recognition in the world for gamers and 'nerds', make our hobby and passion more accepted, known and appreciated by showcasing it. If we support a charity at the same time - all the better.

edit: I think, there are a lot more complex, convoluted and personal reasons as to why running a game is important. Hence why I have no trouble simply accepting when someone says: "Oh I can't run a game? Then I won't attend" Smiley

[quote="Cool Matty"]Poxnor: I guess what I find ridiculous is that somehow running a game makes those considerations disappear? Suddenly, if you're running game, now you have time to go, now you can afford it? If you were going just to run the game, there'd be no reason to stay the rest of the marathon (after all, you'd still have to pay for the other nights!).

It seems to me that you're using your run as a justification in the most negative connotation possible: an excuse. :P

I believe people can (and for the most part, do) help in way more ways than just running games, and so the justification should really be "I want to go help them run this marathon". A run shouldn't be the overwhelming qualifier for that. If you don't think anything else is as important as your run of the game... yeesh.[/quote]

I'd say that's a matter of opinion in the end. I can understand anyone who won't go to a marathon because he/she can not run his/her game. I see nothing wrong with that. There are a ton of reasons that are tied to the game you are running. Not all of them are for everyone, but just to name a few:

- Having "something" to do at the event is a fairly strong reason which piggybacks a multitude of others reasons
--> Being the classic nerd combination of shy, socially awkward with low self esteem myself -> you need a reason to get to the event and not be a "burden" just hanging around standing in the way

- The spotlight and recognition you get from participating actively in such a big event is a fairly huge part, no matter how you look at it. Even if you don't care or don't want that, it's a big part. If not for you, it is for a lot of other people undeniably

- Some people don't care about the [b]specific[/b] charity all that much. I'm one of them. I believe it's a great cause and I believe SDA made a good choice. But anything beyond that doesn't concern me. For me the passion is about "speedrunning" and "high level gaming", and I want the marathons to be a success because I love these things..  Get a better recognition in the world for gamers and 'nerds', make our hobby and passion more accepted, known and appreciated by showcasing it. If we support a charity at the same time - all the better.

edit: I think, there are a lot more complex, convoluted and personal reasons as to why running a game is important. Hence why I have no trouble simply accepting when someone says: "Oh I can't run a game? Then I won't attend" :)

MURPHAGATOR!

2013-07-09 09:20:52 am

Terraffirmative!

Quote from MilesTheWolfman:

As far as I'm concerned about the marathon issue and runners getting games -

Someone said it a ways back in the thread, and I don't have the clarity of mind to go back and find them at the moment, but if a runner wants their game in the marathon, they should have to submit a 5-10 minute clip of their game and their commentary over said game, and the organizers should be required to watch it and then make their decision based on that. I understand this is a lengthy request, and you get a LOT of games offered to be in the marathon, but quite frankly, some games are boring as shit to watch, but the commentary is amazing, or they have decent donation incentives to get the viewers participating, etc. And in the interest of fairness, I'd also like to point out that for this setup to work, everyone would have to submit a video, even allstars who have played before. There shouldn't be any sort of bias, and the decisions should be made based on what both the game and runner have to offer in conjunction with each other.

Just some logistics on this because I want people to know how ridiculous it would be. Over 200 games were suggested for SGDQ this year (by a really quick count skimming through the first few pages of the thread). A 5 minute clip of each means that there would be about 17 HOURS of footage to watch. For a vast majority of these videos, it would give absolutely no useful information. We all know what Sinister1 playing Ninja Gaiden is going to be like, and when I suggest 6 random games most of which no sane person has ever heard of, they are obviously not all going to make the cut. In the few cases where a game or runner who the organizers were not familiar with come up, then a video was asked for to get an idea of if it would be a good fit.

Considering how much work already goes into marathons, adding this kind of work load to an already incredibly difficult and tedious organization process is extremely inconsiderate to the people involved.

[quote="MilesTheWolfman"]As far as I'm concerned about the marathon issue and runners getting games -

Someone said it a ways back in the thread, and I don't have the clarity of mind to go back and find them at the moment, but if a runner wants their game in the marathon, they should have to submit a 5-10 minute clip of their game and their commentary over said game, and the organizers should be required to watch it and then make their decision based on that. I understand this is a lengthy request, and you get a LOT of games offered to be in the marathon, but quite frankly, some games are boring as shit to watch, but the commentary is amazing, or they have decent donation incentives to get the viewers participating, etc. And in the interest of fairness, I'd also like to point out that for this setup to work, [b]everyone would have to submit a video, even allstars who have played before.[/b] There shouldn't be any sort of bias, and the decisions should be made based on what both the game and runner have to offer in conjunction with each other.[/quote]

Just some logistics on this because I want people to know how ridiculous it would be. Over 200 games were suggested for SGDQ this year (by a really quick count skimming through the first few pages of the thread). A 5 minute clip of each means that there would be about 17 HOURS of footage to watch. For a vast majority of these videos, it would give absolutely no useful information. We all know what Sinister1 playing Ninja Gaiden is going to be like, and when I suggest 6 random games most of which no sane person has ever heard of, they are obviously not all going to make the cut. In the few cases where a game or runner who the organizers were not familiar with come up, then a video was asked for to get an idea of if it would be a good fit.

Considering how much work already goes into marathons, adding this kind of work load to an already incredibly difficult and tedious organization process is extremely inconsiderate to the people involved.

puwexil

2013-07-09 09:30:27 am

Professional Second Banana

Personally, I've come to view onsite speedrun marathons as a mix of charity work, community building, and personal vacation time. Since my speedrunning specialty is JRPGs, I'm under no illusions that there's always going to be room on the schedule for one of my games; but I plan to continue attending as often as possible to see my great gaming friends, help out with the tech station and other marathon admin stuff, and visit places that I probably wouldn't otherwise go.

I definitely respect others having different priorities and choosing to spend their money/vacation time on something else that will be more worthwhile for them, if not having a game or something like the marathon location/dates/other attendees is a dealbreaker.

Yagamoth

Edit history:

Yagamoth: 2013-07-09 09:31:56 am

2013-07-09 09:31:19 am

INTJ

@MURPHAGATOR!

I may have the wrong perspective here but, I think 17 hours isn't that much. You don't even need to watch all those videos if it's clear when "Oh hey, we already have FF8, so we don't need FF7" or something along those lines

What concerns me more is, that not everyone has the knowledge/tools to produce a good 5min video, and those who have some form of experience of professional background will have an advantage (I don't think it's possible to completely ignore the production value and focus on the core).

BUT... I still think it's a great idea. Weird how that works.

Freezard

2013-07-09 09:32:11 am

Quote from moooh:

Re: keybindings and configs
This isn't exactly something that belongs in the roundtable thread.
I'll extract the posts to a separate thread and I'll give you most of the answers there as most of these questions already have rulings made.

Yeah, I know I've had discussions with staff about many of those PC rules (like frame rate, user input), I just think the actual rules need to be added to the rules page. Maybe make a PC section there.

One thing I'm wondering is, what are the rules of Flash games and fan-made games? I know there are some Flash games on the site as well as I Wanna Be The Guy, but are you really accept any game? I really don't want to see this site turning into an endless stream of fan-made games being posted because there are so many games out there and people could just make their own game or whatever. Anyway, I think Flash/fan-made games should be in their own forum thread or at least in a sub-section of the PC section because it's kinda annoying to see threads about random fan-made Mario games pop up, and Flash games aren't exactly PC exclusive nowadays. Also I think there should be a sub-section of Indie games because they're just flooding the market at the moment and most of them are unknown to the average/hardcore PC gamer, and their quality is often reminiscent of fan-made games (because they kinda are).

[quote="moooh"]Re: keybindings and configs
This isn't exactly something that belongs in the roundtable thread.
I'll extract the posts to a separate thread and I'll give you most of the answers there as most of these questions already have rulings made.[/quote]
Yeah, I know I've had discussions with staff about many of those PC rules (like frame rate, user input), I just think the actual rules need to be added to the rules page. Maybe make a PC section there.

One thing I'm wondering is, what are the rules of Flash games and fan-made games? I know there are some Flash games on the site as well as I Wanna Be The Guy, but are you really accept any game? I really don't want to see this site turning into an endless stream of fan-made games being posted because there are so many games out there and people could just make their own game or whatever. Anyway, I think Flash/fan-made games should be in their own forum thread or at least in a sub-section of the PC section because it's kinda annoying to see threads about random fan-made Mario games pop up, and Flash games aren't exactly PC exclusive nowadays. Also I think there should be a sub-section of Indie games because they're just flooding the market at the moment and most of them are unknown to the average/hardcore PC gamer, and their quality is often reminiscent of fan-made games (because they kinda are).

Poxnor

2013-07-09 09:33:07 am

Moo! Flap! Hug!

Quote from Cool Matty:

Poxnor: I guess what I find ridiculous is that somehow running a game makes those considerations disappear? Suddenly, if you're running game, now you have time to go, now you can afford it? If you were going just to run the game, there'd be no reason to stay the rest of the marathon (after all, you'd still have to pay for the other nights!).

It seems to me that you're using your run as a justification in the most negative connotation possible: an excuse. Tongue

I believe people can (and for the most part, do) help in way more ways than just running games, and so the justification should really be "I want to go help them run this marathon". A run shouldn't be the overwhelming qualifier for that. If you don't think anything else is as important as your run of the game... yeesh.

Whoa, let's slow this down, and see if I can't make my point better, rather than escalate this into yet another personal war happening on this thread.

Marathons have three purposes for me: doing my hobby (speedrunning), helping out (tech support, commentating, etc.), and meeting people.

My point was: why would I spend my time and money (both limited) to go to a marathon where I only get to do two of these things, given that there are other marathons I could attend where I could do all three? (Again, remember, limited resources of time and money.)

I'm sorry, but I simply don't have time to go to every marathon (SDA, C4L, TSG, etc.). I have to choose.

Your last sentence was also very insulting. I never said nor implied that nothing was more important than my run of my game at a marathon. If that was the takeaway from my post, then I seriously worded it poorly.

[quote="Cool Matty"]Poxnor: I guess what I find ridiculous is that somehow running a game makes those considerations disappear? Suddenly, if you're running game, now you have time to go, now you can afford it? If you were going just to run the game, there'd be no reason to stay the rest of the marathon (after all, you'd still have to pay for the other nights!).

It seems to me that you're using your run as a justification in the most negative connotation possible: an excuse. :P

I believe people can (and for the most part, do) help in way more ways than just running games, and so the justification should really be "I want to go help them run this marathon". A run shouldn't be the overwhelming qualifier for that. If you don't think anything else is as important as your run of the game... yeesh.[/quote]
Whoa, let's slow this down, and see if I can't make my point better, rather than escalate this into [i]yet another[/i] personal war happening on this thread.

Marathons have three purposes for me: doing my hobby (speedrunning), helping out (tech support, commentating, etc.), and meeting people.

My point was: why would I spend my time and money (both limited) to go to a marathon where I only get to do two of these things, [b][i]given[/i][/b] that there are other marathons I could attend where I could do all three?  (Again, remember, limited resources of time and money.)

I'm sorry, but I simply don't have time to go to every marathon (SDA, C4L, TSG, etc.).  I have to choose.

Your last sentence was also very insulting.  I never said nor implied that nothing was more important than my run of my game at a marathon.  If that was the takeaway from my post, then I seriously worded it poorly.

MURPHAGATOR!

2013-07-09 09:38:14 am

Terraffirmative!

Quote from Yagamoth:

I may have the wrong perspective here but, I think 17 hours isn't that much. You don't even need to watch all those videos if it's clear when "Oh hey, we already have FF8, so we don't need FF7" or something along those lines

17 hours is basically 2 entire days. If you don't need to watch the videos to say "oh we have game x we don't need game y", then why are we saying "Well I already know what player x will be like on stream, but I'm going to require him to waste his and our time making a video"? If someone is really so uninvolved with the community that the people in charge don't know them at all, they can (and have) asked for footage of them playing because in that case it's actually relevant. But whether its 17 hours or 5 minutes, it's not right to waste the marathon organizers time making them review information THEY ALREADY KNOW.

Onin

Edit history:

Onin: 2013-07-09 09:40:06 am

2013-07-09 09:39:41 am

It's 17 manhours. No one is saying one person has to do all of it alone and within a day. Take three people to spend an hour a day, and it's done within a week.

Poxnor

Edit history:

Poxnor: 2013-07-09 09:43:13 am

2013-07-09 09:40:15 am

Moo! Flap! Hug!

Or make it a one-minute clip, and that drops to 3.5 man-hours Wink

[Edit: fixed my terrible math Wink

]

Yagamoth

Edit history:

Yagamoth: 2013-07-09 09:46:40 am

Yagamoth: 2013-07-09 09:46:10 am

2013-07-09 09:45:43 am

INTJ

Quote from Onin:

It's 17 manhours. No one is saying one person has to do all of it alone and within a day. Take three people to spend an hour a day, and it's done within a week.

^ That's basically what I meant, sorry for the confusion.

Edit: Also, 2 minutes to get your point across is arguably enough

Edit 2: Maybe not.. It is for me.. But I just remembered how hard it is to cut down a presentation to the important chunks..

Brossentia

Edit history:

Brossentia: 2013-07-09 10:03:41 am

2013-07-09 09:46:45 am

No pain, no gain

Well, I think it's a great idea for new runners to show what they're running, especially if it's an uncommon game. I mean, we all know what Duckfist does to Megaman, but if I wanted to get the run Flower into a marathon, I'd probably need to hype it up a bit. Videos are perfect for that. I think that showing a clip should be recommended but not required; it would take a lot of time, yes, and some we simply don't need because organizers have already seen those runs.

With that said, no matter how many times I suggest it, Mike's not gonna take Fester's Quest. I guess we'll have to see if Rom will =P

Edit: Well, speak of the devil.

Yagamoth

Edit history:

Yagamoth: 2013-07-09 09:50:35 am

2013-07-09 09:49:40 am

INTJ

I love Fester's Quest. Is that a coincidence that it's your avatar now? :P... I'm reasonably certain we could stir up interesting enough commentary to make it an enjoyable marathon watch Wink

Also I'd say, those mini-videos would be merely a help in deciding. As far as I can tell, Mike is already checking out various streams, games and researches a fair bit before rejecting them. So having everything condensed into what the runner (which is the important point) wants to show with the game is certainly helpful.

MURPHAGATOR!

2013-07-09 09:53:29 am

Terraffirmative!

My point isn't that having videos is unhelpful, it's that having every single person intending to propose a run submitting a video just to get in the door is a waste of time. The instances of when a video has been needed, it's been asked for. In the other instances, they didn't ask for video for a reason: they already had the information. That's what I'm trying to get across here.

The actual time wasted doesn't matter, but I felt that number was still big enough that it would weigh on people. Like I said in my last post, the amount of time could be 1 minute total, and it still wouldn't be right.

Onin

Edit history:

Onin: 2013-07-09 09:57:51 am

2013-07-09 09:57:29 am

At the least, you could suggest from the get go (ie in your topics/reddit posts) that a short video along with your game submission might help skew the vote in you favour.

Edenal

2013-07-09 10:00:24 am

Hockey enthusiast

Quote from MURPHAGATOR!:

Just some logistics on this because I want people to know how ridiculous it would be. Over 200 games were suggested for SGDQ this year (by a really quick count skimming through the first few pages of the thread). A 5 minute clip of each means that there would be about 17 HOURS of footage to watch. For a vast majority of these videos, it would give absolutely no useful information. We all know what Sinister1 playing Ninja Gaiden is going to be like, and when I suggest 6 random games most of which no sane person has ever heard of, they are obviously not all going to make the cut. In the few cases where a game or runner who the organizers were not familiar with come up, then a video was asked for to get an idea of if it would be a good fit.

Considering how much work already goes into marathons, adding this kind of work load to an already incredibly difficult and tedious organization process is extremely inconsiderate to the people involved.

Here's some insight from ESA. That is actually how we approached game selections. We watched ~5 minutes of gameplay from game we were uncertain about. And in the end it didn't come down to more than 20-30 games. For some games there were speedruns available, but it got a little more tricky when there was not. So these games might have been cut for the wrong reason, that the gameplay we watched did not reflect the speedrun.

I think we spend something like 2 sittings á 3 hours with that process.

[quote="MURPHAGATOR!"]Just some logistics on this because I want people to know how ridiculous it would be. Over 200 games were suggested for SGDQ this year (by a really quick count skimming through the first few pages of the thread). A 5 minute clip of each means that there would be about 17 HOURS of footage to watch. For a vast majority of these videos, it would give absolutely no useful information. We all know what Sinister1 playing Ninja Gaiden is going to be like, and when I suggest 6 random games most of which no sane person has ever heard of, they are obviously not all going to make the cut. In the few cases where a game or runner who the organizers were not familiar with come up, then a video was asked for to get an idea of if it would be a good fit.

Considering how much work already goes into marathons, adding this kind of work load to an already incredibly difficult and tedious organization process is extremely inconsiderate to the people involved.[/quote]

Here's some insight from ESA. That is actually how we approached game selections. We watched ~5 minutes of gameplay from game we were [b]uncertain [/b]about. And in the end it didn't come down to more than 20-30 games. For some games there were speedruns available, but it got a little more tricky when there was not. So these games might have been cut for the wrong reason, that the gameplay we watched did not reflect the speedrun.

I think we spend something like 2 sittings á 3 hours with that process.

zewing

2013-07-09 10:01:52 am

just( •_•)>⌐■-■ ..... (⌐■_■)wing it

Or you could ask some community members on the specific runner and game. Most active runners should have someone to help verify how good of a watch or the runners skills are. For not well known runners or games then maybe do the 1-5 minute clip showing off game. That way you don't require everyone to submit a video unless it's absolutely necessary to make an educated decision

Dime

Edit history:

Dime: 2013-07-09 10:09:22 am

2013-07-09 10:02:58 am

Quote from Freezard:

Quote from moooh:

Re: keybindings and configs
This isn't exactly something that belongs in the roundtable thread.
I'll extract the posts to a separate thread and I'll give you most of the answers there as most of these questions already have rulings made.

Yeah, I know I've had discussions with staff about many of those PC rules (like frame rate, user input), I just think the actual rules need to be added to the rules page. Maybe make a PC section there.

One thing I'm wondering is, what are the rules of Flash games and fan-made games? I know there are some Flash games on the site as well as I Wanna Be The Guy, but are you really accept any game? I really don't want to see this site turning into an endless stream of fan-made games being posted because there are so many games out there and people could just make their own game or whatever. Anyway, I think Flash/fan-made games should be in their own forum thread or at least in a sub-section of the PC section because it's kinda annoying to see threads about random fan-made Mario games pop up, and Flash games aren't exactly PC exclusive nowadays. Also I think there should be a sub-section of Indie games because they're just flooding the market at the moment and most of them are unknown to the average/hardcore PC gamer, and their quality is often reminiscent of fan-made games (because they kinda are).

Fangames are an interesting topic because you see a number of streams on SRL that essentially just do playthroughs of fangames while rarely doing any speedrunning. I could care less if a player is highly skilled at these games because it is still not speedrunning as optimization is not part of the process if it is simply a playthrough. It may be off-topic but I would be curious as to Cosmo's opinion on fangame playthrough streams on SRL. If it isn't relevant to the roundtable just ignore this post Smiley

Secondly, Freezard I do not believe that any old fangame should necessarily be accepted as a speedrun. One example that I will bring up involves the doom community. It had and still has a massive scene for modding that has brought out thousands of WAD's. Out of all of these only three were ever accepted for competn speedrunning which included "Requiem", "Alien Vendetta" and I believe "Memento Mori". I am of the opinion that it should be by a case-by-case basis but that brings up another topic on who judges what flash games, fan-games and indie titles etc are worthy.

[quote="Freezard"][quote="moooh"]Re: keybindings and configs
This isn't exactly something that belongs in the roundtable thread.
I'll extract the posts to a separate thread and I'll give you most of the answers there as most of these questions already have rulings made.[/quote]
Yeah, I know I've had discussions with staff about many of those PC rules (like frame rate, user input), I just think the actual rules need to be added to the rules page. Maybe make a PC section there.

One thing I'm wondering is, what are the rules of Flash games and fan-made games? I know there are some Flash games on the site as well as I Wanna Be The Guy, but are you really accept any game? I really don't want to see this site turning into an endless stream of fan-made games being posted because there are so many games out there and people could just make their own game or whatever. Anyway, I think Flash/fan-made games should be in their own forum thread or at least in a sub-section of the PC section because it's kinda annoying to see threads about random fan-made Mario games pop up, and Flash games aren't exactly PC exclusive nowadays. Also I think there should be a sub-section of Indie games because they're just flooding the market at the moment and most of them are unknown to the average/hardcore PC gamer, and their quality is often reminiscent of fan-made games (because they kinda are).[/quote]

Fangames are an interesting topic because you see a number of streams on SRL that essentially just do playthroughs of fangames while rarely doing any speedrunning. I could care less if a player is highly skilled at these games because it is still not speedrunning as optimization is not part of the process if it is simply a playthrough. It may be off-topic but I would be curious as to Cosmo's opinion on fangame playthrough streams on SRL.  If it isn't relevant to the roundtable just ignore this post :)

Secondly, Freezard I do not believe that any old fangame should necessarily be accepted as a speedrun. One example that I will bring up involves the doom community. It had and still has a massive scene for modding that has brought out thousands of WAD's. Out of all of these only three were ever accepted for competn speedrunning which included "Requiem", "Alien Vendetta" and I believe "Memento Mori". I am of the opinion that it should be by a case-by-case basis but that brings up another topic on who judges what flash games, fan-games and indie titles etc are worthy.

zewing

2013-07-09 10:09:21 am

just( •_•)>⌐■-■ ..... (⌐■_■)wing it

You can't really stop someone from speedrunning fan games or hacks. You can however stop them from submitting to leaderboards or SDA. Speedrunning is (in most cases) a hobby

Brossentia

2013-07-09 10:11:41 am

No pain, no gain

Back with videos, I think the representation of a run is a huge factor. Simply put, anyone can make a good video. Almost any game could look good between 1-2 minutes. However, the game might not actually be interesting at all outside that time frame. Also, live performance is vastly difference from a recording. If you can make a good video, cool. However, your live skills are what matter in a marathon, and that's going to be more important. In this case, streams are much more reasonable to judge skills.

Of course, not everyone has time to watch streams, but I think it's great to watch those of new members; if they don't have a stream, some sort of video would be fine. If that's not available, having another vouch for them might be okay (Essentia did that for me during my first marathon). At this point, there definitely needs to be some evidence of their skill, but I think we have plenty of ways for people to show what they can do.

So... I agree with MURPHAGATOR! (wow, it feels so empowering to say your name) If needed, videos are good. They've been asked in the past, and it's always been beneficial to those games. I think the "ask if necessary" policy for videos is fine.

Back with videos, I think the representation of a run is a huge factor. Simply put, anyone can make a good video. Almost any game could look good between 1-2 minutes. However, the game might not actually be interesting at all outside that time frame. Also, live performance is vastly difference from a recording. If you can make a good video, cool. However, your live skills are what matter in a marathon, and that's going to be more important. In this case, streams are much more reasonable to judge skills.

Of course, not everyone has time to watch streams, but I think it's great to watch those of new members; if they don't have a stream, some sort of video would be fine. If that's not available, having another vouch for them might be okay (Essentia did that for me during my first marathon). At this point, there definitely needs to be some evidence of their skill, but I think we have plenty of ways for people to show what they can do.

So... I agree with MURPHAGATOR! (wow, it feels so empowering to say your name) If needed, videos are good. They've been asked in the past, and it's always been beneficial to those games. I think the "ask if necessary" policy for videos is fine.

MURPHAGATOR!

2013-07-09 10:13:02 am

Terraffirmative!

Quote from Edenal:

Quote from MURPHAGATOR!:

Just some logistics on this because I want people to know how ridiculous it would be. Over 200 games were suggested for SGDQ this year (by a really quick count skimming through the first few pages of the thread). A 5 minute clip of each means that there would be about 17 HOURS of footage to watch. For a vast majority of these videos, it would give absolutely no useful information. We all know what Sinister1 playing Ninja Gaiden is going to be like, and when I suggest 6 random games most of which no sane person has ever heard of, they are obviously not all going to make the cut. In the few cases where a game or runner who the organizers were not familiar with come up, then a video was asked for to get an idea of if it would be a good fit.

Considering how much work already goes into marathons, adding this kind of work load to an already incredibly difficult and tedious organization process is extremely inconsiderate to the people involved.

Here's some insight from ESA. That is actually how we approached game selections. We watched ~5 minutes of gameplay from game we were uncertain about. And in the end it didn't come down to more than 20-30 games. For some games there were speedruns available, but it got a little more tricky when there was not. So these games might have been cut for the wrong reason, that the gameplay we watched did not reflect the speedrun.

I think we spend something like 2 sittings á 3 hours with that process.

See, that's fine. When the orgs have been uncertain, they ask for footage to make up their minds. That's good a process and gives useful information. It's also how it's worked in the past, or at least what I saw of the SGDQ selection process. Asking every single person to submit footage of every single game, which is what was proposed, is a gigantic waste of time.

[quote="Edenal"][quote="MURPHAGATOR!"]Just some logistics on this because I want people to know how ridiculous it would be. Over 200 games were suggested for SGDQ this year (by a really quick count skimming through the first few pages of the thread). A 5 minute clip of each means that there would be about 17 HOURS of footage to watch. For a vast majority of these videos, it would give absolutely no useful information. We all know what Sinister1 playing Ninja Gaiden is going to be like, and when I suggest 6 random games most of which no sane person has ever heard of, they are obviously not all going to make the cut. In the few cases where a game or runner who the organizers were not familiar with come up, then a video was asked for to get an idea of if it would be a good fit.

Considering how much work already goes into marathons, adding this kind of work load to an already incredibly difficult and tedious organization process is extremely inconsiderate to the people involved.[/quote]

Here's some insight from ESA. That is actually how we approached game selections. We watched ~5 minutes of gameplay from game we were [b]uncertain [/b]about. And in the end it didn't come down to more than 20-30 games. For some games there were speedruns available, but it got a little more tricky when there was not. So these games might have been cut for the wrong reason, that the gameplay we watched did not reflect the speedrun.

I think we spend something like 2 sittings á 3 hours with that process.

[/quote]

See, that's fine. When the orgs have been uncertain, they ask for footage to make up their minds. That's good a process and gives useful information. It's also how it's worked in the past, or at least what I saw of the SGDQ selection process. Asking every single person to submit footage of every single game, which is what was proposed, is a gigantic waste of time.

Cool Matty

Edit history:

Cool Matty: 2013-07-09 10:16:23 am

Cool Matty: 2013-07-09 10:15:21 am

2013-07-09 10:13:42 am

Crawlathon WR, get down on my level.

Quote from Poxnor:

My point was: why would I spend my time and money (both limited) to go to a marathon where I only get to do two of these things, given that there are other marathons I could attend where I could do all three? (Again, remember, limited resources of time and money.)

You just rephrased what you said already, it's not a counter to my point. I know what your reasons ARE.

Quote:

I'm sorry, but I simply don't have time to go to every marathon (SDA, C4L, TSG, etc.). I have to choose.

Your last sentence was also very insulting. I never said nor implied that nothing was more important than my run of my game at a marathon. If that was the takeaway from my post, then I seriously worded it poorly.

Of course you can't go to every marathon. Many people can't even go to one!

Look, it's simply a matter of differing values. You'd go to a specific marathon because (not in whole, but at least in part) you can run a game there. I'd go because I like that marathon the most. I'm not part of TSG, I don't know RPGs that well, so SDA's would be the best fit and a cause I support the most. That's how /I/ choose a marathon. Other people have even other reasons than ours, and that's fine too. I just personally think that having a run isn't a way to decide whether to go to a marathon, full stop.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I just needed to air another side of this thing.

Finally, that last sentence shouldn't have been insulting at all unless you are doing exactly what you said you aren't Tongue

[quote="Poxnor"]
My point was: why would I spend my time and money (both limited) to go to a marathon where I only get to do two of these things, [b][i]given[/i][/b] that there are other marathons I could attend where I could do all three?  (Again, remember, limited resources of time and money.)[/quote]

You just rephrased what you said already, it's not a counter to my point. I know what your reasons ARE.

[quote]
I'm sorry, but I simply don't have time to go to every marathon (SDA, C4L, TSG, etc.).  I have to choose.

Your last sentence was also very insulting.  I never said nor implied that nothing was more important than my run of my game at a marathon.  If that was the takeaway from my post, then I seriously worded it poorly.[/quote]

Of course you can't go to every marathon. Many people can't even go to one!

Look, it's simply a matter of differing values. You'd go to a specific marathon because (not in whole, but at least in part) you can run a game there. I'd go because I like that marathon the most. I'm not part of TSG, I don't know RPGs that well, so SDA's would be the best fit and a cause I support the most. That's how /I/ choose a marathon. Other people have even other reasons than ours, and that's fine too. I just personally think that having a run isn't a way to decide whether to go to a marathon, full stop.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I just needed to air another side of this thing.

Finally, that last sentence shouldn't have been insulting at all unless you are doing exactly what you said you aren't :P

kirbymastah

Edit history:

kirbymastah: 2013-07-09 10:17:58 am

kirbymastah: 2013-07-09 10:17:24 am

2013-07-09 10:15:54 am

<(^_^)>

1-2 minute clips aren't enough to judge whether a game is a good speedrun or not, and/or the player is good, as brossentia said. Streams are probably the best way to show how consistent a speedrunner is overall. I honestly probably would not have gotten any games for SGDQ if I did not stream, but I did stream regularly, and I got relatively more popular as a result of my skills at the games I speedrun. Why am I allowed to speedrun metroid fusion at SGDQ for example? Because I have shown that I am capable of getting top times consistently via my streams. (I don't mean to sound conceited, I am merely using my own experiences as an example of a "new" speedrunner in the SDA community and as a first-timer doing a game at a marathon).

AlecK47

Edit history:

AlecK47: 2013-07-09 10:19:58 am

2013-07-09 10:17:32 am

Quote from Cool Matty:

A run shouldn't be the overwhelming qualifier for that.

Perhaps not, but at the same time it is a big reason. Certainly for somebody with exceptionally limited financial resources (I went to C4L on my father's dime, not my own) and who will soon have more money - most of which will go to paying off student loans for some time - but less free (and vacation) time. Echoing poxnor there, but deciding whether or not to attend a marathon really is a complex decision, and as others have said it really depends on the person and their personal circumstances. In my case I'm more likely to double down on a future marathon where my personal circumstances are more in order for the aforementioned reasons, but others with circumstances much like mine can and will decide differently.

To sum it all up: if after taking everything except whether or not you have a game into account you are on the fence, having or not having a game will likely end up being the deciding factor.

And as Cool Matty posted before I finished this, glad to see that you apparently agree with what I said. Smiley

I guess I'll leave this in so my two cents is known. Tongue

As for indie/fan games and the like, I agree that putting them in their own area (be it a board or sub board) is a good idea. There are a lot of them out there and it's not a hard distinction to make. Grunt work required, but at least worth considering nevertheless.

While I'm at it, I may as well throw my support behind the idea of consolidating marathons that raise funds for marathon attendees. And on that topic, should there be a policy, written or unwritten, that people receiving funds from such events should have a vital role to play (game, tech wizard or whatever) and not just be there to hang out? I think that's the way it's worked so far, but it may change in the future, so I'll put it out there.

And finally, for videos "as needed" seems the best policy to me. Whether they be nicely encoded highlights, twitch highlights, or even a full on "sales" pitch, as long as they convey the necessary information that's what really matters.

[quote="Cool Matty"]A run shouldn't be the overwhelming qualifier for that.[/quote]
Perhaps not, but at the same time it is a big reason.  Certainly for somebody with exceptionally limited financial resources (I went to C4L on my father's dime, not my own) and who will soon have more money - most of which will go to paying off student loans for some time - but less free (and vacation) time.  Echoing poxnor there, but deciding whether or not to attend a marathon really is a complex decision, and as others have said it really depends on the person and their personal circumstances.  In my case I'm more likely to double down on a future marathon where my personal circumstances are more in order for the aforementioned reasons, but others with circumstances much like mine can and will decide differently.

To sum it all up: if after taking [i]everything except[/i] whether or not you have a game into account you are on the fence, having or not having a game will likely end up being the deciding factor.

And as Cool Matty posted before I finished this, glad to see that you apparently agree with what I said. :)  I guess I'll leave this in so my two cents is known. :P

As for indie/fan games and the like, I agree that putting them in their own area (be it a board or sub board) is a good idea.  There are a lot of them out there and it's not a hard distinction to make.  Grunt work required, but at least worth considering nevertheless.

While I'm at it, I may as well throw my support behind the idea of consolidating marathons that raise funds for marathon attendees.  And on that topic, should there be a policy, written or unwritten, that people receiving funds from such events should have a vital role to play (game, tech wizard or whatever) and not just be there to hang out?  I think that's the way it's worked so far, but it may change in the future, so I'll put it out there.

And finally, for videos "as needed" seems the best policy to me.  Whether they be nicely encoded highlights, twitch highlights, or even a full on "sales" pitch, as long as they convey the necessary information that's what really matters.

Brossentia

2013-07-09 10:21:51 am

No pain, no gain

Cool Matty, Poxnor, I love you both, but mind stopping the baiting and all? I mean, I appreciate that you're both great master baiters, but it really seems like you just have different values. Yeah, some will come to help with the marathons. Yeah, some think that not having a game is enough of a reason to not go. It's just a difference of opinions, and I'm sure that a mix of people is always helpful. I'd probably go if I didn't have a game, but that doesn't mean Poxnor should have to. I just think it's fine to end the personal jabs in a public thread.

What would be a little more helpful is to address the actual issue at hand, which is... uh, does anyone remember the issue?

Poxnor

2013-07-09 10:24:02 am

Moo! Flap! Hug!

It's done, Brossentia. I wasn't planning on replying anymore on that topic; and, if I feel the need to discuss the issue (?) more with Cool Matty, it'll be in a PM. It's done, it's over; sorry everyone.