Spyro the Dragon - July 10th, 2013

2013-07-10 08:17:34 am

1-Up!

Game Page: http://speeddemosarchive.com/Spyro.html

Spyro the Dragon (Any %) (Single Segment) (pal) (psx)

Verifier Responses

Quote:

This run is overall bad. The excuse of saying that the version is slower is not acceptable. The only disadvantage this player has to ntsc is load times. Overall, the pal movement is quite faster, but the load times make it less then 2 minutes slower than ntsc, and this is comparing a ntsc ps2 to a pal ps1. there is no way you can say you lose 15 minutes due to version differences in this game. This run would probably be an accept if the runner had a time of a mid 44 - 45 minute run, and if the runner didn't lose 10+ minutes to poor movement and routing. The route is outdated and the movement is terrible. Even if this beats the current sda run, it does not live up to the standard of other runs, and that's why I think it should be Denied.

Quote:

The run fulfills the cliché of a casual speedrunner's final goal. It is just an okay run and definitely faster than ratchet5's previous run. However, it still uses horribly outdated routes and sloppy movement overall, which makes it look far less impressive. The runner should watch the WR runs on NTSC and mimick them, seeing as the route is much better in those runs obviously and there is no PAL/NTSC difference that prevents him from using that route effectively over the one that the runner currently used. Speaking of WRs, the comments give the feel that ratchet5's run is considered to be the WR by the runner. Just to clarify, there are tons of people who did much better on PAL already and SDA is not a WR database, it is a collection of good and well-executed speedruns. Like right now as well, it will get outdated of course but it cannot be updated with just any run that is faster, but rather with a run that holds a certain standard for speedrunning this game at this time. I would accept this run if it goes somewhere below the 48 minute-mark. But this is just ridiculous and does by no means beat a WR. It's a good PB, it's a good start, but it is also something that should be build up on. Plus I agree to what the verifier before me posted. Kick it out again, it does not deserve to be here.
REJECT

Quote:

A/V good, no cheating detected. I'm not as familiar with the routing of this game, but I do echo the previous verifiers hat the movement is pretty bad. I'm sure part of the lost time was due to an outdated route, but the movement makes up a huge chunk of it as well. I would also suggest that the runner check out more current runs of the game. I'm going to have to reject this one, though. Being better than ratchet5's run doesn't mean much when it's ridiculously slower than the NTSC run on the site.

Quote:

It's not a hilariously bad run like those that get submitted sometimes, but it's not very good either. Like the others said the movement isn't very good, and despite not being very familiar with the routing for this game, I can tell that's not great too. I mean, taking 20 seconds to get a dragon while only getting like 3 gems on the way in Dry Canyon... you would've been better off getting the very first dragon in the game instead.
It also seems to me from the comments that the runner didn't bother to check any other runs but Ratchet's.

Overall this looks like a low-effort run. Reject

Quote:

A/V is fine, no cheating of any sort.

I'm afraid I have to concur with the other verifiers, this feels like a run which has not been properly researched and the runner has just been happy with beating an old time rather than fulfilling the potential of the run.

Sorry but this is a reject from me.

Decision: Reject

Reason: Not up to SDA standards

This run will be available for a month. After that this link will no longer work.
http://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/queue/verificationfiles/567

Thread title:

Game Page: http://speeddemosarchive.com/Spyro.html

Spyro the Dragon (Any %) (Single Segment) (pal) (psx)

[b]Verifier Responses[/b]

[quote]This run is overall bad. The excuse of saying that the version is slower is not acceptable. The only disadvantage this player has to ntsc is load times. Overall, the pal movement is quite faster, but the load times make it less then 2 minutes slower than ntsc, and this is comparing a ntsc ps2 to a pal ps1. there is no way you can say you lose 15 minutes due to version differences in this game. This run would probably be an accept if the runner had a time of a mid 44 - 45 minute run, and if the runner didn't lose 10+ minutes to poor movement and routing. The route is outdated and the movement is terrible. Even if this beats the current sda run, it does not live up to the standard of other runs, and that's why I think it should be [b]Denied[/b].[/quote]

[quote]The run fulfills the cliché of a casual speedrunner's final goal. It is just an okay run and definitely faster than ratchet5's previous run. However, it still uses horribly outdated routes and sloppy movement overall, which makes it look far less impressive. The runner should watch the WR runs on NTSC and mimick them, seeing as the route is much better in those runs obviously and there is no PAL/NTSC difference that prevents him from using that route effectively over the one that the runner currently used. Speaking of WRs, the comments give the feel that ratchet5's run is considered to be the WR by the runner. Just to clarify, there are tons of people who did much better on PAL already and SDA is not a WR database, it is a collection of good and well-executed speedruns. Like right now as well, it will get outdated of course but it cannot be updated with just any run that is faster, but rather with a run that holds a certain standard for speedrunning this game at this time. I would accept this run if it goes somewhere below the 48 minute-mark. But this is just ridiculous and does by no means beat a WR. It's a good PB, it's a good start, but it is also something that should be build up on. Plus I agree to what the verifier before me posted. Kick it out again, it does not deserve to be here.
[b]REJECT[/b][/quote]

[quote]A/V good, no cheating detected. I'm not as familiar with the routing of this game, but I do echo the previous verifiers hat the movement is pretty bad. I'm sure part of the lost time was due to an outdated route, but the movement makes up a huge chunk of it as well. I would also suggest that the runner check out more current runs of the game. I'm going to have to reject this one, though. Being better than ratchet5's run doesn't mean much when it's ridiculously slower than the NTSC run on the site.[/quote]

[quote]It's not a hilariously bad run like those that get submitted sometimes, but it's not very good either. Like the others said the movement isn't very good, and despite not being very familiar with the routing for this game, I can tell that's not great too. I mean, taking 20 seconds to get a dragon while only getting like 3 gems on the way in Dry Canyon... you would've been better off getting the very first dragon in the game instead.
It also seems to me from the comments that the runner didn't bother to check any other runs but Ratchet's.

Overall this looks like a low-effort run. [b]Reject[/b][/quote]

[quote]A/V is fine, no cheating of any sort.

I'm afraid I have to concur with the other verifiers, this feels like a run which has not been properly researched and the runner has just been happy with beating an old time rather than fulfilling the potential of the run.

Sorry but this is a [b]reject[/b] from me.[/quote]

[b]Decision:[/b] Reject

[b]Reason:[/b] Not up to SDA standards

This run will be available for a month. After that this link will no longer work.
http://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/queue/verificationfiles/567