Username:
B
I
U
S
"
url
img
#
code
sup
sub
font
size
color
smiley
embarassed
thumbsup
happy
Huh?
Angry
Roll Eyes
Undecided
Lips Sealed
Kiss
Cry
Grin
Wink
Tongue
Shocked
Cheesy
Smiley
Sad
1 page
--
--
List results:
Search options:
Use \ before commas in usernames
Game Page: http://speeddemosarchive.com/StarWarsStarfighter.html

Star Wars: Starfighter (pc) (pc) [Any %] [Single Segment]

Decision: Reject

Reason: Time improvement primarily came from load time differences, run was otherwise slower than the existing run.

https://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/verificationfiles/1545/

This run will be available for a month. After that these link(s) will no longer work.
Thread title:  
Run Information

Star Wars: Starfighter (pc) (pc) [Any %] [Single Segment]

Verification Files

http://v.speeddemosarchive.com/starwarsstarfighterss-v_HQ.mp4

Please refer to the Verification Guidelines before posting. Verifications are due by May 16, 2015.

Please post your opinions about the run and be certain to conclude your post with a verdict (Accept/Reject). This is not a contest where the majority wins - I will judge each verification on its content. Please keep your verification brief unless you have a good reason otherwise.

After 2 weeks I will read all of the verifications and move this thread to the main verification board and post my verdict.
A/V: The runner mentions in the comments that this was a recording taken off twitch. For someone (like me) who doesn't have experience with pc capture, I think it looks good (and certainly better than the vhs-captured run that is currently on the site). If someone else takes a look and says that the video quality is not ok, it would be awesome to give an explanation for future reference. The audio is borderline unacceptable though with overpeaking becoming a problem in many places. It might be passable, but that's just my subjective opinion.

Gameplay: I watched a bit in the beginning and it seems well played. The runner knew what they were doing and executed it well enough as far as I could see (I don't have any experience with this game though). The problem is that this run is only faster than psonar's because of load times. I timed the first few levels (very roughly, but it should still illustrate my point):

psonar / submitted run
------------------------------
start control - 1:36 / 0:42
level 1 start save screen - 3:55 / 3:19
leve 1 end load screen - 4:20 / 3:26
level 2 start save screen - 10:33 / 9:22
leve 2 end load screen - 11:02 / 9:28
level 3 start save screen - 13:42 / 12:20
leve 3 end load screen - 14:13 / 12:25
level 4 start save screen - 15:36 / 13:50
leve 4 end load screen - 16:03 / 13:56
level 5 start save screen - 19:18 / 17:49
leve 5 end load screen - 19:48 / 17:55
level 6 start save screen - 26:47 / 24:41
leve 6 end load screen - 27:17 / 24:47
.
.
.
end control - 1:18:30 / 1:13:39

So, the new run is roughly 4 minutes faster than the current run. However, each load time has roughly been cut from 30 seconds to 6 seconds. Extrapolating for the remaining load times (there are 14 levels, so 13 load times in total) gives that the current run has roughly 6.5 min of load times and the submitted run has roughly 1.5 min of load times. In summary, the submitted run is around one minute slower than the current run. Calculating the individual level times from the times I've written above seems to confirm this. Still, the submitted run manages to save time in a few levels, so the skill is clearly there to beat psonar's time (when taking load times into account). However, as the run stands right now

Reject (when taking load times into account, the submitted run is slower than the current run on the site, the a/v is also questionable and would need a second opinion)
Borderlands 2 Glitch Hunter/ router.
Yeah, I agree with ktwo and specifically as this is a PC game which has loading times removed due to differences in hardware.

If the play time for the missions is longer then the run is longer regardless of total video length.

A/V looks grainy too particularly when areas of the game change from light to dark / shadows. and as this was meant to be the HQ encode it looks pretty bad.

Reject
Ayy Lmao
I am planning on re-running this game to improve my time. However, I want to avoid the quality issues that this run had. Twictch is not the best, but Bandicam takes up sooo much space. Do any SDA veterans have any advice?
Borderlands 2 Glitch Hunter/ router.
you can record using OBS while streaming (or without streaming) which (with the right settings) gives a good quality output file that isn't Massive.

Ayy Lmao
Quote from ktwo:
A/V: The runner mentions in the comments that this was a recording taken off twitch. For someone (like me) who doesn't have experience with pc capture, I think it looks good (and certainly better than the vhs-captured run that is currently on the site). If someone else takes a look and says that the video quality is not ok, it would be awesome to give an explanation for future reference. The audio is borderline unacceptable though with overpeaking becoming a problem in many places. It might be passable, but that's just my subjective opinion.

Gameplay: I watched a bit in the beginning and it seems well played. The runner knew what they were doing and executed it well enough as far as I could see (I don't have any experience with this game though). The problem is that this run is only faster than psonar's because of load times. I timed the first few levels (very roughly, but it should still illustrate my point):

psonar / submitted run
------------------------------
start control - 1:36 / 0:42
level 1 start save screen - 3:55 / 3:19
leve 1 end load screen - 4:20 / 3:26
level 2 start save screen - 10:33 / 9:22
leve 2 end load screen - 11:02 / 9:28
level 3 start save screen - 13:42 / 12:20
leve 3 end load screen - 14:13 / 12:25
level 4 start save screen - 15:36 / 13:50
leve 4 end load screen - 16:03 / 13:56
level 5 start save screen - 19:18 / 17:49
leve 5 end load screen - 19:48 / 17:55
level 6 start save screen - 26:47 / 24:41
leve 6 end load screen - 27:17 / 24:47
.
.
.
end control - 1:18:30 / 1:13:39

So, the new run is roughly 4 minutes faster than the current run. However, each load time has roughly been cut from 30 seconds to 6 seconds. Extrapolating for the remaining load times (there are 14 levels, so 13 load times in total) gives that the current run has roughly 6.5 min of load times and the submitted run has roughly 1.5 min of load times. In summary, the submitted run is around one minute slower than the current run. Calculating the individual level times from the times I've written above seems to confirm this. Still, the submitted run manages to save time in a few levels, so the skill is clearly there to beat psonar's time (when taking load times into account). However, as the run stands right now

Reject (when taking load times into account, the submitted run is slower than the current run on the site, the a/v is also questionable and would need a second opinion)


I thought that version difference was a viable factor. I know in the OoT Runs, version difference is important, because runners take into account various times for system lag, as well as text speed for different languages. 
Can you rephrase your last message? I've read it a few times, but I'm still not sure I understand what you're trying to say or if there is a question in there. :-)
How would these be different versions?
Ayy Lmao
Quote from ktwo:
Can you rephrase your last message? I've read it a few times, but I'm still not sure I understand what you're trying to say or if there is a question in there. :-)



My version is the PC version, thus it has less load times than it's PS2 equivalent.

The Zelda Occarina of Time speed runs rely heavily on which console the game is being run on. The Chineese IQUE has faster text speed but more lag in some places, whereas the Wii Vitual console may be slower but is more stable. Regardless, version difference has been a viable factor in the past for other speed runs.
Loading times isn't a significant enough difference to distinguish categories on SDA. Even if it were, being a minute slower than the existing run when disregarding loading times still makes it a reject.
oldhog, I think I see your point now. Onin explained it pretty well. It's true that different platforms are separate categories, but that assumes that there are significant differences that make them incomparable. Different glitches or tricks are typical such differences. Even when the game play is identical, it can be warranted to create different categories. For example, fps:ers have separate categories for console and pc mainly because the control schemes are so different. I think that could apply for this game as well (even though I don't know the game). However, I don't see how pc would be at a disadvantage in this game, so if anything, it would be to keep psonar's run even if a faster time would be submitted on pc. Anyways, good luck! I hope to see you improve your time (I'm sure you will, you're already faster than psonar in several levels).
Decision posted.
To clarify what the others posted, Oldhog - assuming there are no major gameplay differences between the PC and PS2 versions, we would not consider them separate categories on our site. Since SDA timing discounts load times, the fact that your run is about one minute slower than the existing run means it doesn't qualify for acceptance. Based on what the other posters have said, it sounds like if you improve by over a minute, you should reach the threshold where your run will be faster than the existing one. We hope to see you reach that goal and then submit such a run.