1-Up!
Game Page: Doesn't exist yet
The Secret of Monkey Island (Any %) (Single Segment)
Verifier Responses
Decision: Reject
Reason: Some of the accept recommendations above were a bit weak, or mentioned that the runner ought to keep trying. Spending nearly 30 seconds walking the wrong way in a 35 minute run just doesn't sit well with me. That's not even considering other misclicks or general slowness (referenced in the runner's comments). Seems to me that with better execution and that one big mistake removed, this could be ~40 seconds faster.
This run will be available for a month. After that this link will no longer work.
http://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/queue/verificationfiles/473
The Secret of Monkey Island (Any %) (Single Segment)
Verifier Responses
Quote:
A/V good, no cheating. I'm Bobbin Threadbare, are you my mommy? Wait, no, that's not who I am at all. (Ask me about Loom.) ANYWAYS! Despite some slow moments during the run, and a few navigation flubs, I find that is a really fast run of a really tough old point-and-click. I'm giving this an accept! I time it at 35:40, from when they click off the screen to show the first chapter title until they click on LeChuck to beat him.
Quote:
Agree, A/V good, no cheating. Text manipulation, while fuzzy at times is really good, and shines even during the swordfight sections (with minor exceptions). Very well routed. Since the game doesnt have a page yet and the run is very clean. I vote on accepting. Even if you fight like a cow 
Quote:
The good:
-The route was planned out well. I can't think of any improvements.
-Got good luck with swordfighting and defeated the Sword Master on the first try.
The bad:
-A few minor misclicks throughout, and some hesitation on selecting dialogue at a couple points, but nothing too serious.
-A big mistake at the treasure hunting section: On one screen, the runner accidentally has Guybrush move to the right before he'd advanced to the next screen on the left. Apparently the runner didn't realize this until he ended up back at the beginning of the Fork and had to start over again. This mistake cost about 27 seconds.
If it weren't for the treasure hunting mistake, I'd accept this run. However, it's such a big mistake in a short, simple run that I can't overlook it. Therefore I'm going to have to reject, but I really hope the runner will attempt this again.
-The route was planned out well. I can't think of any improvements.
-Got good luck with swordfighting and defeated the Sword Master on the first try.
The bad:
-A few minor misclicks throughout, and some hesitation on selecting dialogue at a couple points, but nothing too serious.
-A big mistake at the treasure hunting section: On one screen, the runner accidentally has Guybrush move to the right before he'd advanced to the next screen on the left. Apparently the runner didn't realize this until he ended up back at the beginning of the Fork and had to start over again. This mistake cost about 27 seconds.
If it weren't for the treasure hunting mistake, I'd accept this run. However, it's such a big mistake in a short, simple run that I can't overlook it. Therefore I'm going to have to reject, but I really hope the runner will attempt this again.
Quote:
While I agree with the other commenters that there are a few mistakes and slipups that stop the run from being perfect, I respect the art of conversation mashing too much to see it as a reason to reject the run.
Accept, with the caveat that the runner try his best to continue beating his own records.
Accept, with the caveat that the runner try his best to continue beating his own records.
Quote:
Commentary: kinda scant, would've liked to hear a bit more about routing and such. Also, is it really faster to walk through the screen with the "mysterious" doors in the village without using the doors?
A few thinking pauses here and there, e.g. buying the items at the store. The mistake [above] points out seems is probably caused by having one's eyes on one's notes, but it's still caused by inattentiveness and is quite a major one for a run this relatively short. I timed it at 22 seconds though. I compared it with this:
The guy running in the video takes 20s to get from the screen transition where the mistake happened to the clearing with the X (starting at 6:18). The submitter took 42s. How did you measure it [above]?
Anyway, I'd like to maybe ask the runner to give it a couple more tries, rejecting this submission. I can't tell how much luck was involved in getting sufficient insults and one-rounding the sword master, but 22s/27s is a fair margin for allowing the luck to be a little worse in a future re-submission.
Also, even if you get worse luck in future attempts, I'd like to think it's better for the viewers if the run is as clean as possible otherwise.
so reject
A few thinking pauses here and there, e.g. buying the items at the store. The mistake [above] points out seems is probably caused by having one's eyes on one's notes, but it's still caused by inattentiveness and is quite a major one for a run this relatively short. I timed it at 22 seconds though. I compared it with this:
The guy running in the video takes 20s to get from the screen transition where the mistake happened to the clearing with the X (starting at 6:18). The submitter took 42s. How did you measure it [above]?
Anyway, I'd like to maybe ask the runner to give it a couple more tries, rejecting this submission. I can't tell how much luck was involved in getting sufficient insults and one-rounding the sword master, but 22s/27s is a fair margin for allowing the luck to be a little worse in a future re-submission.
Also, even if you get worse luck in future attempts, I'd like to think it's better for the viewers if the run is as clean as possible otherwise.
so reject
Quote:
Oof, that is quite an ugly mistake so early in the run that should probably have warranted a reset, but I'm assuming the runner went going due to having had fairly good luck with the insult gathering and beating the sword master first try, as losing to the sword master once would have cost more than 20 seconds (the fight in this run takes nearly a minute).
Execution of everything else in the run was good, route was good...
Ultimately, I think that overall, this is good enough to not warrant rejection, but I'd also like to see the runner giving it a few more tries.
Thus, Kenny says accept. Agreeing with the 35:40 timing.
Execution of everything else in the run was good, route was good...
Ultimately, I think that overall, this is good enough to not warrant rejection, but I'd also like to see the runner giving it a few more tries.
Thus, Kenny says accept. Agreeing with the 35:40 timing.
Decision: Reject
Reason: Some of the accept recommendations above were a bit weak, or mentioned that the runner ought to keep trying. Spending nearly 30 seconds walking the wrong way in a 35 minute run just doesn't sit well with me. That's not even considering other misclicks or general slowness (referenced in the runner's comments). Seems to me that with better execution and that one big mistake removed, this could be ~40 seconds faster.
This run will be available for a month. After that this link will no longer work.
http://queue.speeddemosarchive.com/queue/verificationfiles/473
Thread title: