Timer Manipulation

2009-02-08 02:05:33 pm

What is SDA's stance on using tricks to manipulate the timer? For example, I was considering doing a Mirror's Edge Speedrun. In the Console versions of the game there are areas that trap you while the game loads. A few of these do not stop the timer, and instead let you progress after the game loads the next area. This seems to be a fixed amount of time. When you first enter the storm drains of Jacknife, the large door will open 40 seconds after you enter the 'holding area'.

However, if when you hear the console loading from the disc you pause the game, the timer obviously stops, yet the loading continues. If you unpause after the game loads, the door opens right away. It saves a huge amount of time, and this can be applied to several areas of several levels.

I ask because I know for sure that the world record runs do this. I would not submit runs if they did not beat, or were within a few seconds of the world record, otherwise why bother. Still, the trick seems a little iffy, and I would like to know what people think.

Thread title:

What is SDA's stance on using tricks to manipulate the timer? For example, I was considering doing a Mirror's Edge Speedrun. In the Console versions of the game there are areas that trap you while the game loads. A few of these do not stop the timer, and instead let you progress after the game loads the next area. This seems to be a fixed amount of time. When you first enter the storm drains of Jacknife, the large door will open 40 seconds after you enter the 'holding area'.

However, if when you hear the console loading from the disc you pause the game, the timer obviously stops, yet the loading continues. If you unpause after the game loads, the door opens right away. It saves a huge amount of time, and this can be applied to several areas of several levels.

I ask because I know for sure that the world record runs do this. I would not submit runs if they did not beat, or were within a few seconds of the world record, otherwise why bother. Still, the trick seems a little iffy, and I would like to know what people think.

groobo

2009-02-08 02:30:14 pm

boss

My guess is if the in-game timer is used you're free to abuse this and if the run is timed manually, well, you're still allowed to use it but the time the game is paused will still count.

mikwuyma

2009-02-08 03:47:22 pm

My feelings on The Demon Rush

Manipulating the timer is fine as long as if it's not something that completely breaks the timer, like resetting it back to zero. I manipulated the timer in my Zero 2 run by just sitting still for five seconds while the in-game timer wasn't moving.

MMAN

2009-02-09 02:02:27 pm

I was thinking of asking about this too, but assumed what Groobo said (and now its been confirmed), but now I'm curious about having more potential competition Smiley

.

Carcinogen

2009-02-11 08:38:18 am

Timer manipulation is very iffy in my book.

Pausing a game != faster completion.

Doing it for Mirror's Edge makes perfect sense though, 'cuz invisible walls are pretty lame.

Lag.Com

2009-02-11 11:19:40 am

sda loyalist

Quote from Carcinogen:

Pausing a game != faster completion.

Tell that to Mega Man 9 runners

65

2009-02-11 11:29:24 am

That's why we need the real time category!

Carcinogen

2009-02-11 02:25:28 pm

Quote from Lag.Com:

Quote from Carcinogen:

Pausing a game != faster completion.

Tell that to Mega Man 9 runners

More like tell that to Capcom.

slowbro

2009-02-11 09:42:49 pm

I wonder how often this method would help (in how many games)? Beautiful Katamari is one.

dex

2009-02-14 09:47:23 am

Invisible avatar

If the timer was the method of timing Deus Ex, I could potentially make the run have less than 3 minutes on the clock. The run would be extremely lame - pausing over and over without a single frame of gameplay shown - but it would be the fastest.

Fortunately, real time is the method of timing since the timer is not very precise anyway :P.

Midori

2009-02-16 12:13:56 pm

Damn you tinypic... damn you.

I don't see why it shouldn't be accepted, as the current 100 man brawl run is. In that run the pauses are used for the exact same reason: To let the game load something while the timer is off.

The main difference is that in Brawl, the pauses themselves are not included in the video. Due to that that the video is taken from a replay (when converted to a replay, the pausing screens are removed).

your_name_here

2009-02-16 09:31:20 pm

I don't even think that pausing to skip load times should really be considered timer manipulation. The timer time still accurately reflects play time minus pauses. It's more of an exploit to make cutscenes start earlier, or enemies spawn faster or whatever.

xXIkuto

2009-03-09 03:30:18 am

personally i think it should be on a game-by-game basis (seems to be the ultimate method of doing things right)

in other words mike would decide if pauses caused whatever he considered "significant" inaccuracy of the game timer, whatever that may be for whatever game. for example: (imaginary) if someone paused the game for 30 seconds (exaggerated) at the end of every level in smb3 (if it had a timer) because somehow it would not count the time for the little scene after you jump and get a mushroom...i think that it would defeat the purpose of SDA to post this run as much faster than a run that was matching times with the exception of pausing the game during the little scene. in reality the pause game would be longer, but the only problem with that is that now the guy somehow has a glitched "beat the level" scene that is not counted by the timer...had no control over the character during such scene (besides pausing it), and did not out-skill the other run by what it may look like if you went on the game timer.

hope that all made sense

personally i think it should be on a game-by-game basis (seems to be the ultimate method of doing things right)

in other words mike would decide if pauses caused whatever he considered "significant" inaccuracy of the game timer, whatever that may be for whatever game.  for example: (imaginary)  if someone paused the game for 30 seconds (exaggerated) at the end of every level in smb3 (if it had a timer) because somehow it would not count the time for the little scene after you jump and get a mushroom...i think that it would defeat the purpose of SDA to post this run as much faster than a run that was matching times with the exception of pausing the game during the little scene.  in reality the pause game would be longer, but the only problem with that is that now the guy somehow has a glitched "beat the level" scene that is not counted by the timer...had no control over the character during such scene (besides pausing it), and did not out-skill the other run by what it may look like if you went on the game timer.

hope that all made sense

Poesta

2009-03-22 06:25:15 am

Yarr

I have a question regarding to timer manipulation: in Thief 2 there's this mission where you have to listen to a conversation for about 5 minutes while the mission itself can be completed in under 9 minutes. The thing is, the whole game speed is dependant on the framerate, except for sounds that don't play any faster. Normally this isn't an issue because the timer adjusts itself to the speed, so if the game runs faster the timer is faster. However, the real conversation time is always the same, independant from the game speed. As a result, when I play without recording @85 fps I can complete the mission in 9 minutes, but while recording @30 fps I can complete it in under 8 minutes.

There is a way to get a shorter conversation time but it involves editing a game file, i.e. binding a key to the console in a configuration file, so this wouldn't be allowed. The conversation is divided into parts, the trick is to pause the game after the start of each part by bringing up the console (the converstaion will continue but the timer doesn't) and unpausing just before the part ends, etc.

I'm thinking of saving just before the conversation and then record at something like 1 fps to cut down the time, would this be allowed?

I have a question regarding to timer manipulation: in Thief 2 there's this mission where you have to listen to a conversation for about 5 minutes while the mission itself can be completed in under 9 minutes. The thing is, the whole game speed is dependant on the framerate, except for sounds that don't play any faster. Normally this isn't an issue because the timer adjusts itself to the speed, so if the game runs faster the timer is faster. However, the real conversation time is always the same, independant from the game speed. As a result, when I play without recording @85 fps I can complete the mission in 9 minutes, but while recording @30 fps I can complete it in under 8 minutes.

There is a way to get a shorter conversation time but it involves editing a game file, i.e. binding a key to the console in a configuration file, so this wouldn't be allowed. The conversation is divided into parts, the trick is to pause the game after the start of each part by bringing up the console (the converstaion will continue but the timer doesn't) and unpausing just before the part ends, etc.

I'm thinking of saving just before the conversation and then record at something like 1 fps to cut down the time, would this be allowed?

groobo

2009-03-22 01:26:04 pm

boss

My wild, probably accurate, guess is that it won't be allowed.

mikwuyma

2009-03-22 01:33:59 pm

My feelings on The Demon Rush

I'm going to say no on that Thief 2 exploit.

Poesta

2009-03-22 01:37:08 pm

Yarr

You mean the console trick or the 1 fps recording?

mikwuyma

2009-03-23 10:20:15 am

My feelings on The Demon Rush

Both.

Poesta

2009-03-23 12:45:42 pm

Yarr

K

ExplodingCabbage

2009-03-31 04:50:26 pm

Just saw this thread. So basically, the lower the framerate, the less time spent? In that case, surely a rule on exactly what framerate to use is needed (presumably require a framerate of 30 FPS, since that's standard I believe), or else the 1 FPS would be no less valid than any other frame rate.

ZenicReverie

2009-03-31 05:21:10 pm

Waiting hurts my soul...

Quote from ExplodingCabbage:

Just saw this thread. So basically, the lower the framerate, the less time spent? In that case, surely a rule on exactly what framerate to use is needed (presumably require a framerate of 30 FPS, since that's standard I believe), or else the 1 FPS would be no less valid than any other frame rate.

Slowing down to 1 FPS will probably have verifiers wondering why that would happen and reject the run based on quality issues.

ExplodingCabbage

2009-04-01 03:27:34 am

Though, if the time for that segment is purely dependent on framerate, surely we need a rule imposing a framerate for that section?