Roll Eyes
Lips Sealed
1 page
List results:
Search options:
Use \ before commas in usernames
Game Page: Doesn't exist yet

Virtua Tennis (Any %) (Single Segment) [Arcade Mode]

Verifier Responses

To begin, I'd like to say something that doesn't REALLY have an effect on the run one way or the other. The goal. In regards to a speedrun, it's not really any%, or 100%, or 'arcade mode'. It's an extremely peculiar goal. Again, I'm not going to judge one way or the other, but I do feel that something more solid could have been achieved, such as simply - beat the 'world tour' or the arcade mode, or whatever. Hell, even unlocking both these bonus characters - but for the goal to be the completion of a random 1-game exhibition match between the two is just peculiar - as said. I feel as if the run should have simply ended once the bonus characters were unlocked. Unless there's something I'm missing, or perhaps the runner knows something I don't, but anyway, that's my little whinge session.

In regards to A/V - all seems good. Nothing all that noteworthy.
In regards to skullduggery, nothing on that front either.

So, from what I can tell, the game progresses through the Arcade mode to unlock 'Master', then through the 'World Circuit' to unlock 'King'. Both characters need to be unlocked to play each other in an exhibition. (This is in the run comments, but for the sake of ease) The run is played on the hardest difficulty, 'Very Hard'. The run therefore should be marked as such - seeing as it would likely have been faster to lower the difficulty, it was simply the runners choice to increase it. (And respect goes out for that!)

I'm going to try and go through 'level by level' but at the same time, it's just tennis, so don't except anything too in depth: (As always though, I'm going to be picky because I'm an ass. I'd point out that just because I'm saying 'that's a mistake' doesn't mean I think it's really crap, I'm just using my fine-tooth comb as it were)


It doesn't really matter what order the runner does the two modes in, so doing the arcade first does not have any negative / positive effects - so to speak.

The first match goes well, nothing too slow - and it's a Game-0 result.

The second match against Courier is a little sloppier. Honestly, considering we are only 2 minutes into the run, I would have reset - but that's just me. The runner loses a point - but the main issue is the time it takes to win many of the points. At the same time, not too much credit should be taken away - clay is a bitch in this game.

The third match begins poorly. The smash should have finished it, but the lob was very slick. The rest of the match is bloody impressive.

The fourth match again begins badly. The runner got solidly baited into that lob shot. But again, the comeback is as solid as a rock - finishing off Haas with absolute impunity.

The fifth match began a little slowly, but again picks up rapidly. I'm detecting this theme here! Runner blows the game point once, but primarily irrelevant - the last point is solidly taken.

The game against Master should be really damn hard - but the runner doesn't make the points he wins very hard. It becomes 40-40 which is a little poor, it shouldn't have needed to come that close - but the points won were so quick in general, that it's hard to 'penalise' as it were.

Overall, the arcade mode is completed on the hardest difficulty in ~6 minutes. This could have been slightly faster - especially the matches against Courier and Master, but I could not claim to ever have a hope of completing such a feat - so kudos!


To be honest, it really would have helped if the runner included his routing notes, or his reasons for doing what he does. I say this simply because the amount of training that occurs seems not needed - but I honestly don't know. (I haven't played this in a while!) I do know that the only real requirement is that the matches - which as far as I know are always unlocked as long as you can beat the previous ones - have to be beaten. The only logical explanation is that the runner needs more money or something similar...or that the training actually increases the player-characters tennis skills. (So they hit harder / move faster etc - but I don't remember such a mechanic in the original) Therefore I have to call to question just how much training is done - and if it is totally necessary. But - for the sake of verification, I'm going to go forward as if it was perfect routing, because for the most part, I think that's best.

The first match against Tesla goes very well. Nothing much to say really.

The runner then performs the first training, the drum shooter. This begins well, but falls off attempting to get that last drum. It's overall - OK though.

The runner then buys his first doubles partner, some 'new strings' and an 'energy drink' and goes into the first doubles match. The AI seems to actually play with the runner as opposed to against them - which really works out. It's a really impressive game of tennis - from both the runner and the AI! (One cannot argue with a perfect game)

The 'return ace' training is done next. The runner misses the last two boxes multiple times - just scraping the last with the second to last ball. The runner then returns - as quite the glutton for punishment - and this time does exactly the same - scrapes with the second to last ball. But considering the difficulty increase - it's a good performance.

The 'big wall' training is done next - and with so much training I again question the need for it. (Again, as always - there's probably something I don't know) The training is executed almost perfectly - with the last shot just missing - but a solid recovery. The training is repeated on the next difficulty for similar results - again, a solid performance.

The next match - a four game match - begins rather unimpresively - with the second point lost. However, it quickly speeds up to a whole new level - and makes for most enjoyable viewing. There are a few major slip ups that cost the runner points - but it's really impressive play on the whole!

The last level of 'big wall' is next. It looked as if the runner may just fail near the end - but it was an impressive finish - to secure the victory.

Another doubles match comes next. As with the first, the AI and runner maintain a firm synergy. THe first point of the second game was a little slow, I feel it could have been finished a good couple of times. The loss of two points was disappointing - but only to me personally considering I was expecting another flawless match! In general terms - neither point could be attributed as 'the runner's fault'. But as always, the match overall really kicks ass.

Yet another doubles match follows. The first game both begins and ends impressively. THe runner's mastery of the game I feel really shines during this game. Same with the second game, and the third. All losses of points in the third game can be directly attributed to the AI hitting the ball directly at the net player on the CPU team. That's just sloppy tennis - but obviously the AI's problems can not be the runner's fault! The fourth game was lost - which I felt was really bad - especially in a speedrun - and even more so that the game hovered on deuce for so long. This cost the runner even more time. In general terms - the match went far longer than it had to.

Another 'return ace' training is up next - and it starts really impressively. The runner completes on the third to last ball - which is good considering that this was the hardest difficulty level!

Another doubles match is up next - this time in Sweeden. I disagree with the decision made in the third point to take the shot instead of the AI. The rest of the first game is really solid tennis. The second game is pretty much as flawless as I feel it could be.

I enjoy watching and playing singles games more than doubles - and that's what's up next. First game is beautiful - very impressive watch. Second game is full of AI screwballing - the runner handles it very well at first - but falls flat on the break point. I feel as if these were primarily errors of execution - but the runner at least wins the game. I would have been far more critical if he did not! The third game fires back to standard practice very quickly. The third point with the beautiful MAX serve was disappointingly lost - and the next lost point being very long as well. The game however - is won. The final game has a single lost point - but the last is won very quickly - and I was impressed.

Another round of 'drum shooter' is up next. The runner really struggles at first - but comes back to clear the training admirably. The runner re-enters for the final level of the training next. I will point out that the runner fails this training once. I AGAIN have to question how necessary this is to pass. The failiure does not look impressive.  However - the next attempt does pass the training - and it was a pretty good run through as well.

A new training next - 'smash box'. This next training begins really impressively - but the last box is cleared with some effort.

Another singles match up next. I would note the small stutter of the video at the beginning of this match. I don't know what the cause of this is - but I wouldn't go so far as to call it out on anything. The match itself is not noteworthy. A total of 3 points are lost - the runner showing off again admirable skill at the game.

More singles. The start is not good - getting baited into a weak lob and smashed. The next lost point also does not look good. The execution could have saved the point. The point bringing the game into deuce cannot be attributed to the runner's fault. The game is then won by two very impressive points by the runner. The second game begins really well - with the runner railroading the AI totally. The second to last point is lost - but to no great deficit. The last game begins with a lost point - but it is recovered with great skill.

Back to the 'smash box'. Again - the last ball takes effort to clear - but on the whole it is a well rounded and solid performance. The runner returns to the training to complete the third level - and clears it almost as quickly as I believe is possible.

A singles match against Henmen now ensues. The first game begins with two impressive points won by the runner. The game is won Game-15. The second game is also a very skilled display by the runner. Quickly the game equates to 0-40. The ace at this point REALLY looks bad from the runner - and the same goes for the following three points. The game in fact goes to Deuce 4 - which does not look good at all. The third game begins with the AI managing to lob a ball over the runner - however the game is on the whole - another impressive display of skill. The final game again starts poorly - but speeds up very quickly. I especially note the third and last points of the game - which are impressive return winners. This match overall is the worst so far - simply because of that Deuce 4 from the second game. Overall I can say this does not look good - but at the same time - no games were lost, so it cannot be thought of too poorly.

The 'bulls eye' training is next. The runner does well - achieving the score required and then playing at the net to rush the rest of the balls that were played.

Another singles match is next. The first game is impressively whitewashed by the runner. The last point was a little hazy at the end - but the winner was delivered! The second game does not begin as impressively - but then proceeds on a much more favourable track - with the runner winning the remainder of the points with due speed.

The next game is a doubles match. The second point of the first game is lost by fault of the AI partner - and the rest of the first game goes reasonably well. The only other point lost I would regretfully say was the runner's fault - the prime choice with the point was to let the AI take it. The next game is taken by the AI - which really doesn't look good.

It is at this point which I declined to deeply analyse this run and began to just watch through, as opposed to making notes. I did this with consideration to the fact I was only half way through - and already two games were lost. (This was during the doubles match with Haas and Courier, beginning at approx 54 minutes) I admire the runner's skill - and acknowledge that Very Hard in this game is just that - but at the same time - seeing as the runner set the challenge - I see no reason to specifically sympathise. Going into this - I of course expected points to be lost - even many upon many points. Maybe even a game or two. But - in total from what I have found, 9 lost games. Remembering that these were all hard fought - let us assume a base level of approximately 2 minutes per game. That's 18 lost minutes over the course of the run! Lost points in games that the runner wins is understandable - at least that progresses towards victory - but games the runner loses only set the runner back. I also point out the multiple losses of trainings. I approximate this at two occasions that I saw - but I may have accidentally not remembered one upon writing this paragraph.

At the same time - although I can say that this could certainly look better - the runner still shows an extreme control and knowledge of the game. I cannot say at all that I could replicate this run without hundreds of hours of practice and attempts. The randomness of sporting AI attributes to a large portion of the runner's 'failiures' - and I put heavy quotations on that word.


Therefore I overall give this a reluctant and narrow accept. It is still an entertaining run to say the VERY least, and considering a run does not exist of this game on SDA yet - it would be a good addition. I strongly advise the runner to attempt to improve his run. I don't say this because this is necessarily BAD - but there are so many displays of skill that I find it hard to believe the runner is not capable of far better times.

Keep at it man - I really enjoyed verifying this - it was a fun watch!

The runner shows very strong skill and uses best strategies to win matches as fast as possible (based on net play).
Like the first verifier, not that I think this run is not good enough (it's clearly a huge achievement, especially a single segment with max difficulty in less than 2h30, believe me, I know how doubles match can be a pain in the ass at this difficulty),
but the goal is kind of strange and very specific.

Rule used :
- overall difficulty : very high
- arcade mode settings: 1 game, no deuce
- beat arcade mode
- beat world tour mode
- win a match between the 2 special unlocked characters with the same settings than arcade mode

I highly doubt that other runners will try to beat this run because of :
- those very specific rules
- the amount of randomness (CPU partner, tricky/boring trainings)
- insane route possibilities
- length for a SS, especially the endless doubles match
- difficulty to time accurately
- ...

I even wonder wether SDA accept such specific categories.

I'd like to see a 6 game arcade mode at a given difficulty (high or very high), that would be an interesting challenge with a easily mesurable time to beat.

Decision : given the amount of work/patience/skill demonstrated, ACCEPT but in a very specific category.

A/V is good.

No cheating.

The runner shows very strong skills which, as the other verifiers said, also makes me wonder why he decided to play with such specific rules. Both casual and good Virtua Tennis players may have prefered seeing a "simple" run showing arcade mode being destroyed as fast as possible.

If SDA accept such specific categories I clearly accept this run. But I'd love the runner to do another run which may involve more competition here (as atomicJo said, I highly doubt that other people will try to beat this run).

Decision: Accept, but PLEASE destroy this game the standard way in another video Smiley

Decision: Accept

Congratulations to 'ike6252!'
Thread title: