Forum posts


Page: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »|
 

I gotta just watch these at normal speed, it's way too hard to catch things. Yeah, I can confirm you're correct on all of those @NewSchoolBoxer. Thanks for listing out the times!

Personally, I like the idea that all characters are recruited (except Galf obviously). Makes it pretty interesting. Though an argument could definitely be made that Lyon doesn't count, since it seems to change so little either way, he really should be included.

The 100% Rep thing seems a little arbitrary, I agree. Especially considering how RNG heavy this game is, I'd think it would be unfair to require it. A single mistake or bad battle RNG could potentially invalidate a run, and I really don't think absolute perfection is the intent here.

I personally like the last hit rule as it kind of flows with the general concept of first meaningful action or input to last meaningful action or input that so many of the original SDA runs are timed by, but I guess it doesn't mater much either way.

At this point, at least for Dragon's Haven, it probably doesn't make sense to change it. The moderation team doesn't seem to have much interest in re-timing things or updating the rules anyways. >shrug<

 
 

Try to get a 79k model number PS2 if you're going that route. They are most likely the fastest disk speed. Any slim PS2 is better than a fat PS2 though.

 
 

Hmm, I missed that in his latest video. Went back and checked, and sure enough, Lyon does not appear to be recruited by Brootus or @Dragondarch. Watch Brootus skip Lyon at 24:00. I honestly thought Lyon was recruited all this time, but it looks like all the early runs skip him on closer inspection. The routing just makes it look like it.

Well one thing you could argue is that Lyon isn't really a special character. Aside from the initial dialogue, he never plays any story importance again, and he isn't a requirement for any additional dialogue or items. Ashe it seems can have dialogue, so his recruitment makes sense. And like I said, Deneb actually makes the run interesting and she does have additional dialogue and triggers getting items, so it makes sense that she would be a requirement.

I don't know, the reasoning seems pretty clear cut to me in terms of recruitment at least. What do folks think? Is there an argument against not recruiting Lyon?

I remember hearing that the Saturn version had more content, but I'm surprised at just how much after reading about it. Pretty interesting! Thanks for pointing that out!

 
 

Weird take, but Tyrian 2000. Easy to get into. Lot's of menuing though.

Oh, it's also free on GoG.com. D'oh, forgot to mention that.

ShadowFlare7799, HowDenKing and Tenka like this. 
 

Understood on the not wanting to turn the thread into an argument. 👍

I've been trying to descalate by providing direct feedback, so hopefully I'm achieving some of that. Let me know if not though!

@Liv - I understand the guideline is not meant to come off as condescending, but it could read that way as you're making a determination over what you think is functional. Others might disagree on what constitutes a functional game as it could mean anything from simply able to run, to what actually makes up the bare basics of a game. And once you get into the philosophical side of what constitutes a game, that's where the dander tends to fly. I don't think inviting that type of discussion is what anyone wants, as it's just not productive.

In this case maybe a less exact term might do. I use the word "polished" for this usually, but it might not be the best term either in all honesty. To me a level of polish doesn't mean completeness, just that it has enough to be a recognized as a cohesive presentation. People tend not to be able to argue semantics around it, which I think is one of your goals. There's certainly other words too.

@kirkq - The guidelines and rules you drew up are great in general. I felt kind of bad even writing some of this down as it's really just the perception of change that looks to be what's concerning some folks, and I understand the intent. All of it makes sense, it's just the devil in the last 1% of the details. I apologize if I've made you feel like you had to come back and explain all of this, or even contributed to it - not my intention at all. I was actually slightly worried about this and disappointed to see you chime in. Thank you for doing so regardless.

I too really don't like to see all this weird uncomfortable... I don't know, infighting? ...about the rules, or perceptions of the rules... or whatnot. My goal is to reduce this kind of thing. Right now typing kinda hurts physically to be doing to be honest. I'd rather not be doing it. Just hope I'm being helpful is all.

 
 

@Dangerless

I think people are interpreting it wrongly and responding angrily because some of them are very ambiguous, and not in a good way, i.e. a way that supports the Admin staff doing their jobs on SRC. It's good to hear they are being worked on (as you just stated in your post actually). And hey, writing concise guidelines are hard things to do. I get it. It's ambitious and amazing that the staff is try to codify things and make things transparent. I love that personally.

Just think a few of those that I discussed probably don't accurately represent the intent.

And, yeah, proof that multiple people run it probably makes sense for adding very obscure things (just noticed that in your post).

Imaproshaman, Quivico and 6oliath like this. 
 

While I get where you're coming from @Dangerless and @Liv, there's certainly a number of games that I run that seem like leaderboards might never have existed under the new rules. I run them simply because I saw them listed here and decided to give them a try. And now due to the activity and competition, others are too. But I don't think that's really the point in itself.

I think a lot of the concern over the rules stem from the wording in Request Processing Details. It makes it seem like there's very little wiggle room, and I don't think it's an accurate reflection of what is intended. I don't think things have changed much at all from how the staff has been doing things, as @Liv alludes to, but some of the rules wording certainly make it seem like it.

• The game should have a reasonable length such as 5 minutes or longer.

Okay, the game shouldn't be too short, but there's plenty of legit games that can be beaten in under 5 minutes. This makes it look like there might be a problem with all games under 5 minutes. Don't think that's intended. Maybe just putting that: Average non-speedrun playthroughs should be over 5 minutes with exceptions at the staff's discretion? That's what I think the intent is.

• The game should show some level of effort by the developer that is better than a week spent by a teenager using generic Unity assets.

Okay, beyond that this comes off as condescending, I don't think this leaves room in the wording for games that are somehow notable despite serious drawbacks in quality. Maybe something like: The game should have a level of polish or notability. There, leaves lots of grey area for the Admin staff's discretion, and doesn't come off too harsh.

EDIT: I still think it's pretty condescending with the edit @Liv stated, but at least it's better.

• The game should have been played by a reasonably large number of people.

I think this is meaning that it should have a notable player base? At some point? I can see a lot of exceptions and room for confusion in this one. I myself thought this meant that it should be speedrun by a large number of people on first read. Think this is again a notability thing, but I can't fix this one without knowing what's intended, so I'll ask some questions:

Does this mean played casually by a large number of people?
Does this refer to the availability of the game, or that the game was popular and well known enough?
How does this handle prototypes and recent re-releases that aren't widely available due to being packaged with a product?

Quivico likes this. 
 

TL;DR version of @Oh_DeeR 's linked article: Hyperkin steals non-commercially licensed code from emulation projects it knows don't have the money to fight a court battle and profits from the developer's work in excess. When called out for not following the license, they did the bare minimum, and they still don't properly attribute where all the code they use comes from or follow many of the licenses.

Don't buy Hyperkin's emulation boxes. Don't buy any of these cheap third party emulation boxes. Support the developers of emulation projects and run this stuff on your computer instead.

Quivico, O.D.W. and 6 others like this. 
 

It's emulation, so probably per game. But considering Hyperkin's track record, it probably won't be accurate enough to be an allowed emulator on most games.

IcKY and ShikenNuggets like this. 
 

Just to add a wonderful little wrinkle on MAME emulation:

Even if MAME is allowed, you may not want to do runs on plain MAME. It was originally built to preserve the games, not the user experience, so unless you're using an optimized fork, you may run into extremely high input latency depending on the game/hardware.

Final Burn Alpha and WolfMAME are generally considered the best for latency, though there are a few other forks that are good as well. Usually games specify what versions of MAME are acceptable.

Quivico, ShadowFlare7799 and Tenka like this. 
 

The PS2 version using arcade perfect settings has been added after a little discussion.
Also, WolfMAME has been added to the games as an official emulation platform.

Questions, Comments, Concerns? Please feel free to drop a line here.

 
 

WELL YOU'RE GETTING A THANKS ANYWAYS AND THAT'S THAT! =P Thanks for all you've done for us!

And honestly, you've done more than fine. Despite any shortcomings, there's a reason why this is THE leaderboard site for a wide swath of speedrunning community. You're a big part of that.

Good luck and take care of yourself.

Imaproshaman and HowDenKing like this. 
 

I'll try again.

@GreenMixTape, @Ms_Haunter, and @Overfiendvip ...

Can the rules be updated to reflect the actual rules of the Best Ending Category as stated by @Dragondarch ? I think there's a significant consensus between the few threads here, as well as historically.

 
 

Pepsiman. Thread over.

Imaproshaman, Quivico and Tenka like this. 
 

Pausing shouldn't stop the timer in speedrun mode. That could lead to pause buffering tricks that kind of ruin your vision of pace for the game.

I wouldn't worry too much about making sure it interacts well with splitting software out of the gate. So long as you're willing to modify things if folks eventually do have a problem with creating an auto splitter, you'll be fine.

Imaproshaman, jitspoe and Quivico like this. 
 

I find it helpful to do some magical thinking and blame the game. Usually takes the edge off. Yes I made the mistake, yes it's not really the games fault, but damnit, it feels like it should be, so it is!

Usually helps calm me down enough to remember how I'm supposed to be doing the next thing.

Imaproshaman likes this. 
 

Karaoke. So into it that the SO and I have our own in home setup, but I prefer to go out and sing in front of people. I'm decent, but my wife is a classically trained singer. It's tough following her sometimes. =P

ShadowFlare7799 likes this. 
 

Eh I guess we'll keep the settings as is, @george_washingtoad 's run is on defaults. If for some reason anyone believes it should be changed or wants more categories on higher settings, please feel free to make that known here!

NerdyNester likes this. 
 

Uh, you just... don't. Like some others are saying, find a game you don't mind playing again and again forever.

Imaproshaman and Tenka like this. 
 

The trick is using both hands. Or at least multiple fingers, alternating. As someone who struggles with some minor hand pain daily even without speedrunning, save your hands, don't try to make single fingers faster - you'll just hurt yourself.

Exercise is unlikely to help with this much unless it's just stretching. Stretching is always good.

 

Page: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »|