United StatesI wrote a Dragster lua script for visual feedback while practicing or for recording a stepmania chart to play against.
Please use responsibly. 5.57 needs to be legit. Using the script in a direct manner would invalidate the run.
EDIT: Newer script here: https://pastebin.com/FrZM5FgD
Also I reviewed darbian's 5.61 video:
- His first shift was on the correct frame, but he held the gas one frame too early at the start, so he already missed 5.57 off the start.
- As a result, all of his gear 2 through 4 shifts were about 0.1 seconds too early if he was doing them visually or by audio.
Emphasis: The first three shifts are everything, and even if you get a 5.61 you might be doing them relatively wrong.
The script is pretty good at telling you if you got the first few shifts right (green) or wrong (red) Wrong makes a 5.57 impossible. You will find it is quite difficult to get them all correct.
To my understanding, the game only reads input every other frame at 60 fps, correct me if I'm wrong. This means every button must be held two frames. This is why it seems like inputs drop sometimes.
Seer0fsouls: Added due to inactivity. The board had "Timer ascending" selected, which is why the places were wrong. I fixed it.
Low_Life: It looks like your run was added. Moderators are able to add other moderators at their discretion. I changed the other mod to a super mod, they can add mods at their discretion.
ufotekkie: Use the game request form.
Corsaka: It seems like there's some discrepancy/confusion between the rules and the versions (Patch versions, remastered, etc). From what I can infer, it sounds like you want to run a new version that has more levels and possibly changes to older levels while only running the subset of older levels, which sounds a bit confusing to track. That's my interpretation at least from what has been mentioned. I'm guessing the implied rule is "Must be playing on the version that only has these levels." Try to sort it out on the forums please.
Jayguy: One of the mods was online recently. I'd recommend doing a run to help make your case to the moderators.
KazMcDemon: I'll remove them due to moderator consensus and general inactivity.
VeliØr: If you do a run and the mod is still inactive, I'll probably add you.
Carter44: Moderators are generally added by other moderators at their discretion. You could try posting on the forum for the game. Games often don't have inherent need for more moderators. This thread is intended as a last resort.
EatsSmallChildren321: It's been pending 3 weeks or so, and the mod was online at least once since then, so this seems fine.
Dani: Yeah, it's behind again. If it's in "Pending Actions" for you, it's in the queue.
RamVal: The user is active enough. Please try contacting them, or a forum post, or waiting.
Waffel: I'd recommend making a post on the game's forum. Also I'd recommend being more specific on the game forum as to why you think that is the case.
PSCHARFF: I changed the other mod to a super mod, they can add mods at their discretion.
Carter44: If one of the other runners wants mod I'll probably give it to them if they ask. If you want to mod games, I'd recommend doing runs
Jezs: So Callumbal was more than willing to help you out and then you more or less told him to go screw himself while he was literally helping you out, and now you're in this thread asking for us to solve your dilemma? Your priorities are very clearly 1: Get control of the game and not the series mods, 2: Get the game added. I don't see how adding games for people who are in active disagreements with series moderators is a good idea. It just becomes an unstable situation.
I'm changing moderation for this game over to a well-known community member with knowledge of the game.
I'm working with some of the site's NES runners to turn over certain games to active users well-involved in the NES speedrunning community and meticulous with timing runs.
This change is mostly intended to improve reliability of the data on boards.
Qaloz/Aster: I moved the runs Walnucto: I actually can't do that through the site interface right now. You could change it, but we can't delete it without going into the database. I made a note of the bug.
garadas21: Is there actually an inherent issue with the board content for the moment other than the users seeming disagreeable? Until we get a new system in place and communicated, I tend to not want to make changes without reasonably substantial cause. We can take the discussion offline if you want. I've been discussing with some of the other NES runners.
Yuuki-sama: I'd recommend doing a run if you want added. The moderator is only somewhat inactive.
huxxny/MrGamerOFCourse: If the series mods want control of that game, I will give it to them if they ask. The user's log shows a few deleted posts, but nothing terribly shady in the content of the deletions. It almost seems like he didn't want the sticky thread used for that purpose or something. I don't recommend deleting non-spam/non-flame posts though.
SpaceBroJakob: It looks like it was deleted.
haydenunturned: Please discuss it with the moderators.
Paulister: Looks like ROMaster added you.
capes: Looks like ROMaster added you.
Quivico: Looks like ROMaster added you.
GodlyJagex/Slyceth: Looks like this was somewhat resolved for now after some additional discussion.
RedHat: The guideline given in this thread for inactivity in 3 weeks. If this is still an issue next week we can look at it.
iIFurtressIi: It looks like you were added.
KevínDieSeegurke: It looks like you were added.
soupG: The game has plenty of moderators.
GhostScit: There have been issues in the past between you and those moderators being able to get along. I don't see how adding both sets of people in the same place doesn't immediately create a problem.
RealBonner: Run pending, ok.
Qaloz: I deleted the account but can't change the name through the site interface unless the recurring "Failed to rename theme folder" bug gets fixed.
I've been using "Webgame" as a catch-all for "indie-freeware" as well which includes all those websites where people can upload any crappy game (and the occasional good game)
I thought we removed post edits by mods like a year ago. Is that not true?
If you click request game on the series page it requests as part of that series. It's not particularly intuitive. Just resubmit for now.
I think we agreed to make this any% so I went ahead and added it.
We either need to retime the existing runs (which I did not do yet) or make the rules read something like "Time ends when player loses control leading to a good ending", which would actually make Flobeamer's run timed a few seconds faster, and might actually be more sensible.
I don't particularly view it as a "wrong warp" at least in the traditional sense. We didn't really corrupt memory or get the game to load the wrong screen or anything like that. All it does is end the game with health remaining. Basically we avoided dying in a scripted death sequence. The game has multiple endings with various triggers. One of the big triggers is "Do you have health?", which we can see by hacking our health to 1 and dying anywhere, which triggers a given "good ending" depending on what other things you've done.
It also kind of depends if we consider "Beat Hans" an ending condition. If the game was designed slightly differently, beating Hans might not even be required to get a good ending. Or maybe some crazy theoretical thought like managing to turn another crook into Hans's ID and killing him. (You can sprite glitch in this game by alternating 2 frames left two frames right, but it doesn't do much.)
It seems more like "A Boy and His Blob" or "Link to the Past" than "Super Mario World" I'm not opposed to a "Beat Hans" category, because it's also a relatively interesting/(hilarious) route compared to "All crooks" which is much more standard.
GameFAQs lists these endings: -Dying -Time running out -Winning -Calling the police and winning -Calling the police, doing the helicopter sequence -Calling the police, keeping the detonators, and winning for an animation of Powell shooting! (True Ending IMO)
There's also the "You both died" ending
I'm changing moderation for this game over to some well-known community members with knowledge of the game.
This board is a bit excessive on categories when compared with the rest of the site NES games. The categories are also highly isolated making it difficult to find and compare runs.
The site does not specifically standardize these things, but we're looking at coming up with some basic expectations for NES games. The wider NES speedrun community wants to implement some basic expectations for NES games on the site.
Recommend changing rules to the following and then retiming all the any% runs:
Time begins at hitting start on beginner and ends on first frame the text is readable on a "good" ending. Double KO on final boss does not count as a victory.
I reproduced this, cool stuff. Getting to any "good" ending qualifies as any% in my mind. If you could do a recorded run that isn't played back from a movie file, I'll accept it under any% if the other mods have no issues with that. You should also probably record from reset or power on to not inadvertently manipulate the RNG via save state.
Flobeamer1922 submitted this video today: (Link=)
I tend to think he successfully found a way to execute the "Die with health win" I've speculated possible in the past. If you indeed managed that, congratulations on finding the glitch.
1: Myself and the other mods are trying to understand exactly how this route works. At a basic level we need to be able to reproduce it to know if it's legitimate. If you want to, you can just link us the movie file and specify the emulator version used, and that should be enough for us to confirm the route itself is legitimate. Alternatively, a set of things you are required to do would help us reproduce this.
2: The recording mechanism here is rather non-standard, and I'm not sure if we would want to allow this recording mechanism or not. The run is played back from an emulator movie file, and the sound is out of sync and/or sped up. This is possibly a result of bad capturing (use sync sound maybe?)
I'm not really accusing you of TASing this, because the movement doesn't look particularly crisp. It seems more like a demonstration played in real time and played back from a recording for simplifying capture. Playing the run back from a movie file is somewhat questionable as it leaves runs very susceptible to being TASed, and I'm unsure if that's something we would want to allow as a precedent.
If you can clarify point 1, the moderators can come to a consensus on point 2.
We can discuss how/if this affects categories after we sort this out. I would tend to think this just becomes the new "any%"
I'm changing moderation over to some well-known community members with knowledge of the game.
This board is pretty heavily out of step with the rest of the site NES games. The standard category uses turbo, which almost all games ban, and the category organization isn't particularly good. Putting 3 games on 3 different consoles under the same umbrella and splitting by console probably isn't ideal for this game.
The site does not specifically standardize these things, but we're looking at coming up with some basic expectations for NES games. The wider NES speedrun community wants to implement some basic expectations for NES games on the site so that all users can use all boards, as opposed to having the board supporting the ideals of whoever happened to request it first.
MasterArcher02: I can change your name, but you already started posting a bunch on your other account, so do you still want it changed here? I can't merge the posts.
RottDawg: I'll delete it if you really want. I'd like to discuss recent events first if that's okay, I sent you a Discord PM.
Yocko: Added because this seems to make sense. ItsMaximum: Added due to inactivity. Foetoid: This seems fine. Fireman: Added due to inactivity. AlejandroGarza: The game exists, please discuss it with the moderators. Duckie2010: Added due to inactivity. Caitelady: Added due to inactivity. Cyberdemon531: It's my perception that Megaman community members would have a negative opinion about classic mega man style games being added until we have better solutions in place for integrating the two sites. Thomas: Deleted. For informational purposes: I think the delete button useability is removed after a couple weeks of the board existing to protect it. KevínDieSeegurke: I'd recommend doing a run first and seeing if this brings about discussion to resolve the issue. I get your concern about the patch changes, but without having a run pending it's a bit of a stretch for me to add you. AquaBlake: I added you to all the games with inactive moderators, please discuss with the other active moderators. FutureForce14: Added due to inactivity. pidgezero_one: Presuming this is a request to add. If you want removed at some point, you can self-remove. SolidSpiderZnake: This seems fine. loginner: I'll add you since he's highly inactive. Kennert007: I added another user who plays the game and moderates other games in the series since he's pretty active.
In response to Rottdawg's post here: http://www.speedrun.com/The_Site/thread/c898h (As stated in that thread, I view thread titles of that nature to be a bit over the top.)
A NES run was mistimed by 3 frames and the top time on the board was wrong for a day. Without a substantial amount of context there's not really a way to know if it's a mistake or intentional.
I would highly recommend that user to stop deleting posts bringing up potential issues, as it gives off a pretty bad perception that feedback/criticism isn't welcome. Users rightly get pretty annoyed when they bring up an issue and it gets deleted, which probably contributes to it boiling over into site staff territory.
I realize you and your group of friends take NES records really seriously. Not all site moderators give runs the same level of scrutiny and diligence you guys want given to runs. I've had some long-term ideas for solutions to this problem, such as implementing dedicated console moderators and things of that nature. It would help site staff a lot to have these issues dealt with at lower levels.
My tendency in general for handling moderation disputes like this is to turn over board moderation to the consensus of the runners of the game if some new consensus is reached. I realize this isn't in writing, and it really should be.
I don't think it makes sense to outright remove users for board issues that could reasonably be construed as honest mistakes. Is there a more long-term solution to the generic version of the problem being presented here? We can discuss this through another medium if you'd prefer.
