If anyone is wondering the calculation between RTA and igt, it is adding 1:05.723 to your in game sum of levels.
Is this intended to be a rule of thumb for people practicing runs? Otherwise, the loads in this game can't be standardized because there's always a bit of player input into them: namely, moving the mouse from "Play" to "1-1" and holding down jump between levels. Simple, boring input to be sure—but there's always the possibility of slower mouse movement, or a simple mistake.
I recall that in at least one of the full game runs the runner forgot to hold jump after one of the levels, leading to a delayed transition.
Well, transition times are part of the "real time", whether you like it or not. People who do transitions slowly will lose some time because of that, and it's normal.
IF you decide that you don't want to count the loading times in full game runs, or standardize them for all runners - then keep RTA as it is (time between start and end conditions), but calculate IGT as the sum of all level times. Then you can make the in-game time as the main time in the leaderboard settings.
Alternatively, you can also look at it as "real time" and "time without loads", same thing.
Adding 1:05.723 to IGT is just arbitrary and useless (not to mention that the 723 milliseconds don't make any sense).
@Oreo321 The frame rate issue is kind of extraneous, since going by the Kongregate leaderboards, Foxbot's in-game times don't correspond to any normal frame rate either. Check out pages 3-4 for the all time level 1-3 times for an example, and you'll find: 46.339 46.345 47.332 47.341 49.338
A .001 difference is possible! Therefore it's possible the Foxbot loads are calibrated to some weird frame time, too, no? Though I admit I have no idea how Preston would've figured that out.
Anyway, my main issue is, if the full game is switched to some sort of IGT, then it'd be possible for players to take little breaks between levels with no punishment, as the levels require player input to advance. Under RTA, that gets included in their time, so it's appropriately accounted for.
This isn't a game where the levels advance automatically and lag is the only cause of any difference in transition time, so it shouldn't be treated as such. Unless, of course, someone out there were to make a version where the levels can be set to load automatically...
There are many leaderboards where the full game works with IGT, and you can take a little break (focus on "little") between levels, and everyone is okay with that.
Anyway, that's not the point. If you calculate "RTA" by taking the real IGT (sum of all levels) and then add a certain arbitrary time to it - that's not RTA anymore, just IGT in disguise. And that method doesn't count the load times anyway.
I guess my point is, if you as moderators/verifiers don't want the load times to affect the timing of a full run (and I fully support that), then just get rid of RTA and count the IGT instead.
I think that the IGT adding up is a good idea. I think people playing on websites like, coolmathgames or armor games should not have a disadvantage over the people playing on itch.io. Please tell me if this is what you want. If it is I will change it and do the calculations on the runs. And @Oreo321 No when a run is submitted I don't add 1:05.723 to the IGT. I was just putting it out there because that was the difference between hahhah's IGT and RTA.
Ero's Sum of IGT was 6:46.46 Ero's RTA was 7:51.161 hahhah's Sum of IGT was 5:53.46 hahhah's RTA was 6:59.183 So the difference is about give or take 1-2 frames and that could be human error in retiming. I don't think that is enough to warrant a rule change unless somebody thinks otherwise.
Wait, come to think of it—how'd my time get retimed to .183? That's 11/60, but I record in 30 fps. Did I get credited with ending on a half frame due to the awkward lag/stutter at the end?
(Sorry for the digression, I just never noticed that before.)
