United States- If a run is in the queue for a couple days/moderator is inactive for a week or so, it can't hurt to ask.
- No, they wouldn't. Maybe some people would but those people just want their . However, the person who played the faster run would then complain, moderator gets spotlighted as bad mod, demodded, faster run goes up anyway.
One per day is a good amount- though switching to a weekly format with 7 runs, one per day could also work nicely.
You could easily argue that having a known time NOT on a leaderboard is a mistake.
I wasn't able to record and stream at the same time for years...anytime I was doing really serious attempts of something and just wanted the game feed I wasn't able to stream it.
Though with OBS the local recording of the stream has a low impact that still gets cut if the stream goes down, and that recording will have whatever other trappings you also stream with, like, say, microphone audio. A plugin that keeps the local recording going even if the stream goes down could be quite useful, I'd think.
On that note, why can't there be leaderboards for segmented runs? Obviously segmented and single segment/RTA shouldn't be compared to each other directly, but there's no reason not to support a segmented leaderboard if there's runs being done.
In the case of Portal, I can think of several segmented runs.
I'm pretty sure what's going on here is Coco dies, then gets the mask at the same time. This ends up skipping the death animation, resetting the level and having you start with a mask.
If I'm right, it's useless.
Also I'm greatly amused by the fact that my old splits are being used in that highlight.
I was able to delete the game fine- that said, ROM hacks are still bugged and can't be removed.
Actually, as a series supermod you can add mods for games within the series, or the series itself.
Just going to chip in my own, since I just cleaned it up and changed the background.
Over on the Ape Escape series we realized there was no category for the mini-game, Mesal Gear Solid. We decided that the best course of action was to create a new 'game' within the series for the minigames within the series, but I found I was not allowed to add a game to the series.
I'm pretty sure that series super mods used to be allowed to add games-was this functionality removed on purpose?
I noticed that the current run stops timing as soon as the final boss dies. I'd argue that timing should stop at last meaningful input-you can still move and extend the game on last spells, so timing would stop on failing the final last spell. This would make the 25:27 run a fair amount slower than it currently is.
This is also how Elainespencer (who has a 22:xx FinalA and low 23 FinalB) and I timed runs about a year ago.
[quote]"i will never agree that a LIGIT run is not interesting"[/quote] In many cases yes, less broken runs are more interesting. But this isn't always the case and when games are sufficiently broken (as much as I don't like the game, OOT is a perfect example) that's where other ¤more restrictive¤ categories come in to remove the incredibly breaking glitches from the run.
[quote]"its not an impossible task"[/quote] Coming up with a definition everyone agrees on is an impossible task. Again, OOT has a huge list of tricks that are and aren't allowed for glitchless and some of the allowed tricks definitely seem like glitches. But where do you draw the line between tricks, shortcuts, exploits, glitches and intended behavior? Many glitches are obvious, but others are much more subtle and, in the case of DK64, could outright happen while just playing. In a glitchless run of a game where you accidentally fall through the floor, does that invalidate the run?
[quote]" it improved the overall experience for all the community surrounding a game... "[/quote] Debatable. One of my main games, Ape Escape, has a technique called the boost jump. It allows you to jump farther than intended and not lose momentum while jumping. This is a very easy trick to learn and adds quite a bit to the game. Instituting glitchless would ¤subtract¤ from the experience and create a cluttered category few people run, if any, with an unoptimized (bad) time. That said, there is a significantly less broken "no infinite jump" category for each of the 3 completion categories, but these get less attention and are still pretty broken, but instead of infinite jumping everywhere the runs use the movement and terrain to the fullest. Still, this wasn't something that was tracked for a while and was just something that was a fun run or race every so often. Either way, glitchless improving the experience = no.
[quote]"i think we should not exclude new speedrunners nor intimidate them with restrictive leaderboards that don't represent how most people play and run the games"[/quote] There is so much wrong with this sentence. Nothing is excluding new runners, if you want to run a glitchy category you have to learn the glitches, if you want a good time you have to learn the route and practice. Nothing is going to change this. Do you propose "routeless" categories-oh wait, that would exclude any existing runners! Restrictive leaderboards? Regular any% is beat the game as fast as possible, ¤NO RESTRICTIONS¤. Glitchless is ¤restricting¤ the run by banning specific techniques. Leaderboards don't represent how most people play the game? Well, that's true, but most people also aren't playing for speed. Leaderboards don't represent how most people run the game? Also blatantly false. You can see that for Ape Escape ( http://www.speedrun.com/ae1 ) the most commonly ran category is any%, the least restricted. The glitched run ¤is¤ most run. Just because you don't want to learn or use glitches doesn't mean everyone else has to track it that way, and nothing stops you from submitting runs that meet the category requirements without glitches. Just know that your time/route would be suboptimal, but hey, I speedrun because it's fun, not because I want everyone else to acknowledge my arbitrary categories & follow my personal whims on category definitions.
[quote]"Speedrunning is not "just" about reaching the credit as fast as possible"[/quote] It kind of is about reaching the category goal as quickly as possible.
[quote]"before everything else it should be about how good, how skillful you can get at a game and how fast you can beat it"[/quote] That's what I just said.
[quote]"not "just" how good you are at performing glitches and do anything but being skillful at the game..."[/quote] Performing glitches takes skill, in many cases it takes more skill than just running through the intended way. In addition to that, there's a lot of movement, knowledge, reacting to RNG, etc. that even in glitchy runs means there's quite a bit more to the run than just being good at performing the glitches. Next point please.
[quote]"and don't get me wrong here, i don't mean exploting glitches is not awesome and ligit... most of the time it take as much if not more skills, and one lead to the other"[/quote] That's what I just said.
[quote]"those are 2 entier different things, 2 different sets of skills"[/quote] They are different things, but the skillset is the same. It's the skillset of playing the game fast. The movement is the same (or harder when glitches and tricks are added in!). The run might be shorter but 99% of the time it's shorter because the tricks make it harder.
[quote]"i just think that BOTH are important and should be considered for EVERY games..."[/quote] And this is the crux of it. That's your opinion. Your opinion is wrong, for the reasons I have outlined. Have a nice day.
[quote]" ;D"[/quote] No.
Rejected run: If it was segmented that's a valid reject reason. That's just the way it is.
Glitchless: it's game by game. Most games won't have a glitchless category because there's no interest in running it and defining glitchless is arbitrary. Metroid prime is one of those games: which side does scandashing fall to? Again, just because glitches are allowed doesn't mean they have to be used, and just because your run is 'glitchless' doesn't mean is has to be tracked separately.
Difficulty settings: Generally only the easiest & hardest difficulties are tracked. I took a look at Doom (which traditionally has focused on hardest difficulty) and I agree that it should have categories for the easiest difficulty, but I can understand why they don't have it.
The overall theme here is the categories are up to the community & a 'request category' could end up with stuff like 'drunk any%' and just create more clutter for mods to work through. However, once a PM system is implemented here that would be a place where category requests could go without creating excessive clutter (or you could use the games forum, or send to a mod on another site, etc.).
"change the default layout"
I don't think this is, or should ever be, a requirement. Of the 5 games/series I mod, Jumpyluff made a layout for 10 Second Ninja, Bman made one for Ape Escape which I then replaced (all black with dark red was ugh) and we've both tweaked since, I made the Chip's Challenge layout and Bookworm Adventures & Peggle have the default layout.
That doesn't change that a lack of rules & activity is pretty much inexcusable, but not changing the layout is a rather petty complaint.
Requested the series-I didn't realize that's how the request series option worked, I thought that I would have to request the games within the form for requesting the series.
http://www.speedrun.com/Chips_Challenge http://www.speedrun.com/Chips_Challenge_2
At the time of the first request, CC2 wasn't even expected to be released and when it was requested, there was no "this game is part of an existing series". Since there wasn't a series page to request from, the 2 games are individual without a series currently when they should be part of the same Chip's Challenge series.
CC1 in the CC2 engine will be a category under CC2. Sorry I didn't respond to this sooner, I didn't see this until now.
15 second split at the beginning of the run, 10 second SplitsBet delay, -21.00 starting timer value. Bets made immediately after the "get your bets in" message were ignored consistently-it seemed that if the timer still displayed a value below 0 the bet was ignored, though I could be mistaken.
Wouldn't you still need to re-fight Cortex in 105%, since the game wouldn't say 105% until after he's defeated with all gems?
For any%, I'd say it would still count: you do still beat Cortex and the game acts like you have.
Alright, I used this today (finally actually streamed!) and ran into a couple bugs:
¤ Resets took affect immediately, blocking all commands before the dead run message came up. So the log would be: (I reset) PersonInChat: !bet time SplitsBot: Timer is not running! (delay ends) SplitsBot: Run is kill :(
¤ You can bet non-valid numbers, as long as they're numbers (2:155, etc.) ¤ There's weird behavior when betting early on the first split-unsure if it's from the length (12-15 seconds) of the split or if it's due to the bet being in the delay (on the splits, 21 seconds). I was using a 10 second SplitsBet delay, for reference. My guess would be it ignores any bets given during the LiveSplit delay.
