New Jersey, USA"Standards of measurement would also be entirely different across different games, also."
I agree with your sentiment, though I will say that the idea could feasibly be implemented on a game-by-game basis, just as any category currently is.
That's just to comment on the technicality of your final statement.
Right, but how could it be proven where someone is from? And if it could be proven, then wouldn't that be a privacy issue? I'm assuming site admins have access to our IP addresses, but would it be fair for them to use that information to reveal to everyone where users are from? Whether it's a broad or specific location being revealed, it would still use information that some people feel should be kept private.
How would locations be proven? Would that be a privacy issue?
If you wanted to specifically execute your idea, then it would be possible on any individual leaderboard by a game mod. Simply create three categories, and state in the rules what time ranges should be submitted to which category.
I don't think it would be feasible, site-wide. Further more, the issue is already resolved in various other ways, depending on the games. Some examples of categories that account for different levels of difficulty are glitch/glitch less, skip/skipless, or any X/X-less, where X equals a difficult element of a game. There are also games like some Mario games that have a category progression that presents a nice learning curve. That said, the runs within those categories are not ranked by difficulty.
Personally, I think it would be nice if more games made clear what a reasonable time looks like, so that I know about how long a game might be at a beginner level. But, I can always make a good guess or contact a runner. I don't think an entirely new system would be necessary for that.
By the way, there is no points system. Either I read something incorrectly, or PreFiXAUT misinterpreted your idea.
Didn't the PANICOREPT situation occur after his runs had been accepted?
I don't mean to downplay your point, but the specific example may not hold up.
Personal things are just that: personal. You either work it out, or you manage the consequences. Realize that you're not racing yourself. It just happens to be taking longer for your results to be posted on the board. The board still exists. Your time still exists. In the meantime, if you submit more times, then they should all eventually be accepted. At that point, you'll have even more obsolete runs to compare your PB to (I am personally intrigued by seeing all of my past, obsolete PBs and seeing my progression in that way, not necessarily compared to others). And so what, if you're racing yourself? If you need to be racing others to enjoy a game, then find a situation that better suits your disposition. There are many runners on this site who are the sole runner of a game that they play, yet they continually pursue improvement. What's the point of anything in this world, if not personal growth?
I'm not commenting on your thoughts about the "system" itself, only on your emotional reaction to your runs not being accepted--your first paragraph, rather than the second paragraph and your overall mod request.
Right, but are you differentiating between PBs and runs? If so, then how? With your above example, is there a scenario where you would identify them as runs, rather than PBs?
I assumed the run count on a profile's info tab included all runs, even those obsoleted by new submissions, unless a user deletes them as they go. Maybe that's where my confusion is coming from.
Yeah, a huge motivator for me is when I see the following, amongst other things: a comment on a WR such as "this game is dead" or "I'm done here", implying that the run will never be surmounted; boards with a single, blind or otherwise lazily unoptimized run; and games where the record was smashed, so the community seems to have given up trying. On the flip side, I also enjoy getting into games with a single, motivated runner, or a small community.
Wouldn't "most PBs" be the same as "most runs"? Or would it be minus one-offs and minus the first run in a sequence of submissions? The first run would still technically be a PB, even if there is nothing to compare it to, right?
That's what I was attempting to illustrate :D
WR is a byproduct of having a leaderboard.
@furrywulfz
Also, do you have any more examples like niconico or other communities of runners, other than mega man, donkey Kong, and (I think) Zelda?
Edit: Also, if there is no community surrounding a game, then it very well can be an individual effort, but your point still stands for speed running on the whole. I'd also say that the goal of any runner that isn't ego-driven is to ultimately increase a game's publicity and build a community, however small.
If you have so much passion for the game, then you would stop ranting and just perform new, undeniably legitimate runs. You are the one who brought this up publicly. You could have kept this on the Street Fighter forums. You could have kept this on the mod request thread. Now you've made it even more public by creating your own thread.
Democracy has nothing to do with publicity. It has to do with control by the majority. The majority of people here seem to disagree with you, and they have shown on what basis they do so (at the very least, Token has been selected as a representative of the majority). For you to be honored, you must first honor others. You have to honor the thoughts, ideas, and rulings of the majority. No one here hates you. No one here is actively trying to disprove you. No one here is treating you unfairly. You have brought this all on yourself, because you continue to present the same argument in light of very clear and reasoned decisions against your evidence.
"just because one person can obtain something doesn't mean you are able to do the same"
I agree. When I say something like "If one person has done it, then it can be repeated", I don't mean by everyone, by every individual. I mean in general. It can be repeated by someone, and there are elements that can be repeated by anyone, which are the smaller goals that an individual can set for themselves.
Also, you won't necessarily end up hating the game. That will only happen if you have the wrong mindset. Part of setting goals is finding out what you are capable of. At that point, you have created your own world with your own record to achieve. Part of understanding what you're capable of is also understanding how much disappointment you are capable of handling. If you don't tilt, then you can set your goals as high as you want and never get frustrated. Your goals don't need to be small. They just need to be manageable for whatever your mindset might be.
When I say "Or it will become even more fun, knowing that you can do even better", maybe I mean "knowing that a better time is possible by someone, anyone (since it has been done)". If there is a better time, then I will see what I need to improve in my own runs to try achieving that time. I'm personally more likely to get bored and stop playing than to start hating the game and give up. It all depends on your mindset. "Can do", for me, doesn't equate to "will do". I "can do" anything. Anything is possible, but that doesn't mean that it is possible for me to do anything. But, that won't stop me from doing the things that I actually can and will do, and it won't stop me from attempting to do things that I may end up being unable to do. Part of my mindset is that I don't get upset if something is out of reach. I either keep pushing forward, or I move on to something more engaging. I've never completed a 100-mile run, but I would like to eventually. Even if I'm an old man and still haven't been able to do it, I'm not going to stop running.
@FurryWulfz
"chances are it is gonna hurt even more when someone better at that game than you comes and takes that title away."
Or it will become even more fun, knowing that you can do even better. That's the way I see it.
Also, do you know of any other examples like niconico? Besides sites like Mega Man and Donkey Kong, do you know of any other communities out there?
making an edit...pending...(done) That's how I see "trying to get a WR". It's not about holding the title. It's about all of the things that everyone keeps mentioning: trying to do your best, enjoying the game, etc. WR isn't a title, it's a threshold that can be achieved. If one person has done it, then it can be repeated, and therein lies the challenge and fun. The fun is in trying to do better, and that comes with the inevitability of someone having done the best, so far. The presence of a WR is a result of a community of people playing the game, not of an individual accomplishment. The presence of a personal record is the result of an individual playing a game. It's not about bragging and being the best. It's about the realization that recording times makes it inevitable that someone will be the fastest, that someone else may do it even faster, and that a "WR" is a symptom of that process. In that sense, I believe WRs matter, no matter how many other people are in a community, so long as there is one person trying to better themselves. In the same way, that's why personal records matter on an individual basis, for all of the reasons mentioned by everyone in this thread. One of my favorite runners to watch is Aquas. He holds the record in Ultimate Ghouls n Ghosts, where he is the only runner. His one goal is to match the time of a segmented run from Speed Demos Archive. Even though I don't even play that game, I still hold his accomplishments with that game in high regard, because of how motivated he is to better his time, even though no one else plays the game. His personal record matters to me, and there are many other people who enjoy watching him play the game. Despite the small scale on which it might matter (there are many more important things in my life, let alone the games I run myself), it does still matter.
I do agree that WRs are redundant, and it is especially apparent in games where the top ten players all have the exact same time, or only a few seconds off. Games like that especially illustrate my thoughts. For games like that, WR doesn't exist as a title. It simply exists as the fastest that most people are able to do, give-or-take. And since most runners likely start by watching the better runs, then it becomes a cyclical process where, essentially, the community as a whole is trying to reach the same goal. Wouldn't it be fun if every Mario 64 player had the exact same WR time? It would literally (sorry, I'm officially in rambling mode) It would literally be a "world record"--a record held by the world (i.e., community), which is how I already see every WR.
I don't fault you for not reading that entire paragraph (just my assumption ;) :D ), but it seems that he has given up the argument:
"i am indeed wasting time typing here for nothing and for that, i am going to play all this games again, either you people accept it or not either you ban or you dont starting right now. and i will start with USFIV"
I look forward to seeing the results.
I don't remember either, so you could be right. Either way, I think All Treasures is fine as-is, besides changing the Croog rule. Every person that might play the game doesn't need to play All Treasures. If a player is dissuaded from one category, then there are other categories to run. It's like that for every game on the site. Some people don't like glitches, so there are glitchless categories. Some people don't enjoy long runs, so they don't play 100% categories. In the case of Drill Dozer, a NG+ Any% could be a welcome addition for players who want a shorter run.
And yes, you need to re-play stages to complete All Treasures (my uncertainty was whether the game needs to be beaten). That's the role that the treasures play in the game: for re-play-ability--and that's the challenge of the category: to achieve that element of the game as a speedrun. Some categories are meant to be daunting.
NG+ 100% doesn't seem like it needs to be a thing. It makes no sense, because part of the percentage will have already been completed.
I'm having a difficult time focusing at the moment, so I'm going to try to make my thoughts concise here:
All treasures looks good, besides the wording of the rules NG+ Any% would make a good addition, especially for players who would prefer a shorter run¤ NG+ 100% doesn't make sense, as the percentage would already be partially complete Hard Mode Any% can be considered, once we're competent enough with the game
¤Besides the shortcuts, I'm pretty sure the bulk of the game is cutscenes. I intend to time them, when I start recording.
I thought you can get all drill bits through the shop, before beating croog. I think the challenge of 100% is how long it is. You'll find that many 100% categories on this site aren't very competitive, due to the nature of that type of run.
You're right that the rules may need to be tweaked, since an optimized strategy might look something like beating the game, then collecting the final treasure somewhere in the middle of a level. The timer should end on collecting the final treasure, rather than on beating Croog.
Personally, I think that the Dozer board would be better served with the addition of a full NG+ Any%. This would allow for the use of all drills, full health upgrades, the full gearbox unlocked, skipping cutscenes, and using the shortcuts found throughout the game. The shortcuts alone would distinguish NG+ from the other categories.
Also, just to note, you should use mGBA, instead of VBA. VBA is unstable, particularly when using save states.
As for health upgrades, I think that would be a requirement only if All Treasures was a true 100%. In that sense, 100% would be overkill. At the moment, health management seems better left as a strategic element, rather than a completion element. The current rules state "all treasures", so there isn't room for misinterpretation there.
Oh! :D While we're at it, I'm not sure if Silent_Excalibr realized that there is a Hard Mode that can be unlocked. Hard Mode Any% should be considered for the future, as well.
I wasn't going to bring these things up until I got an actual any% going, but Tom beat me to the punch (punching Croog pun intended).
No one is attacking you.
The people who are knowledgeable of the game have watched your videos.
If you want to defend your honor, then you should have the personal integrity to do so in a way that will be beyond doubt. You are not doing this right now. What you are doing now is supplementing worthwhile action with frantic typing. Expletives, exclamation marks, and strings of random punctuation do nothing to solidify what you are putting forth. For your words to be honored, you must first honor the words and the intent of others.
You should feel guilty. You should be able to see why the people here distrust what you have claimed, and you should take responsibility for the possible confusion. No one here can truly prove you wrong. All anyone here knows is what you have put forth, and what you have put forth has been deemed inadequate.
If you really feel that you are being treated unfairly, then you should "shut your mouth", sit down, and perform, because actions speak louder than exclamation marks.
He's talking about sucking sweet triple-D hangers, obviously.
But seriously, he said "eventually" :D
@Auddy07
I feel like banning users from any forums on this site would be unfair, on the basis that there would then be no way to allow a banned user to make amends. Game forums aren't like Twitter accounts. Game forums are not a personal space. If a user is enough of a problem, and if they continue to be a problem after being notified of their ill behavior, then the situation could then be turned over to a site mod or admin. There was a user who recently went on a bit of a tirade after not being allowed to mod a game. There was a back-and-forth between him and a few other users. Had that situation occurred in a game forum where one of the other users involved were able to ban him, he very likely could have been banned (I'm assuming this, based on their tone). Had he been banned, he would not have been able to apologize for his actions, which he did. The forums and game forums are a place for discussion and for users to sort out their differences, if needed. If a user begins to conduct themselves in a manner that is considered abusive, then a site mod or admin can be notified. Is there a difference if they are first banned, then they come to the main forum or email an admin or site mod to state their case?
