Each game generally has its own rules concerning video evidence. Some games require full video for every submission, others don't even require verification for submissions. Check your game's rules to see if this applies to you, but as others have previously said, it's often best to err on the side of caution and just record video if you're able to.

MasterC's Hero Story: 27:22.600 IGT, 39:22.820 RTA, April 20th 2014

An important run in the history of SA2, 39:22 doesn't sound like a great time, but it was set in early 2014, when standards were much more lax. Moreover, it was played on GameCube! This would make this time approximately a low 38 on Windows 10, which was very, VERY strong at the time.

No GC-exclusive runners have yet beaten MasterC's time.

Due to a recent rule change concerning video evidence retention, certain runs cannot formally remain on the leaderboard without existing evidence to sustain them. Nontheless, I don't want to just purge them from existence, and would like for their memory to remain somewhere, so here you will be able to find details of old runs that cannot remain on the boards.

^ What this langer said. Punchy covered the community side of the matter, and I more specifically want to comment on the moderation side of things. Obviously my submission was a joke, but it was made to illustrate an important point: If you're going to claim that time can be made without any substantial evidence, then what precedent does that set to possibly unscrupulous runners who just 'claim' to have a better time than anything listed. If someone who actually knows the game had came along and claimed to have a god-tier time that was still reasonably and actually possible to achieve, what basis would you have for rejecting that time just because they're not providing a video to verify?

If the response to this is "We do require video evidence to verify, then we remove the video after verification", then this does not address the main problems that affect your community, namely:

The community is forced to take your word for every speculative time that's posted.

It creates an atmosphere of elitism that can be very off-putting to a lot of people, when they see knowledge and resources centralised around one or two figures who are 'trusted' with them.

Either way I hope this incident doesn't hurt your speedgame or the community that supports it, go forever fast.

At the point where you're making arbitrary categories it just becomes needlessly stupid, though. You could make categories that are literally ANY goal, most of the misc ones already are dumb.

There's already All Endings. Which is a lot more endings than the ones you described.

I know very little about this, and in the event that I were to attend an ESA, I understand that I am expected to provide my own game cartridges, as established in the previous thread I made.

With that in mind, I know very little about how cross-region play works between cartridges and consoles. Will PAL cartridges generally work with NTSC consoles, and run in 60hz? I was told that EU speedrunners are expected to get a new set of consoles, but nothing was said of the games, so I ASSUME this is the case, but I wanted to get confirmation. Any light that anyone can shed on this would be welcome, or any external links anyone can provide to games lists along these lines.

Short answer is, there's just no point when it's documented elsewhere. At this point adding an IL board here would just be centralised around a few runners who care to submit stats.

In this topic: Shitter successfully baits and derails topic. Nicely done.

On topic: Was once on 36 pace in Sonic Adventure 2 after getting City Escape skip (dumb as hell, depends on X, Y and Z co-ordinates plus speed range, may as well be RNG with a short frame window), good RNG everywhere else, no real execution mistake.

Then controller decides to disconnect after another fantastic set of RNG. The game deals with controller disconnects by detecting a change in control scheme and asking whether you want to reboot now or later to save the new control scheme. Controller reconnected, and I accidentally selected Reboot Now before realizing what I was doing. I hadn't created a save file for that run.

Well, it was good while it lasted.

Is there a general policy about the usage of emulators versus official consoles for runs? I looked in the master thread as well as the submission thread and couldn't see anything pertaining to it. As most of the attendees of ESA, I am also a PAL region gamer, and thus don't have NTSC/60HZ games or consoles for older generations such as Genesis/SNES. Am I actually expected to shell out for new hardware?

If you skipped the Papyrus battle, wouldn't you skip a trigger to make the hangout playable?

So, browsing YouTube it is apparent that some players have completed runs of this game without submitting, people who aren't members of this site, in fact, and thus CAN'T submit.

Among these times are players who play on emu, specifically Fusion, which has been highlighted recently as a potentially inaccurate emulator. For instance, I was going to add this time by Onclemol done at a marathon. The video claims it is a 29:44, but after retiming due to inaccurate splits, it is actually a 30:00

But I decided to check his Twitch page, and his old PB shows that he uses Fusion. http://www.twitch.tv/onclemol/c/1926429

How should this be approached? As of now, I am happy to accept these runs after Vorpal's findings of Fusion difference being potentially negligible, but if anyone else has serious objections, feel free to remove the run until something more concrete can be decided.

I would be happy to do any testing relating to console/emu split differences, though I'll probably never get the opportunity to. Doing it myself is out of the question since I have a PAL console, but on the offchance we meet at an event, I'm down to look into it.

This game currently has no rules to tell people how to time their runs, and as a result I actually used the wrong end-of-run point for my first couple of PBs. The game page could do with a paragraph like:

"Time begins on selecting Start on the title screen, and ends on the fade-to-white after the final autoscroller."

"I'm posting here because it seems to be the best way to contact you."

My Speedrun.com profile contains links to both my Twitch and my Twitter. SA2B has its own sub-forum, and I give out my Skype info on request. Making a topic on the main forum like this wasn't strictly necessary.

"Could you have some degree of professionalism and actually tell me why you rejected my SA2B run instead of just saying "wtf is this"? To answer your question, that was a recording of a Skype call."

1. Webcam quality on a tiny portion of the screen
2. Flipped game feed
3. Muted VOD
4. No timer/splits
5. As you say, it's a recording of a Skype call. This is not ok, since it shows the Skype info of other people, including people I know. Not everyone wants their Skype info publicly viewable, much less without their consent or knowledge.

5 is the primary reason I rejected, as 1-4 individually wouldn't normally warrant a rejection from me, but this is just CRAZY bad. It's a picture-perfect example of how not to submit a run. For future reference:

Have your game feed be the PRIMARY focus of your capture. You have other videos on your YouTube where you do this, so I know you know how to do this, and I will not accept any videos where you do not meet this standard.

Do not reveal other people's public information in your videos.

Have a split timer onscreen that is accurately tracking the run, even if it's done in post-production.

Try to have video and audio as intact as possible in their original state. Direct capture is NOT a requirement, I'm happy to accept webcam quality as long as it looks reasonable.

Game Name: Sonic Adventure 2: Battle System: GameCube (Playing PC Steam version) Category: Hero Story Gameplay Estimate: 45:00 Sample run video: Description: This run was seen a few months ago at Insomnia55, and was very well-received. Since then I've been practicing up, both in consistency and learning new strats and tricks. The run offers a wide and varied experience due to the game's nature of changing up playstyles each stage: Gameplay is split between Sonic, Tails and Knuckles, all of whom play their own types of levels. Glitches and skips are very heavily used in the second half of the run, and a healthy amount of RNG is present; enough to make the endtime uncertain, but not enough to make the estimate difficult to meet.

Now I feel bad for everyone who'd already booked travel and time off.

One thing I just thought of:

If future events DO end up being round-the-clock, we will need more tech staff, not just runners. It would be absolutely unfair to expect Flicky and Planks to run everything for a 72 hour period.

Organiser Feedback:

There was, shall we say, a slight hiccup in communication leading up to the event which I feel deterred some people from committing to attending, but as far as the event itself went, I don't think we could have asked for anything more. I feel that we made very good use of the limited resources we had, and special thanks need to be given to Planks and Flicky not only for making this happen, but also for making it happen so WELL. This was honestly more fun than AGDQ.

Insomnia Feedback:

This isn't so clear-cut as the management more or less confirmed that this was more akin to a 'trial run' than anything else, where they were pretty much scouting us out and what we were capable of achieving on our own. As such, stuff provided by the event staff was minimal and we were largely on our own. Some of the stuff we were promised also never made it to us, like the sofas, which adversely affected viewership at the event as lots of people were standing for a few minutes, then leaving. The ones who actually got to sit down tended to stay a lot longer, so it's important that this is remedied next time.

That said, it's easy to tell that we were well-received, and I have no doubt that more support and resources will be allocated on future events, so these are hopefully one-off concerns that shouldn't require many future contingencies, if any.

As far as the accommodation situation goes, again, it's hard to say when next time will probably be different. Camping wasn't much to my taste, and it was a little far from the event, but with the number of attendees the event was pulling, it was understandable. Showers were also in short supply, and too far from the campsite IMO. Assuming that we're in mass housing or something next time, these will again not be concerns.

Future Events:

As far as the frequency of future events goes, 3 per year is certainly ambitious. I was under the impression that this was an annual thing, and was very surprised when I heard that the next event was in December. Not that I'm complaining as I had a lot of fun and would gladly do it again, it's just a matter of whether I can afford it as I'm currently between jobs. I would certainly encourage those who didn't attend this event to attend future events, as I agree with Tyzerra's concern that if the events become centralised around a few specific runners, we'll just see repeats of the same runs. I can't realistically offer anything except SA2B if I want to actually show a good run, for instance, and there were some very good candidates for runs which didn't show up this time, such as Crash 2 105%.

Overall, a really good event which I was proud to be part of, and very grateful to Flicky and Planks for organising. Top marks.

I don't imagine I'm in the minority when I say I think it would be vastly preferable to stream on the ESA channel if given the option. Would be a bit of a buzzkill to stream to a potentially much smaller audience, none of which have an interest in speedrunning. I'm sure Flicky will have made that case to the organisers though.