Forums  /  Star Fox  /  Video Proof Rule Change Discussion
(edited: )

Currently, all Star Fox games require video proof among submissions barring very few exceptions.

I feel it may be worth discussion to scale back this "absolute video proof" rule and instead instill a "Video Proof if time below XX:XX"

Many games that are competitive have some sort of rule (as in top placeholder times or sub XX:XX:XX times).

So, do you guys feel it could be beneficial to instill this slightly more lax video proof requirement? For reference, Super Mario Sunshine Any% requires video proof for runs below 1:25:00 -


Easier to be apart of the community
Helps runners without capture equipment to still be apart of the leaderboard


No proof run ever happened


My Opinion

I think it would be a good idea to remove the absolute video proof rule to make it a bit more runner friendly. I think the line should be drawn based on position (Like top 10/15). Really depends on the game, so more competitive games may have a different cutoff point

Air_iqAir_iq, ArgickArgick and NerdyFoxTVNerdyFoxTV like this. 

I'm all for letting people submit times and only requiring video proof if they are within the top 10. Obviously specifics for each game and category will be different but the general consensus should be video if you are challenging the leaderboards.

Air_iqAir_iq likes this. 

Even as someone who has a Star Fox 64 Any% PB without video evidence that's not on the boards, I 100% think, and most people would probably agree that, "top times" must have video evidence. The question is, what qualifies a top time on the boards?

I think the "times below XX:XX require video evidence" rule is totally fair. The Sonic Adventure 2 community has that rule and they've never had a problem. It works really well for moderation purposes and speeds up verifying runs on average. The biggest contention for that rule is, what should the threshold be?

I feel as though that's for the mods to decide. Personally, I think the mods know the game well, and they know the community well, so they should be able to come to a clear consensus pretty reasonably. Now, I only mod 64 and Zero, but here are my recommendations for each category:

Runs under XX:XX require video evidence:

Star Fox 64:

Any%: 25:00
Blue Line: 28:00
Red Line: 38:00
100%: 1:35:00
Kill Slippy: All times
100 Rings Training Mode: All times
Emulator Runs are the same as console runs.

Star Fox Zero (IGT):

Any%: 35:00
100%: 2:00:00

The times were picked based on what I thought was "the best reasonable time someone could get on a first run". This is without interacting with the community, looking at the rules, and posting a previous time. If they've posted a time before, there's no excuse for not reading the rules and if they want a time on the boards, they should abide by those rules. I mean, this kinda applies for a first run, but it's kinda understandable if someone decides to just do a run and doesn't look at the board first.

Let me know what you think. By no means am I making the rule, or are these thresholds set in stone, this should be an open discussion with the community to see what they think.

fling84fling84 and ArgickArgick like this. 

Also not against mid/low-end runs not requiring video proof.

I also agree with Lylat's suggestion about having runs with times beyond a certain threshold being the determining factor to whether a given run requires video proof or not.

I suppose either way of doing it is fairly arbitrary, but personally I do think when people think about "top-tier" runs for any given game, they usually think about it in terms of "sub-XX" and not "top 10" ... especially once they start learning the game (not to say they don't think about it _both_ ways, but I do hear people say stuff like "sub-XX is a great time" much more often, and having "sub-XX" as a speedrun goal... that kind of thing).

So with this in mind, using a run time as a threshold definitely would be game-specific and need to be determined by the moderators of each game/category individually as Lylat mentioned.

That all being said, I'd be ok with either way (top X on the leaderboard, or sub-X time). Just stating my own thoughts! 🙂


I'll basically echo what Lylat and Fling have said. As some games don't even have more than ten times on the leaderboards (¤cough¤ SNES Star Fox games ¤cough¤), it would be ideal to administer a time requirement per game/category rather than a 'top 10' or whatever.


For Star Fox 2 sub 15 runs in any% Normal, sub 30 in any% hard are starting points


I really think "top X runs" would be a better idea instead of "under X time". This means that if/when new strats are found we won't have to change the rules and honestly, estimating a time where we can not "trust people's words anymore" feels weird.

Star Fox 2, Star Fox Command and Star Fox 64 3D should obviously ignore these kind of rules until they are more competitive.

Recent Threads
View all
Thread Author
Last post
1 replies
Video Requirements For All Star Fox Games
Last post
3 replies
Video Proof Rule Change Discussion
Last post
6 replies
Last post
6 replies