Hey sorry I'm replying late as well! I thought that maybe this was intended originally as well, because it happens fairly often in the game. However my video proves this can't be how the game works, allow me to explain:

Here's the order that things happen in my video:

1. Goblin attacks Felgar and misses.
2. Goblin attacks Gwydion and hits for 1 damage.
3. It is now B's turn (the only guy who wasn't attacked), and his "Use Item" is already missing from the menu. I don't need to "Use Item" with him, however, so I attack the Ogre and miss.
4. It is now Gwydion's turn, and his "Use Item" is also gone. So I pass, because that will allow his turn to come back quicker, and I'm hoping it will fix itself. (And this is the guy I need to "Use Item" with, which is why I pause in confusion on the menu for a moment)
5. Few more monsters move, B is killed, then it becomes Felgar's turn. He was also attacked, but unlike my other 2 party members, he CAN use items on his first turn.
6. On Gwydion's 2nd turn, he is finally able to use items again.

I could see your "knock down" theory making sense at first, because Gwydion was hit, whereas Felgar was not (Gwydion was glitched, Felgar was not). However here's the main issue with that theory: My other Cleric named B was never attacked, and still had "Use Item" missing on his first turn. If this theory was accurate, he would be able to "Use Item" on his first turn, but as you see in the video, he cannot.

Based on what your video is showing, your cart is behaving much more like PRG1 than PRG0. I attempted to perform the backwards jump on Stage 2 as you did, and he does indeed backwards jump onto the ropes and glitch high enough that the only way to get out of it is to fall and die. In addition to this, your select test is like PRG1, as well as you having the press right for those skips (in PRG0 it's quite easy and you only press down).

While your stage 4 still looks more PRG0, this is the only thing, because your game definitely doesn't behave like PRG0. I can show you what PRG0 does in most situations (down + A normally jumps right regardless of which direction DK Jr faces, not always backwards though).

I'll have to look into it a bit more, but yeah I'm glad you posted that video. I would say whatever versions those are, they definitely are not PRG0. I know you use original hardware, so the only thing I could suggest to find a true PRG0 version if you're interested: you could grab a PRG0 version online and put it on an Everdrive.

Here's that Select test in action. I think this is really the easiest way to tell:

I hope that helps more than my original post!

We'll put Hirexen and Lojen's comments aside, Hirexen is a mod but Lojen holds WR so his abilities exceed most. I invite you to attempt this Stage 3 skip on the Donkey Kong Classics version of DK Jr., as you are underestimating the difficulty of it, if it's even possible. I have stood there attempting thousands of jumps, not one succeeded. This is far from the "3 fails" you claim that makes you think this version is PRG1. Once again, you need to locate a PRG1 version of this game and attempt it, and you will see the difference for yourself.

But let's focus on "Is SalaryMan using PRG0?", and you have further proven the answer is yes with this link: https://tcrf.net/Donkey_Kong_Jr._(NES)

The color of the fruit only changes when they fall. The key factor to focus on is the color of the chains. I have taken a screenshot of your video, and overlaid both images from this website of the PRG0 and PRG1 versions. Compare the chains on the side of the level, as well as the ones you climb:

Another way to test that I can show in a video if required: Hold Select at the main screen. If your cursor keeps scrolling, it's PRG0. If you hold Select and it only scrolls once, it's PRG1.

You are using PRG0. You can't do the skip on Stage 3 in the PRG1 version. Your run on the leaderboards includes this skip, which means you are 100% using PRG0. Hirexen states this in this thread: https://www.speedrun.com/dkjr/thread/3dp9y

While I have no idea how to identify them via physical features, you can play them to easily find out: if you can do the skip on Stage 3, they are PRG0. If it's impossible, it's PRG1. I started with a PRG1 ROM myself so I can verify this, as I had to locate a PRG0 one for that exact reason: Stage 3 skip.

While that is a good idea, and would add more challenge, I feel that it doesn't deviate from existing categories enough to justify making another category that is basically, "Win Single Game but with any team other than the Raiders". Referencing tecmogeek.com as well, you could almost accomplish the exact same thing with Jerry Rice, and Barry Sanders that you can with Bo. Someone could easily argue that if we're going to ban the Raiders because of Bo, we should also ban the 49ers and Lions.

In regards to your last bit, I like the idea of playing one of the worst teams, that could be a good idea for a Low%, but would require all players to play the exact same low-tier team. I will definitely consider this one, along with a possible Division% as well. But as it stands, I've added 2 categories recently and want to see how many people participate in those before I add any more.

@bold - The guy who randomly checks his network requests is the same guy with 84 runs, but 628 comments. The same guy who speedruns only mobile games, then spends 90% of his time reading these forums and posting on every thread whether he has anything to add or not. Dude has given 10,789 likes and is seeking acceptance more than anything. His most recent run is 6 months ago, yet he's constantly speedrunning his fingers on the SRC forums. He thinks this is Reddit.

You already know how I feel about this. Looking forward to the new categories, and making Milo MVP again!

Sorry to be this guy, but I just submitted my own run for Excitebike and saw a small issue. I noticed the MS timer in-game only counts two positions, meaning all times on SRC should have a "0" in the 3rd position. I confirmed this by checking the leaderboard and noticing all but one time have this exact thing going.

I noticed that 9th place is jeverony with a time of 6m 07s 013ms. His video shows it's a 6:07.13. This should be updated to 6m 07s 130ms if I am not mistaken. I apologize for my OCD, I'm not trying to step on any toes, nor is this a huge discrepancy. I just wanted to point it out.

Edit: This is Selection A Any%.

I appreciate the feedback. After looking at all the points you made, I agree with most of them. I'd like to delete this thread, but this forum won't let me. So I'll delete all my other posts, and leave this here.

I'm still checking your video now. In regards to a comment you made about changing players in-game, it is allowed yes. My logic being if a player is injured, I'm not going to disqualify a run because you had to substitute. Extending this logic further, swapping uninjured players would be fine too, as long as the clock is running and it's during the game.

EDIT: After reviewing the first run of this new category, I've decided to change the clock start. Originally I was thinking people would change all their teams to "Man", then reset, then the clock would start on "Start Game" at the main menu.

But I see it was a bit confusing as there is also a "Game Start" option on the season menu, and that's when the clock was started. Instead of add time to the run, I will frame count all runs starting at the first fade from the pressing "Game Start" on the season menu from now on. The main thing is you show a reset before starting the season ofc. Rules will be updated to reflect this change.

I like the idea, as it's no different than most games with glitches running Any% versus 100%, this would basically be the 100% version of Donkey Kong Jr. I've recently done something similar with Tecmo Super Bowl: the strategy for most categories is simply "kill the clock as fast as possible", and while it's a fun idea, it's not realistic football. So I made a category requiring 49 points and winning, so people who want to play more "as intended" have that opportunity now.

You could even add a Misc category for "High Score" like the old arcades. Just go until you die, highest score gets the best times for accuracy purposes. (Since SRC will always favor times over any other metric)

Yessir, I only run NES games using FCEUX 2.2.2. I do have Mesen on my computer, but that's because there is a SimCity NES prototype that doesn't run properly on FCEUX, and I have a gold and silver trophy on runs for that game. You can tell I am running FCEUX as the resets and controller input at the bottom left match every other video I've submitted. If I were using another emulator, you could tell by just those features which are unique and vary in every emulator.

I will submit my better of the two for now. I will still work on improving it, I know I can with some RNG, faster day 3 resets, etc. Once that is done, I will provide a full window on the improvement. I plan on streaming some Police Quest III tonight, as I just figured out how to get DOSBox to properly display on OBS. But I plan on working on that triple pack as well, so I might have a better run shortly.

I'll just post this here because I don't feel it warrants it's own thread: I didn't submit either of the triple races we did on Friday because I didn't go fullscreen after to show my entire emulator. But now that I know I can immediately reset after Jason dies on day 3, I should be able to get a better time anyway. Will submit one when RNG permits and I have the proper proof.

Alright I have added "Week 1 Challenge" as another category. Currently the rules are posted, and it requires you win every game in week 1 as one of the two teams in every matchup against the AI.

My only further question would be: should we require every single game in week 1 to be won? There are 14 games in week 1, and currently if a runner were to lose a single game, it kills the run. Should we allow some leeway in this? Or does everyone feel winning every game is a fair requirement?

As it stands though, you must win all 14 games in the first week.

I agree with Division% and the 1 Week Challenge being the most diverse from what we already have. Division% as mentioned could be a bit RNG depending on your season record, but also a nice middle-ground between a single game run, and a full-season run. As DrMoo said, you could do a full-season run, and submit the video up until Division is clinched to get two runs in one if you choose.

Now I will say, with Week 1 Challenge: I feel like forcing people to reset their rosters/data before running this is a necessity. From my perspective, Week 1 Challenge seems most fair and fun if people cannot modify rosters/playbooks, and everything is default as intended.

I will let this sit for a while longer, to garner as many responses as possible from the community. But to those who have already replied: do you agree with my idea that Week 1 Challenge should require a data reset in the video before the run? If not, feel free to present your reasoning. I will consider everything before I add any more categories.

Lowered by another 30+ seconds, nice!

Appreciate the input! I agree that Division% and Week 1 Challenge offer the best differences in gameplay and runs. Week 1 Challenge especially because it would force you to choose a team on every game in the first week, and you'd have to play 50% of the teams against the other 50%. And ofc Division% would be a nice longer run for those who don't want to run the whole Super Bowl.

I will give a few quick opinions on the categories myself:

Division% and Week 1 Challenge are both mid-length challenges. If people feel they are different enough we could consider adding both, otherwise one or the other could also be acceptable. Too many categories could diminish the value of the WRs in a way, but at the same time adding categories only encourages more ways to compete and play, and that's overall a great thing.

This is the same reason I leave my Comeback% idea up on the idea board for now. I think SchmidttyGames' idea of Points% accomplishes the same goal as Comeback%, without forcing you to let the CPU score. But maybe that could add another layer to the whole thing. I'll see how you guys feel before I do anything further.