Argentina[quote=SnarkySceptile]a) lots of runners wouldn't have ~2 hours of uninterrupted gameplay for a full-game, compared to maybe a 2-3 minute average of some IL times[/quote]
While I agree that a single IL run will be several magnitudes of times quicker than a full game run, you also have to take into account that ILs are also in general more finely optimized than full game runs as well, meaning that in order to get a good time you'll probably also end up doing several more IL runs than you would have with full game runs (so additively they kinda end up averaging out in time spent). That's not to say unoptimized ILs don't exist, but riddle me this: where do you think you're more likely to make a 10 second mistake, a 2 hour long run or a 2-3 minute run?
Also, often times people pull riskier and more complex stunts on ILs in order to go for those increasingly marginal time saves (since they kinda become mandatory when going for WR on ILs at some point), which can get frustrating when they start relying on RNG or frame perfect execution.
Personally I feel more burnt out when doing shorter runs than I do with long ones (be it ILs or full game) due to these reasons, but I can clearly see why some runners would prefer to run games in that fashion.
When you see two restaurants side by side, and one is packed with lively people and the other one is empty, which one would you go to for dinner? I believe most people would go with the packed one, and I think it's similar to what's happening here.
It's not that IL's are so unpopular: there are indeed games where the reverse is true, and I'm not talking about some obscure indie games, having prominent speedrun communities like GoldenEye and Doom running primarily on ILs.
What I think it boils down to is that people like to run what most people are running, be it ILs or full game runs. Perhaps it's because they like to compete and gain internet points, perhaps it's because they're more likely to get help as new runners for a category with more people in it rather than the opposite. That doesn't mean that other categories can't have a spot, but people just tend to gravitate towards the center of attention.
Furthermore, I honestly think this effect doesn't only apply to full-game runs vs ILs, given that I also see it when runners are even choosing a game to run: you'll see more people eager to run SM64 and Minecraft rather than other games with smaller speedrun communities, even when the games themselves are popular amongst casual players.
[quote=Viper]Imo from an outsiders pov, if this emulator gave an advantage to old runs, then those runs should be archived or removed, grandfathering these times would be unfair to new runners.[/quote]
I agree that keeping them as-is would be unfair for new runners, and I forgot to clarify that while other runs done with that emulator have been grandfathered in, they'll certainly be re-timed to reflect the rule change and to have a level playing field. Added that to the original post now!
Thanks for the input!
So, I once had the opportunity to witness (what I hope is) a rather uncommon ocurrence on speedrun.com which I had a formed opinion about, but I realised it'd be rather interesting to see what takes other people have around the issue.
To avoid possible drama and tensions I'll keep names about the game and users involved vague because it's not my main point of interest. ;)
Anyways, there was this runner (hereafter called "Mr. X") that currently had WR for the Any% category for this game. However, for whatever reason (not pertaining cheating or any foul play, mind you), Mr. X. decided to delete the vod for this run (as well as runs for other categories, but I digress), which later prompted the run's removal from the leaderboard. So far, so good.
Months come and go, and it's now been 6 months since the incident, with the runs long gone. Mr. X decided to show up again on the discord and the mods didn't outright tell them off, so all seemed good. Much to their dismay however, when Mr. X re-uploaded their old run a few days later, it got rejected.
Turns out, the rules had changed during the 6 month period Mr. X was inactive, removing one of the allowed emulators from the rules (and this change was done way before they came back), and it is this specific emulator that was used for their old run.
So here's the issue: given that it's an old run, Mr. X thought they could just re-upload it and all would be good. My personal take was that, given that they deleted it themselves (i.e. not the mods) and then later re-submitted it, I was of the idea that it was perfectly fine for the run to be held to the new rules.
As I previously mentioned though, I realised that perhaps this may not be the same conclusion everyone would reach, so I got curious and thus made this thread. What are your thoughts and would you have handled the situation differently?
PS: Just to clarify, I have no hand moderating this particular game and the situation has been a cold case for quite a while now, I'm just interested in learning about other points of view :)
EDIT: I forgot to clarify this, but other runs that were performed with this particular emulator have indeed been grandfathered in, pending a re-timing of said runs to avoid unfairness to future runners.
[quote=1]I've seen communities go from IRC to Skype to Discord, its not like changing platforms is super hard or impossible.[/quote]
I absolutely agree with this. There was a time where it seemed like Skype would forever be the way to communicate via voice chat and look where that went. Platforms only stay relevant as the users find them useful (or at least better than the competition). If Discord starts doing anti-consumer moves and the app experience goes down the gutter, sooner or later it'll fall out of grace for the casual public, and eventually communities will end up following suit.
For the time being though, I believe most communities will find it "adequate enough" to their needs, so I don't see this happening in the near future.
[quote=cronusmaker]REFUSED , TRY MAKE A RUN OF THE MAPS REQUESTED[/quote]
I'm not sure exactly what you input in your request, but generally the mods expect to see a video showcasing a run for the category in question, to ensure the quality of the request and mostly to show there's at least one person (namely the applicant) willing to run it.
If you find it troublesome for some reason, it'd be better if you described why so that people can better assist you. :)
I was thinking that maybe adding some sort of "Archiving" method for runs would benefit the site for cases like this: you could mark the run as archived (which you could decide whether it's shown or hidden by default), and that way you could distinguish "active/live" runs from runs that once had a video or proof in general but no longer do so.
You could achieve something similar to this using variables, but as far as I know those variables would then proceed to show up in the submit form for runners, making it less than ideal.
My case would be similar to @Oreo321 's, but I did notice that I didn't get the "site under pressure" notice when I loaded the forums now.
PS: I don't know if me not getting the notice is indicative of anything, since there's probably less traffic than usual right now (I figure some users aren't aware the "read-only" mode is gone, so they're probably avoiding the site for the time being), so I'll keep monitoring that on my end at least.
I started out as a Spider-Man 2000 speedrunner, so I thought making my avatar something related to that was in order.
Thus, I set out to put together a dank Spider-Man avatar using stuff from google. Here's the recipe:
- Take a stock "spodermun"
- Put a fedora on it
- Put some stock air horns around it
- Add part of the Spider-Man 2000 cover art as background for the image
...and voila, you get my avatar. Not exactly the most inspired image ever, but I like it.
Personalmente hago speedruns de Pepsiman, y en general no suelo streamearlos, ais que por ese lado no hay problema con subir runs grabados a Youtube.
Por otro lado, entiendo que con tener el audio del juego alcanza perfectamente, y de hecho piden explicitamente que sólo figure el audio del juego + comentario del runner de manera opcional (es decir, no incluir otros audios como música personal o cosas del estilo).
Si tenés alguna otra pregunta, no dudes en sumarte al servidor de discord oficial para los speedrunners de Pepsiman que está abierto para todos. También estoy disponible personalmente para cualquier duda que tengas :)
Great thread idea. Give me a moment to get in character if you will...
:ahem:
Casino casino casino casino casino casino casino casino. Money? Cash Cash Cash! Poker Poker suspicious link ! Big Prizes! Roulette Roulette Roulette. CashApp CashApp!
Tech Company! WebPages. Software Solutions for Everyone! Front-End Back-End Programming Languages. Coding Coding Coding!
[quote=Broderick.Stiles]Everyone....... it’s a joke, everything I said was a joke, what I’m saying right now isn’t a joke, this thread is a joke, nothing serious going on here XD.[/quote]
...but what's the joke though? That you don't know what the verification screen looks like?
I might just be immune to humor these days I guess.
Bump for visibility. Please ammend the rules shown on the Game Request page so that it reflects the rule change in regards to PvP games. It's one thing to keep things short for the game request page, but having two pages with contradictory rules is pointless (and it really doesn't sound like it should be too complex to correct).
@Pear Ahh I see, I was unaware of that thread. Thanks!
So, from what I gathered from that thread, the OP's preferences seem to be:
- A game with an Any% time between 30-55 minutes
- Not related to Sonic because they find it cringe
- Possible Platforms: Web and Nintendo Switch
I do have games that fit the first two criterias amongst the ones I've ran in the past, but sadly I'm afraid they are not webgames nor are they playable on the switch, so I'm out of suggestions here. Good luck with your search!
