I feeeeel like you're being duplicitous by disguising your want to remove leaderboard PBs as a game issue. I'm not the only one, by the way, that thinks this is an excuse to claim records that you can't hit at the moment.

"like your bandwidth throttling diatribe (it does exist just not in the sense you spoke on)" You're still gonna double down on that? Mate you have massive issues with acknowledging your opinion is your opinion; you seem to lack the capacity to divide your opinion from presented fact. Just talking with you here is stressful because you can't understand that, from my perspective, I acknowledge the fact it has some impact, but don't believe it alone would be enough to either make or break a PB/WR. So, because you can't grasp why I have that view point, you're lashing out over and over again.

I don't want to see other people's PBs invalidated because of your inability to divide opinion from fact. Like I said, if you want your perfect world, make your own category. At the moment I see more absolute votes for 1 than any other.

I'm only tolerating you at the moment because I don't want you pushing other people's PBs off of the leaderboard. The reason I stopped coming to your streams was because you went on a ridiculous, 20 minute long attack, because you didn't think bandwidth throttling was a thing. The world is bigger than your understanding of it. You would do well to try to understand other people's positions on these things. Given your propensity for hyper aggressive behaviour when things don't fit your ideals, yes, I do think you're trying to create a situation that enables yourself to do better in the category; I think currently, you're trying to bully and push down any opinion that doesn't see eye to eye with yours.

My opinion stands, I don't think the difference is great enough as it has been presented to warrant a new rule that invalidates old runs. If anything, if you want to create your ideal world of fairness, make a new category called 60/75/90fps whatever it is you settle on, and just run that.

Even in that video, they don't show a significant difference, just that a difference exists. Even in the direct comparison, it's less than a 5% impact on a straight. I don't think it's significant enough to be a serious impact on a run, you're more likely to have bigger impacts on traffic RNG.

Also, could you behave yourself? You're insulting me in every post you make. It's getting pathetic.

Look, if this is important to you, I'd recommend finding a way to prove it. Using one video, that doesn't follow the same driving lines, is not a good piece of evidence. When Illuminati prompted you to look into it further, you made the scope so huge that it couldn't be tested.

"The issue with the testing would be its complexity with very little practical benefit in the results. Without doing the exact same inputs on each test, having the the exact same RNG of traffic, and having the exact same fps fluctuations due to surrounding environments, determining the differences between FPS caps would be next to impossible. The differences would also not be constant in each setting.There would also need to be testing in all different forms of gamplay and on multiple forms of hardware.At the end of the day, we know the more FPS you have the more time you will save. The closer the FPS cap is to the FPS of previous runs the greater the ability people will have to beat the old records."

But here's the problem, you haven't proven the baseline that FPS is what's making the impact. You have not proven to any degree "we know the more FPS you have the more time you will save", and that's what you'd need to substantiate here to convince people. You are talking about invalidating people's runs/moving them off of the main board on a topic you claim has been proven, and yet the proof is so small and insignificant I can't see it as justification at the moment, which does make me think there's another motive.

If this is important to you, set up a scenario where you can test it. Use somewhere perfectly straight like the airport runway, use mods/commands to freeze all NPCs or something, and then see how it plays out.

@DarkViperAU

I did watch the video. They did not follow the same driving lines. They're not worth comparing. There may be a speed difference in framerates, I'm not an expert, but I can see that it hasn't been proven with any accuracy or precision.

I think you're trying to make WRs easier to beat by invalidating the old ones by having them removed from the main board. That's the advantage I think you're trying to give yourself.

1

I don't think there's good proof for your claim as it stands. You have one dubious video where they don't follow the same lines. I'm thinking the same thing as many people are here: you're trying to create the optimal situation for you to get a WR. I also think that having you in charge of the rules right now is presenting a conflict of interest, and think you should consider handing it off to someone else. Just, stop digging to ruin other people's fun.

Well, if you went AM (incl. BMX, NRG etc), how long would the run actually take? It's cutting off a good amount of content, but some time estimates would be decent. If it's still over the 10hr mark, I'm not so convinced by it.

Any 100% runners want to chime in on this?

Well, I agree with the concept of an actual All Missions category.

I'm not clued up about ASM, what was the big change that suddenly saw a drop off in runners?

So you think it should stay in a board, that's significantly harder to find, because of rationale that would also apply to categories like 100%, to remain purist to going fast?

Shit son never take off that Sonic costume.

I'm not really sure how it'd stifle any% progression. At the moment you only have 2 people in the same ballpark, and I don't suppose they'll stop running any%.I don't think Patrick or Nick will stop looking for new things either.

I think the OM0 specificity still runs into the problems Josh mentioned. I think Dupeless% or No Major Glithces% is better with the rules being abstracted more comprehensively.

I'm not sure why ASM would have to go to make way for it, at least not immediately. Fair enough if in 3-6 months it's got no traction, however it doesn't seem like an either/or thing, there's a lot of room on the header for both for the time being.

@BackmadeJay this is why I'm in favour of a resubmission and not by default approach. Stuff has gradually changed, and not all runs would be eligible.

I think that if Any% NMG is a thing, old runs should be allowed, but have to be resubmitted by the original runner. The original runner should check to make sure their run conforms to these new rules before resubmitting it, rather than having the mods have to comb through them to make sure they're all valid. I think that's a fairer workload.

EDIT: This also ensures that the board isn't cluttered from the get-go, and only has up to date runs on it. It means the board will only be populated by current runners too - at least current GTA SA runners, even if they do a different category now.

Well, the thing about moderators in a group, is that the moderators have to be able to work well together. It can go very wrong if there's no awareness of the situation, where it feeds into negative behaviour, and that can definitely be a downside of the moderators being friends.

But if the moderators aren't friends, and don't communicate well, then there ends up a great incongruity in rules and enforcement of them. It can be just as damaging to have a lack of consistency as it can be to have moderators feeding into each other negatively.

In the fairly sizeable Source community I was in, I had to remove several moderators because they were cheating for their friends, or failing to enforce rules evenly. It's really hard to find impartial people, if they're all on the same page and communicate well, you can at least effectively minimise that variation.That does take self moderation though.

The big flame debate is a bit crazy. I'm just gonna play devil's advocate and hope it communicates more clearly, I think reset's problem is it sounds like Mh, from the post, is going to use his position to prevent the change as he "reserves the right". I don't think it's the crybaby thing that's the issue. Either way, I don't want to be overly caught up in this, I'm just trying to diffuse the communication frustration here.

@Joshimuz Well, sliding is technically a glitch, it's a faster method on missions like EOTL and Home Invasion, but would you consider it a major glitch compared to wrong warps, SSU, or OM0?

I think the ultimate point should be preventing skipping segments of the game. Other minor glitches like sliding should still be allowed.

Yeah I agree with the name thing. I understand why that would be a concern.

I feel like if it became a category, there'd need to be a pretty clear cut set of rules. You could always account for other stuff in future, like "No wrong warps". I'd also include a note about it being non-exhaustive, that the rules can and will change if new major glitches are found, or even that this category expects you to complete a specific set of missions in their entirety.

Maybe setting out a parameter for 'what a major glitch is', like 'Any glitch that allows you to skip missions, wrong warp, or otherwise bypass segments of the game', that would preclude things like despawning traffic, or sliding, as they don't skip any segments of the game - to me at least, those aren't major glitches.

Regarding replacing ASM, that could just be a time thing. If ASM stays alive while NMG is a thing, then I think they should be left separate.

It's what I kind of inferred from Mh's post, make of it what you will.

Well, for III and VC, would it really harm them to have dupeless% too? An easy way to end any conflict over this is to try it for a little while, if nobody uses it and it's dead, then the issue wouldn't need to be revisited for some time/unless something substantial changed (like SSU).

I don't think SSU and SA dupes are really comparable, but does that really matter? It's one extra tab on a board that's nowhere near full (excl. the list of collectables, but they have their own drop down anyway), and it looks like people want to run it. I think saying "the extent of dupes in SA isn't as significant as the SSU in VC, therefore we shouldn't add dupeless% on that ground" is pretty arbitrary.

Nobody here is asking for changes to any%, there's no dispute on what any% is, so I don't think "it's not any% really" is a good argument either.

Thanks, I'll be sure to vet my opinions through you first Patrick.