Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Discuss policy guidelines for the community and whether something needs to be changed or not.
Keizaron
Site Admin
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:13 pm
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Keizaron » Tue Jul 19, 2016 1:24 pm

werster wrote:First off; obviously Gen 2 should not have credits (anyone who thinks otherwise is actually a complete moron), and that time should be taken off old runs that sat through them.
I echo this and said this earlier in the thread. Absolutely for grandfathering runs with a subtraction of credits.
More important point: Y'all talking about starting timing at character control? Uhh.....nope. Every game that has any function that has any impact on the game must be timed from when that function starts. E.g, Gen 4/5 RNG starts when the game starts, games must be timed from reset. I'm not as familar with Gen 1/3/6, but Gen 2 has RNG running during opening, must be timed from reset. Even if Gen 1/3/6 aren't known to be the same, unless they are known to -not- be the same, they should also be timed from reset (in case something is found in the future that could be used from manipulation)

As far as I'm concerned that should simply be non negotiable, and simply common sense. Obviously past runs should be compensated for accordingly, but if you want to switch to RTA that simply has to be done. You can't say you want the "actual real time because the IGT doesn't count everything"....and then not count everything that impacts the game. That would be incredibly hypocritical and dumb as hell.
I think a lot of reason why people want timing to start at character control for runs is because they don't want to be "punished" for using a different console (DS vs 3DS for gen 4 and 5) or to have extra time for preparing themselves (gen 3). However, I'm in complete agreement here. Tyrant's Any% run is actually a really good example of a runner preparing himself for manipulation in gen 3, finishing the run and re-timing it for the actual run. It's not impossible to do, even if people find the extra seconds added to their time undesirable. As for DS vs 3DS, while it's unfortunate that one is a tiny bit slower than the other, and while it's unfortunate that there's extra time for later manips added, it just makes the most sense to me to keep that universal. There are plenty of other speedruns where console choice makes an impact, so I don't think that's a good enough factor to shift the timing.

User avatar
GarfieldTheLightning
Youngster
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 5:04 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by GarfieldTheLightning » Tue Jul 19, 2016 4:12 pm

werster wrote:First off; obviously Gen 2 should not have credits (anyone who thinks otherwise is actually a complete moron), and that time should be taken off old runs that sat through them.
Every game that has any function that has any impact on the game must be timed from when that function starts. E.g, Gen 4/5 RNG starts when the game starts, games must be timed from reset.
I know you said gen 2, but I'm going to assume you're including HeartGold/SoulSilver in that. In which case, sitting through the credits gives you a different RNG value for trash can manip, which therefore has an impact on the game, which by your own argument should therefore be included in the timing. The validity of your viewpoints are not as "obvious" as you'd like to claim.

The only difference I can see timing RTA from reset in gen 4 games instead of character control doing would be to handicap 3DS players by 50 frames. I cannot see the upside to this. Even Keiz listed two points against timing RTA from reset and none for, and he claims to be an advocate for RTA from reset!
I speedrun Pokémon Pearl, White 2 and X!

Keizaron
Site Admin
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:13 pm
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Keizaron » Tue Jul 19, 2016 5:12 pm

GarfieldTheLightning wrote:sitting through the credits gives you a different RNG value for trash can manip, which therefore has an impact on the game, which by your own argument should therefore be included in the timing.
But you immediately reset to get trash can manip, so I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here.
Even Keiz listed two points against timing RTA from reset and none for, and he claims to be an advocate for RTA from reset!
I mean, I'm for RTA and I'm for reset, but I'm not bias enough to not point out issues. So again, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. Not trying to start anything, just genuinely confused.

User avatar
GarfieldTheLightning
Youngster
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 5:04 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by GarfieldTheLightning » Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 pm

Keizaron wrote:
GarfieldTheLightning wrote:sitting through the credits gives you a different RNG value for trash can manip, which therefore has an impact on the game, which by your own argument should therefore be included in the timing.
But you immediately reset to get trash can manip, so I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here.
What I'm saying is that if you reset immediately after the game saves following your entry into the Hall of Fame, you will get different RNG than if you reset part-way through the credits or sit through the whole credits. The trash can manipulation that Werster figured out only works if date * month + minute + second = 8e (142 in decimal) upon game start, which means that minute + second has to equal 42 when you start the game up. Depending on how your run goes, the amount of time you will have to wait during the credits to reach your reset point will vary. If the argument is that time spent outside of IGT boundaries should be included in RTA because it affects the run, why should this case be any different?
I speedrun Pokémon Pearl, White 2 and X!

Keizaron
Site Admin
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:13 pm
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Keizaron » Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:38 pm

GarfieldTheLightning wrote:What I'm saying is that if you reset immediately after the game saves following your entry into the Hall of Fame, you will get different RNG than if you reset part-way through the credits or sit through the whole credits. The trash can manipulation that Werster figured out only works if date * month + minute + second = 8e (142 in decimal) upon game start, which means that minute + second has to equal 42 when you start the game up. Depending on how your run goes, the amount of time you will have to wait during the credits to reach your reset point will vary. If the argument is that time spent outside of IGT boundaries should be included in RTA because it affects the run, why should this case be any different?
In this case, I'd say because you're still intentionally egging the game to go your way, whereas with gen 2 credits you do absolutely nothing and it contributes nothing to the run (as of now).

User avatar
werster
Site Admin
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:38 am

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by werster » Tue Jul 19, 2016 8:29 pm

Yes, the point I was actually making Garf is that the Credits SHOULD count, and therefore should NOT be counted for in timing of previous runs. Because they count, everyone would reset through them, only reason they weren't is because they previously didn't, and shouldn't be penalised because that wasn't an error when their run was done.

As such, HGSS Credits should be included too, because they are impacting the run. All runs that didn't do trash can manip should have credits discounted, as that wasn't an error, but those that have used trash can manip knew what they were doing, should have them counted. Sorry I didn't spell this out, but just a bit of common sense sees that is obvious based on what I said before (everything must count)

[Fun fact for those arguing about only caring about the "minutes" of a speedrun being bad, assuming you used trash can manip (which you should), this means you would play for the minute in Johto in HGSS Glitchless runs so that you could reset properly for trash can manip anyway!]

entrpntr
Pokémon Trainer
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:22 pm

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by entrpntr » Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:37 am

werster wrote:The only thing I really came in here to comment on (other than arguing is dumb), is the "where to start/stop timing" if/when the switch to RTA is made. First off; obviously Gen 2 should not have credits (anyone who thinks otherwise is actually a complete moron), and that time should be taken off old runs that sat through them.
More important point: Y'all talking about starting timing at character control? Uhh.....nope. Every game that has any function that has any impact on the game must be timed from when that function starts. E.g, Gen 4/5 RNG starts when the game starts, games must be timed from reset. I'm not as familar with Gen 1/3/6, but Gen 2 has RNG running during opening, must be timed from reset. Even if Gen 1/3/6 aren't known to be the same, unless they are known to -not- be the same, they should also be timed from reset (in case something is found in the future that could be used from manipulation)
If there is a switch to RTA, I agree with this. I like starting from reset/power on and ending at "The End" or "Fin" for all the main series games. Keeps it extremely simple and should be consistent in capturing everything that constitutes playing the game (RNG manip possibilities at the start of Gen 1-5 + AZ/Rival fights at the end of Gen 6). This should be applicable to the main series games released in the future, and thus cut out the need to dissect each new game individually after its release.

(This timing method has the added benefit of easing the future transition that will take place when we merge with the JP community in 2018.)

Keizaron
Site Admin
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:13 pm
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Keizaron » Wed Jul 20, 2016 2:37 pm

entrpntr wrote:If there is a switch to RTA, I agree with this. I like starting from reset/power on and ending at "The End" or "Fin" for all the main series games. Keeps it extremely simple and should be consistent in capturing everything that constitutes playing the game (RNG manip possibilities at the start of Gen 1-5 + AZ/Rival fights at the end of Gen 6). This should be applicable to the main series games released in the future, and thus cut out the need to dissect each new game individually after its release.
I'm not personally fond of power on to "The End", but if that becomes the popular choice if/when we make the switch to RTA, then so be it. I've always been fond of New Game to last input because those actually contribute to the run in a meaningful way (yes, options contribute but eh, seems silly to include that IMO). For something like gen 4, the soft reset for manipulation feels as good of a New Game as you can get.
(This timing method has the added benefit of easing the future transition that will take place when we merge with the JP community in 2018.)
That's a 2019 thing, you stupid idiot. :)

ExtraTricky
Bug Catcher
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:39 am

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by ExtraTricky » Wed Jul 20, 2016 7:44 pm

I'm also not a fan of timing from power on. I understand where the sentiment comes from, but as far as I understand it, the argument for RTA isn't "count everything", but "count everything between the start of the run and the end of the run". Having the start of the run be when you select "New game" seems perfectly reasonable to me (I won't comment about starting from movement, since I am not familiar with the gens where that's a serious suggestion). I don't think there's a "right" answer here other than the one that makes the most people happy, so I'm really just posting to say that starting from "new game" would make me happier than starting from power on.

Keizaron
Site Admin
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:13 pm
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Keizaron » Wed Jul 20, 2016 7:50 pm

ExtraTricky wrote:(I won't comment about starting from movement, since I am not familiar with the gens where that's a serious suggestion).
For future reference, this refers to gens 3 through 5.

entrpntr
Pokémon Trainer
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:22 pm

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by entrpntr » Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:58 pm

I don't know many games where the initial RNG seed affects things as significantly as it does in [some of the] Pokémon games. That's what pushes things over the edge for me. To give an extreme example, if there was some god RNG seed that involved waiting 30 minutes at the start screen, waiting until New Game fails to reflect real time that is meaningful, and would look pretty awkward.

So for games where the initial RNG seed has any practical manipulation/application, I think it makes sense to err on the side of including all inputs that affect the run. Beyond that, I don't care all that much, but I do think having a common timing mechanism across the main series games has some value.

ExtraTricky
Bug Catcher
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:39 am

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by ExtraTricky » Thu Jul 21, 2016 12:22 am

I was thinking about that and wondered: Why would we count time doing RNG manipulation at the intro screen and not time doing RNG manipulation in the main console menu (like setting the clock)? Even starting from a hard reset doesn't really solve the issue because you could adjust the date/time and then hard reset. So despite timing from hard reset / power on you have actions that are affecting the run that aren't being counted in the timing. My conclusion was that you just have to draw a line somewhere and "new game" feels like the most natural line to me.

entrpntr
Pokémon Trainer
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:22 pm

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by entrpntr » Thu Jul 21, 2016 12:43 am

Yeah, I think I'd lean the other way, as traditional RTA timing starts from power-on, so it strikes me as a natural enough convention to use. Setting the clock seems similar to clearing a save file to prep for the "actual" run. But this is a good demonstration of why some of us prefer to use a timing method that draws its own boundaries and makes these kinds of determinations a moot point.

User avatar
werster
Site Admin
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:38 am

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by werster » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:14 am

ExtraTricky wrote:I was thinking about that and wondered: Why would we count time doing RNG manipulation at the intro screen and not time doing RNG manipulation in the main console menu (like setting the clock)?
Because setting the clock is about setting the parameters to play the game, rather than actually doing so. When I start/reset the game, I am given a starting position to do the run from. I have now 'started' the game. Before that, I was setting up the game. If you were to say a run starts at setting the clock for a DS game, by the same token you would say a Gen 3 run might start when you remove/lose the save battery. Or when you purchase a console for Gen 5 (or even when that console is made). I'm using these example to show how ridiculous this would be (in case you didn't pick that up), since technically yes, the Mac Address of your console does impact your run in a unique way. But. You are not playing the game.

The difference, is when you are waiting at a New Game screen (or choosing character names, or options), you -are- playing the game. And the game is running, and functioning. -And- it is having an impact. Not timing that is dumb, especially given how you are upset that not 'everything' about the game is timed using IGT, which is arbitrary because...IGT is not Real Time. It is counting everything is wants to count. If you want to argue that is not ok, alright, do that, but then you have to bloody actually count everything. Of the game.

ExtraTricky
Bug Catcher
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:39 am

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by ExtraTricky » Thu Jul 21, 2016 5:47 am

Right, I considered that answer as well. I didn't find it satisfying because RTA runs can involve doing things that are outside the game. Like say 2 hours in you exit to the DS menu and change your clock again. If that's not playing the game, then should that time count toward your run? Of course it should, despite the fact that the game is not operating during that time. The relevant factor is that it's between the start point and the end point of the run.

At least for me, it's not about IGT not counting "everything about the game", but about IGT not counting everything between the start point and the end point of the run.

User avatar
GarfieldTheLightning
Youngster
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 5:04 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by GarfieldTheLightning » Thu Jul 21, 2016 10:23 am

I fundamentally disagree (with Werster/Keizaron - there will be others I disagree with but they don't have as much power to make big decisions) on what we want from decisions like where to start the timer if we switch to RTA. The thing is - whether RTA is started from start-up, New Game, character control, or wherever - how does this affect you as a runner? Not at all. It doesn't make your run faster or slower when compared to anyone else's.

I don't like bringing this up again, but a fair few runners wanted save+quit runs to be separated from single-segment runs in Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Red and Blue Rescue Team as an official leaderboard. The decision to not allow this did not affect anyone who wanted solely to runs the faster save+quit, but it was made anyway. Now, although I still disagree with this, I can accept it because I understand the perspective that save+quit is just a faster way of completing the game than single-segment, but I think it's a useful illustration of the priorities of decision-makers. Several runners wanted a split, but there was no debate thread, no vote - in the end it came down to telling them they were wrong and maintaining the presentation of a certain set of standards, even if these standards had literally no effect on those who pushed for that decision, but a noticeable one on those who were against it.

It's the same story here. Having the start point of RTA at character control as opposed to game start-up has literally no practical negative effect on anyone as a runner. But having it at game start-up as opposed to character control does, because it handicaps 3DS runners by 48/50 frames. Keiz mentioned that there are console discrepancies across other games, but those are either unavoidable or re-timing every run to eliminate these differences is borderline impossible. But when there's an easy way that can be consistently applied across Pokémon games to eliminate this and other negative effects on sets of runners, but people don't want to do this because conforming to an ideal on what speedrunning should be is more important... I don't get it, and I will never get why this matters so much.
I speedrun Pokémon Pearl, White 2 and X!

Keizaron
Site Admin
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:13 pm
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Keizaron » Thu Jul 21, 2016 1:37 pm

GarfieldTheLightning wrote:when there's an easy way that can be consistently applied across Pokémon games to eliminate this and other negative effects on sets of runners, but people don't want to do this because conforming to an ideal on what speedrunning should be is more important... I don't get it, and I will never get why this matters so much.
That's a vast jump from "I don't agree with werster/Keizaron on how they want to time it" to "I'm going to assume I know why they prefer this method as opposed to my method"...

I can't speak for werster, but to assume I prefer a method that *I* personally feel is easier to maintain is because of some fantastical notion of what speedrunning is and isn't is discrediting my opinion entirely.
I fundamentally disagree (with Werster/Keizaron - there will be others I disagree with but they don't have as much power to make big decisions) on what we want from decisions like where to start the timer if we switch to RTA.
This is entirely a community decision. Just because we can make the changes doesn't mean we will until a satisfactory middle ground is reached by all.

In other news, I made a really rough draft on some of my thoughts of each gen:

Image

Please note:

- I only included main series games. Side games like XD I'd assume would just follow standard RTA notions
- Aside from gen 1, all the methods listed assume ending at the fade out to credits (in gen 2's case, the blackout before the final flash)
- I lack knowledge on gen 5 and gen 6, so I kind of winged it there; I'll need runners' thoughts and knowledge on that a lot more
- I tried to make it as unbiased as possible; hopefully I succeeded
- There are probably some other timing methods I haven't included
- I did not include power on to credits
Last edited by Keizaron on Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Amoeba
Cooltrainer
Posts: 280
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:26 am
Contact:

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Amoeba » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:03 pm

I think garf meant that yourself and werster's opinions can (and likely will) hold more sway amongst the community. People are likely to agree with someone who has; plenty of experience in certain games, experience in many of the games, or in werster's case both. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with this fact, those with the greater knowledge will be able to make more informed decisions, but that's not going to feel great when that person is disagreeing with your point.

I'm not picking a side here, there just appears to be some tensions behind these posts~
~

User avatar
werster
Site Admin
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:38 am

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by werster » Thu Jul 21, 2016 10:02 pm

Friendly reminder that S+Q and SS -is- split up for Pokemon Mystery Dungeon R/B now. Friendly reminder they switched -to- IGT for future titles so that they could allow pausing the game (and IGT) to go eat food, then brought back RTA but still allow pausing your timer in the middle of the run. Never use PMD as an example of rule making unless the point you're making is they are a lil bit silly.

Garf: The entire point I'm trying to make is I don't give a shit and think using what's easiest and has consistency across the board for all runners and makes things easier would be the better option. But that option is to continue using IGT, which people do not agree with. But disagreeing with that half way is a fucking cop out for nothing, if you are going to make the change for the sake of what values you are going for, it has to be followed through completely.

You also spoke of 3DS being hampered by like 50 frames, I'm sorry to say but the difficultly of hitting the Seed on 3DS is always going to be 99% of the handicap compared to DS. The 'time' you would lose isn't even a drop in the bucket comparatively. Either way though I consider it to be partly relevant, consider if hitting the seed was easier on 3DS, or whether tweaking was easier (for some people this may actually be true with double controls). Not representing the complete accuracy of what you are playing on is contrary to the whole "everything must be exactly relevant to the real time spent on this game" argument that has sparked and fuelled the notion that we must change from IGT. Hell, the Gen 3 IGT is basically exactly what a "Time without Loads" timer would look like, which is what people strive directly for in a lot of games (esp PC ones where your system has a great impact on the loads), but everyone is saying that isn't ok, at all, like it's the dumbest thing in the world.

Meebs: It's funny that you say that, because I feel like I am always and constantly in the minority, and so even when it may not be the case everyone will disagree with me. Sorry if I come across like I'm singling anyone out (trust me, the people I want to I simply don't communicate with at all), I'm just trying to set the stage for what I think is ~logical~

Exarion
Cooltrainer
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 10:07 am

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Exarion » Fri Jul 22, 2016 1:04 am

"Time without loads" just doesn't make sense to me. We route, run and stream using real timers. We talk using the terminology of real time. There are no significant flaws to using real time as an official measure for Pokemon speedruns, unlike in series such as Sonic.

As Entr said on Discord, our opinions on the concept of "time" probably differ on a fundamental level, so they're unlikely to change through this discussion.
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/exarionu
Pokemon Red speedrunning guide: http://pastebin.com/CkVA5yvJ

entrpntr
Pokémon Trainer
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:22 pm

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by entrpntr » Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:57 am

We need to be on the same page if we're going to have as productive a discussion as possible, so I'll give it one more stab.

As for the fundamental difference, it's not our opinions on time that differ. There are two models of time: the game's model, and the player's model. We just happen to have games where it doesn't really make sense to have categories for both, and the disagreement is over which timing method is the most sensible. That disagreement is fine, but saying that IGT "doesn't represent what is fastest" or "runs contrary to the definition of a speedrun" just because it doesn't count certain frames demonstrates an uninformed and insular viewpoint more than anything.

Moving on, RTA is a specific paradigm for measuring in real time "how long did it take to beat the game". The most useful way I can think of framing it is: (1) A player performs any desired pregame setup and sends a ".ready" signal prior to starting gameplay, (2) at any point in time after that, an official may say "Go!" and the player proceeds to gameplay in attempt to complete the game as fast as possible. (The player has no control over when this "Go!" signal is given.)

What we consider the start of gameplay is arbitrary to some degree, but at a minimum, our timing method should reflect any meaningful time spent after the hypothetical "Go!" signal (the DS clock complicates things here, and where to start timing depends on whether we view the time between setting the clock and the subsequent reset as meaningful). That is the "common sense" of RTA timing as I understand it. We can choose to discard some of the common sense if it makes people happier, but we have enlightened decision makers to figure out what they think is the best way to proceed.

Anyway, if you wanted to argue that the start of gameplay was at character control, then starting official timing there might make sense, as everything beforehand would fall under pregame setup. But for Gen 3-5 (and Gold Any%), if we define "New Game" selection as the start of gameplay, the fact that practical & significant RNG abuse exists dictates that we need to find a different convention for the official start of timing to be compatible with RTA principles.

Seeing as I don't have a stake in the Gen 3+ games, I agree that my opinion on where to draw the lines doesn't matter, so I won't comment beyond that. It's also possible that everything I spouted above is misguided, so please feel free to correct me if you think I'm full of shit.

User avatar
iMAX1UP
Bug Catcher
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 7:36 pm

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by iMAX1UP » Sat Jul 23, 2016 4:02 am

Since the previous post was mocked & ridicule perhaps this approach should be more politically correct for you that's trying to find ways to make all this changing to RTA the best thing for everyone which in reality is not. Is all about the leaderboards that you all care about. All the other reasons that you all have it all leads to the Top Times on leaderboards. So pretending to care about beginners to put S+Q for them wont really matter when you all focus on the leaderboards and therefore you think that RTA will clean up the whole mess of ties, now aks yourself this, whats wrong with ties?

For the purpose of keeping it short, I've posted what is above, but if you have time or give a shit of what i got to say heres a link of the longer version of such http://pastebin.com/EH7kupJf
Last edited by iMAX1UP on Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:49 pm, edited 5 times in total.
♥ CHECK ME OUT ♥
Image Image Image Image Image

analpikachu
Preschooler
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 5:34 pm

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by analpikachu » Sat Jul 23, 2016 6:04 pm

Hi, I have a few questions (I'm specifically talking about gen 1):

1. In the hypothetical case we switch to RTA, will we be able to save and quit?
2. Is there an especific method to transform the old IGT runs to RTA?
3. Is there an especific set of new rules to get a verified run? (In case we switch to RTA)

Probably the answers for questions 2 and 3 is no (for the moment), but when we get a specific set of new rules and a method to transform old runs into RTA, we should socialize them to the community and let them decide via voting.

Keizaron
Site Admin
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:13 pm
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Keizaron » Sun Jul 24, 2016 3:47 am

iMAX1UP wrote:All you selfish fuks that just want to say you are better than everyone because you are one second faster need a reality check. After all the effort not just myself but the rest of us put in with IGT optimizing, changing it to RTA would just be a waste of time. If you can't get a faster time that is faster IGT then can you really say it was better? Your run may be cleaner in some spots but unless your really improve that time, what is the point of saying it's better? Nothing and anyone that really wants that 1 second faster time is just desparate.
Opinions with attitudes like this will be taken with a grain of salt. If you can't make your point in a more mature way, don't bother wasting your or anybody else's time.
analpikachu wrote:Hi, I have a few questions (I'm specifically talking about gen 1):

1. In the hypothetical case we switch to RTA, will we be able to save and quit?
2. Is there an especific method to transform the old IGT runs to RTA?
3. Is there an especific set of new rules to get a verified run? (In case we switch to RTA)

Probably the answers for questions 2 and 3 is no (for the moment), but when we get a specific set of new rules and a method to transform old runs into RTA, we should socialize them to the community and let them decide via voting.
1. Yes, S+Q would be allowed.
2. The only specific ways to do it is to just re-time runs. We'd have to take the visible timers on each run, time whatever wasn't include that should be included, and add it to the time.
3. The rules should remain the same, unless I'm forgetting about something.

Exarion
Cooltrainer
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 10:07 am

Re: Revisiting Timing Methods for Pokemon Speedruns (IGT vs RTA)

Post by Exarion » Sun Jul 24, 2016 4:11 am

entrpntr wrote:As for the fundamental difference, it's not our opinions on time that differ. There are two models of time: the game's model, and the player's model. We just happen to have games where it doesn't really make sense to have categories for both, and the disagreement is over which timing method is the most sensible. That disagreement is fine, but saying that IGT "doesn't represent what is fastest" or "runs contrary to the definition of a speedrun" just because it doesn't count certain frames demonstrates an uninformed and insular viewpoint more than anything.
If I created my own video game with a timer that counted every fifth frame, would that not be a poor representation of what's fastest? What if it only counted frames in the overworld, but not in menus, boss fights, etc.? Pokemon games essentially do these things, just to a much smaller degree.

I'm having trouble understanding your point, probably because I've never viewed an in-game timer -- or any timer, for that matter -- as anything other than an emulation of RTA: hours, minutes and seconds. The idea that even a single second could be excluded just makes no sense to me. I originally thought IGT-RTA disparities existed solely because the Game Boy's frame rate wasn't quite 60, meaning IGT could be calculated with a simple conversion. Now that I've learned otherwise, I can only look at significant flaws with RTA -- of which the community has presented none -- as ample reason to preserve IGT.
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/exarionu
Pokemon Red speedrunning guide: http://pastebin.com/CkVA5yvJ

Post Reply

Return to “Policy Changes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest