You call any% runs where you don't have percentage at all, just because it's used to tell the type of game completion. Here I put % just to highlight each category tells exactly the difference against all the rest, and all of them refer to game completion. I'd like to hear your arguments against my very thoughts.
I don't think these are types of game completion. A game is either completed or not, and runs that don't complete the game simply aren't accepted. Rather, there are two types of runs: those without restriction (also known as "any%") and those that have a restriction. Restrictions are self-imposed limits that make the run slower but more entertaining, such as "don't use the warp zone", or "no wall zipping", or "take only the most needed items" (also known as "low%"); unrestricted runs are limitless.
The key is that this classification is unambiguous and objective; e.g. it is obvious, given some familiarity with the game, whether or not a particular run uses a warp zone. This means that branches are clear, and it's inarguable whether a run fits into a branch or not. We accept all unrestricted runs, in the vault. We accept restriction-based runs if consensus agrees that they're entertaining, in moon and star tier.
On the other hand, whether a run is a "legitimate" completion or whether it's "non-glitched" leaves lots of room for argument. What exactly do those words mean? Is skipping most of the game illegitimate, and if so, wouldn't that disqualify a standard SMB warp run? Is an out-of-bounds glitch allowed in a non-glitched run, and should it distinguish between Megaman's wall zipping and Sonic's x-coord underrun? Is skipping the final boss illegitimate, and if so, what about causing his hit points to wrap to negative at the beginning of the fight? Ultimately these terms are just not precise enough.
The bottom line is that we do like runs that show off most of the game. But such runs need a better reason for existing than "shows some levels but not others", or "uses some glitches but not others". And this works out well in practice; if the purpose of a run is not just speed, then the runner needs to explain what restrictions he's working under and why. Because TAS'ing is all about precision; if we can play a game with superhuman precision, then surely we can have precise branch names as well.
Because TAS'ing is all about precision; if we can play a game with superhuman precision, then surely we can have precise branch names as well.
The thing is, by a similar analogy, that for many people TASes should be elegant too, so we should come up with elegant AND precise names. Sometimes a compromise must be reached: personally I think that for Super Mario World "11 exits" is a perfect name for the branch.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Sorry, but saying, any%, low% and 100% are not referring to type of game completion is absurd.
Calling unambiguous and objective the system where you need to change the branch of what was previously any% (that then became slower than glitched) to "avoids whatever glitch is used to glitch the game into completion state in the glitched branch", adjusting the branch each time the game is broken differently - that is absurd.
Mentioning the avoided game-breaking glitch in "what previously was any%" and not mentioning it in all the rest branches (though it is avoided there too) - that is absurd.
All that absurd is caused by a will to HIGHLIGHT the fastest branch. Also it is caused by forcing the categorization to perfectly match the tier system. It was that, Vault was added to allow boring game records to be published. Now you are turning it that way like only Vault matters by default, all the rest is dependent on it. All the rest needs to mention what restriction it uses over the Vaulted run.
Categories/branches are created when a good run presents unique content over the other branches. Branch names are made to tell people what are they looking at. Branch names should be clear, short and descriptive. As was said, "no glitch A, no trick B, also warpless, no OOB" in one branch sounds like shit. But even that is tolerable when it describes WHAT MAKES IT UNIQUE (like "glitchless low%, Speedbooster").
Now all the branches need to excuse and tell how do they all differ from a single fastest branch.
"no X-Ray glitch"
"no X-Ray glitch, 14%, Speedbooster"
"no X-Ray glitch, 14%"
"no X-Ray glitch, lowest ingame timer"
"no X-Ray glitch, 100%"
"no X-Ray glitch, Reverse Boss Order"
And finally the branch the DOES use the X-Ray glitch NEVER TELLS that!
What the fuck is this shit?! What is it done for? I fail to see how exactly all that crap is helpful to anyone.
All the Moons branches are now unique by using "no X-Ray glitch"?! They are unique each by itself. Please let them have the names they can be recognized for.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
There's no need to be rude about it.
I'm not sure why you call this the "new system" as if it was some shocking change. It's not a new system; it is in fact the old system, how runs were traditionally named on this site. What is actually new is labeling the fastest run as "glitched" and the prettiest run as "any%"; this was tried for a small number of games, but it didn't work out well, so we deprecated it and went back to the old system (i.e. that "any%" means fastest).
It's worth mentioning that Super Metroid is really not the standard situation here, because no other game on the site has so many published branches. Also, the branch names in your post are neither the ones currently in use, nor have I seen anyone argue for those, so I don't think you need to worry about those becoming the norm.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
And not a single idea I gave is disproved. Neither is any question answered. Great.
Also, where did you get the term "restriction" that suddenly is the key to naming Moons runs? You still don't see how you're making Moons runs serve around Vault?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
The thing is, by a similar analogy, that for many people TASes should be elegant too, so we should come up with elegant AND precise names. Sometimes a compromise must be reached: personally I think that for Super Mario World "11 exits" is a perfect name for the branch.
I agree. It definitely sounds better than the example names feos mentioned.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Radiant wrote:
There has never been such a thing as "glitched%" or "pacifist%"; those terms don't make sense to me.
feos TheGreekBrit: can you tell where did you get the term "glitched%" from?
TheGreekBrit feos: It's just what people call it
feos where?
TheGreekBrit SMW peeps
TheGreekBrit YI peets
TheGreekBrit peeps
TheGreekBrit It's just
TheGreekBrit de facto there
feos I mean, with % after glitched
TheGreekBrit It'll never be any% to me
TheGreekBrit If it's glitched then it's glitched%
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
He meant that glitched% and pacifist% have never been used on this site. The former fits into the site's definition of any% (and is considered legitimate unless it doesn't reach the real ending) and the latter has always had the branch name "pacifist" here.
Also, low% is only a valid category for a game when getting the lowest percent completion is slower than finishing as fast as possible (any%).
