Not that huge an issue, but I feel like if mods absolutely feel the need to submit runs for other people, please at least wait until there is a video available. Personally, I don't think mods should be submitting for others at all, but if it has to be done for whatever reason, then this would be a good compromise I think.
I completely agree with Rizz and have stated so publicly before.
As for Pain's topic:
-
Moderators already have to approve every run. I know I, at least, check the video for any runs I verify. I assume the other mods do the same. I do this even for longstanding runners.
-
Making videos optional is something I'd be very against doing for the following reasons:
a) There's no technical way to enforce videos by arbitrary criteria (besides constantly rejecting runs). b) There's no great place to surface a pastebin with our rules around video proof. The rules for individual categories already take up a bunch of space. c) I'm worried people could use a decision like this to try to justify allowing emulators for bad times. The SMS community, to use your example, allow emulator runs. d) How do we determine where the line is for requiring proof? Is it rank-based or time-based? If rank-based, does it change as we get more total runs? If time-based, does it change as strats improve? e) What about edge-cases? People who are a short time past the line are going to beg for exceptions, which makes the mods look like assholes when they have to reject it. f) It is NOT HARD to record a run. I whole-heartedly do NOT believe people who say they "do not have the ability to provide a video"; I assume those people have not done the appropriate research. Ez-cap costs $8. Everyone has at least one computer in their home (and if they don't, odds are they don't have a game console). Can't get an ez-cap for some reason? Potato cam. No webcam? Phone or camcorder. My first runs were done when I didn't have a job and was so broke I was eating peanut butter for every meal. People who say they can't record a video are most likely just lazy.
To Timmi's point: I try to check the "series" forum as often as possible, but there's currently no way to get email notifications for it, so don't hold your breath on all the mods checking them. :/
I know I'm not really part of this community, but I figure I should throw my 2 cents in.
imo, video proof of some kind should be required for any and all runs of any and all games, even if it's just that a few mods watched the livestream of it and the VoD doesn't exist or something along those lines, because you get people that will make up times to get into ts, you'll get people doing a bunch of other bullshit along those lines, and it just sucks in general for everyone involved, and I wholeheartedly agree that it's easy to stream/upload for proof.
As for the internet situation, noone said the stream had to be good quality. For ps2 gen games, I'm capable of streaming at 600kbps and my quality is definitely watchable, it's not amazing, but games that don't have insane speed look decent, and even games that do, still look okay.
You can stream at 300-400kbps, an upload speed that pretty much literally everyone on the internet has, and it will look more than good enough to prove a run as long as you know how to set up OBS properly. Uploading runs is a Pain647 in the ass, sure, but noone's saying you have to upload or you have to stream, whatever's easier for the person should be more than fine to prove a run to any moderator who isn't a complete moron.
If anyone has a problem with the above statement(s) regarding streaming at low quality, hit me up on twitter or twitch or whatever the fuck else and I'll teach you how to use OBS, having Australian internet that's fairly unstable, I've had to learn how to fuck with the settings to pump the best quality stream out of any given bitrate, and I can easily teach that to someone else.
Edit: I know some people are gunna say kh1.5 isn't ps2 gen, but you can downscale it, or capture it using a ps2 cord, or a whole bunch of other things to combat that, also, the game doesn't have too many fast moving textures, so you can get away with a lot.
My feelings on the matter lie with grig and Timmi.
- Upload speeds don't have to be anywhere near good to be able to stream at a low quality (see sonic and rizz, both of whom stream at under 1Mbps, I believe). 2) They don't have to stream, they can local record and upload to YouTube.
The only game I would even consider not requiring video proof for is DDD.
(Also, what I meant about "technical way" is there are no tools built-in to the site to enforce a video past a certain time.)
To state more clearly one of the points I kind of hinted to in my original reasons: Picking a cutoff time for where we accept video proof is always going to be arbitrary and, in my opinion, could be seen as disrespectful. Once we draw a line about where we consider a run "good enough" to require video proof, we're then calling all times worse than that mark "bad." I think this is disrespectful and possibly discouraging for new runners.
One might say rejecting a run for no video proof could be discouraging, but I disagree. The fact that we're applying the same rules to everybody is inherently inclusive and means nobody gets special treatment (another reason I would prefer if we didn't add times manually, but that's a topic for another time). In addition, whenever I have to reject a run for no video proof, I specifically say that I hope the runner comes back with a new time soon and to contact me if they ever need any assistance or clarification on anything.
TL/DR: Calling some runs "good enough" to require a video means you're calling everything else "bad." Making the same rules apply to everyone puts everyone on an equal playing field.
No other community I've seen rejects runs that are a good chunk away from the world record. Usually communitys have just a general idea of when to reject based on time.
Regardless, I feel like if they AT LEAST provide some splits, or even if we have this arbritrary rule that after a few personals bests, then you need start providing video proof, cause chances are that many people won't be able to record their first run at least for a few runs. I can understand rejecting for having no proof at all, but splits should be accepted.
We are also not calling other people bad, its just generally known that once you hit a certain time, then you need to start giving us more proof of the time.
I'm honestly on the fence about the whole thing but to me it boils down to it should either be all runs require video proof or none. Having a cutoff is really not a good idea (with the exception of 3d because lmao 3ds cap cards). I think Hobz nailed it when he said it's disrespectful. We're basically saying what run is considered 'good' enough to need proof and thats wrong.
Liquid, please read the entire thread carefully before you respond, because most of what you've said was already covered. I understand the rise of emotions in this situation, but please take the time to properly contribute to the discussion. I'll paraphrase the points for you.
"No other community I've seen rejects runs that are a good chunk away from the world record."
This is false. Several communities simply don't accept runs that are slower than certain times, period. IIRC, one example is the Mega Man community, but I could be misremembering.
"Usually communitys have just a general idea of when to reject based on time."
What does "general idea" mean? Who draws the lines? When do they change? Are they rank-based or time-based? What happens when leaderboard mods don't check the forums and people are questioning the times?
"Regardless, I feel like if they AT LEAST provide some splits,"
No way to enforce this on speedrun.com without making people post splits in the video link, which leads to many more rejections from people not understanding our odd submission process...
"or even if we have this arbritrary rule that after a few personals bests, then you need start providing video proof, cause chances are that many people won't be able to record their first run at least for a few runs."
As I mentioned before, I wholeheartedly disagree with the fact that people can't record their first run. Please see my post above for detailed reasons, but I recorded my first run when I was so broke that I literally ate only pistachios for a week.
"I can understand rejecting for having no proof at all, but splits should be accepted."
Splits are very easily fudged. It's been done in the past and could easily happen again (Riley_got_pb is one example).
"We are also not calling other people bad, its just generally known that once you hit a certain time, then you need to start giving us more proof of the time."
Or we just give everyone the same rules, you know, like how the world works.
I agree with what Timmi said I was just saying similar things myself. I think it's better and more orderly for everyone to be governed the same rather than treat better times/runners differently.
"... community can be more open to newcomers and not have huge gaps they have to jump over to be on our leaderboards/part of our community."
I still don't understand how an $8 capture card is considered a "huge gap." Has anybody complained about not being able to record runs and given their reasoning? I'd love to hear from them, because right now I haven't met anybody who "can't record" their run.
While it wouldn't be the greatest but seeing as we accept it for DDD I was wondering if a screenshot of the IGT would solve the issue of proof? I know in Re:Coded / Days saving and loading takes up to 20 seconds each time so a segmented run is always going to be slower than an RTA and I believe Ghostwheel said something similar about KH2 having a time penalty each time he saved and loaded when he was doing his 100% standard run.
Maybe add that with a picture of your splits to confirm? as it'd be very weird if someone had a 15 minute roxas section for instance (Saying this I know I'm the worst given I have 1 second splits in my Re:Coded WR because I can't be bothered to bind skip split).
Obviously i'm all for video proof for any top 20 run. At that point there really isn't a reason you can't just local record and upload. Hell I used to stream using a $3 webcam because DS cap cards suck to get.
We've discussed this for years in the SRL community when it came to Leaderboards. There we're many questions of "What time should be required to be on a LB" or "Require Videos?"
The ultimate conclusion was SRL leaderboards died, lol.
However, in my opinion, it doesn't do the community any good to have half your runs not include video proof. You're going down a slippery slope if you start allowing it for some and not everyone. Ultimately there WOULD be bias if it's an established community member compared to a new person coming along and saying "Yo I've got a PB one minute above your arbitrary cut off line". No matter where you set a line, speedrunning and it's games and routes are changing every day. So you would move this arbitrary line that, whether you think you're insulting other runner's times or not, there would be an inevitable "I put time into this run, and this person with no name came along and is ranked above me". Part of being part of a leaderboard community more then a speed running community is getting to climb those ranks. Would you say the first run is fine but require video proof the 2nd run? Or once you hit the cap. At that point, you are inspiring them to get a capture card to record your runs and not only submit your time, but submit your own unique strategies which is an ever bigger contribution to the community. If we require it up front, imagine the inspiration it would cause for everyone to get that capture card.
Speedrunning to be a more successful hobby imo should require some level of organization, not a messy leaderboard, with a messy ruleset that allows certain perks for some runners and not for others. Speedrunning, like any hobby usually requires some level of financial investment, which includes a game, console, controller, T.V., computer and a capture card, which you can obtain for the same price and cheaper then most of the other requirements above. Don't just be a time or a number, invest a LITTLE more and have video evidence of the many hours you sunk into the game of your choice. I think this is better for everyone involved, new runners, current runners and viewers of the LB's who can give a shit less about my 2:58 without a video and would just watch a time with a video even if it was worse then mine to find strats.
For the record, ALL of my times would be removed with my current stance, and as I said at AGDQ many times:
"This is Fine"
My mind was always 50/50 on this and honestly i'm chill either way it goes.
I understand that a criteria can cause unpleasant debates and potential drama, but i think its more motivating for a runner to put the pride, time and money into a hobby almost like any sport really. The only honest bit that threw me off about this (I probably missed a discussion on it) but coming to a decision on videos being a must, to me it just kinda happened, not saying i'm against the idea i just wasn't aware we were fully doing that and was up and down on rejecting runs since I know we use to allow runs in the past without proof. But now as a community were discussing our views it makes the decision process a lot more realistic to see whats better for everyone.
The only question I have to ask is will a run be rejected if say twitch servers go down and you miss lets say 40 minutes of your run? and also to back up this question if you have atrocious internet from AU/NZ and don't really have the capabilities of uploading your run to youtube due to internet speed/data? or would you request the person to restream the chunk that went missing?
Besides that I think I prefer the idea of having continuity with having video proof being allowed besides the handhelds I guess since there a bit quirky and Draz can easily check how realistic a run is with IGT due to it being mostly accurate. :~)
"The only honest bit that threw me off [...] it just kinda happened..."
When the SRcom leaderboards were created initially they were set up requiring video proof, so it did just kind of "happen." However, we did have very weird rules on the gdoc on "video proof is required but occasionally splits can be accepted," a rule that never defined the use of "occasionally" and was rarely enforced anyways. We even explicitly had a rule for requiring video proof for WRs which was also not well-enforced (see BB's 2.5 Beginner WR where Twitch deleted the VOD).
"The only question I have to ask is will a run be rejected if say twitch servers go down and you miss lets say 40 minutes of your run?"
IMO, not if it was originally livestreamed and has audio. Simply link all the parts, and as long as the majority of the run has video and both the starting and ending splits are included, there shouldn't be any issues. Now if it were a YouTube video of a non-streamed run, then you should definitely have the whole thing.
"If you have atrocious internet from AU/NZ and don't really have the capabilities of uploading your run to youtube due to internet speed/data?"
This point is so iffy to me just because we have people like Rizz and Sonic who stream on very poor connections all the time, but most Internet Service Providers don't put a hard limit on your upload data anyways, only download. This would be more easily handled if we had an actual case of this, but so far I've yet to hear from anyone who legitimately has a reason they haven't been able to record a run.
"I think I prefer the idea of having continuity with having video proof being allowed besides the handhelds"
I would limit this to only 3DS personally, since emulator is allowed for GBA and DS runs and recording from a PSP is quite simple from what I understand.
Thanks for contributing to the discussion!
GBA CoM can also be streamed from a gamecube rather cheaply as well so its not really a handheld (Gamecube load times are actually faster than a DS lite). Also the fact IGT can't be used for CoM due to the soft resets for moogle trips and splits are pointless for a whole bunch of different reasons.
For those reasons alone I'd say video proof should be required for CoM (Twitch removed my highlights for my CoM runs so I'd say if there was video proof at some point that it should be allowed similar to BB's 2.5 record that way if Twitch implodes and we all lose our highlights we can at least have times on the leaderboards )
