The contents of that policy at the time were awful. For the most part it just shifted an executive decision that could be made by people with some history and first-hand context, to the site moderators who for the most part had a lesser grasp on each specific case outside of what could be said by both parties after the fact. It was reverted because of this reason. Site mods on that particular case were overstepping their bounds and the community backlashed against it. It wasn't the right approach at all.

As a site mod at the time of that rough policy, though I can't remember my exact standing on it as it has been several years and really all logs of the conversations and such have been completely lost now; some reasoning behind that was that the site did have a problem with some game moderation though. Not all, and no point speaking specifically about the situation you're in right now, but it was pretty clear at that time the site had some serious issues with moderation in the more obscure, smaller communities because there were was zero consideration put into exactly who could be a moderator at all. I can't speak to how the site is currently obviously.

So you would, for instance, run into many situations where someone would attain moderator and then just mass add all their close friends and essentially mob moderation for a game. This was, in essence, the intended communities a policy such as that was supposed to combat, but the way it was presented initially was downright awful and the response was so awful the idea was completely scrapped altogether.

No one here has full context to your situation though, so it's outright pointless for anyone here to give their side on your specific situation.

1. Separating Console and PC is pretty standard leaderboard affair. It doesn't matter what Hades does, this isn't Hades.

The purpose of a leaderboard's function is to allow tracking of competitive categories. Having everything be in singular category format doesn't fit that purpose as PC can utilise performance features, like 120fps, which massively affects the speed of this run, which console cannot access. PC and Console versions cannot be competitive because of that.

If there is further need to divide consoles down the lines then it will be done, but right now there is no need.

2. Hard is the highest selectable difficulty for a NEW GAME playthrough. The difficulty above that is only selectable for a NG+ playthrough.

The community wanted the category to be Hard only, as it is also a category that bans NG+ files, so it is Hard only. Nothing arbitary about it, as it is the game itself that prohibits non-NG+ files from accessing the difficulty above it.

3. This one is just weird, because they are rulings for framerate, so... will be in the rules. Makes no sense to have them anywhere else.

4. The current category is a NEW GAME category, so obviously it doesn't permit usage of NG+ saves. If NG+ was created then it would be separate.

The bottom two bullet-points are you seemingly misunderstanding that categories are decided by the community and not by anything else.

The community that manages this game, it being effectively a Megaten (Megami Tensei/Persona) game in spirit, manages it to be very close to what a Megaten game leaderboard is managed as. These typically are best ending, hardest difficulty (within reason, as said, NG+ difficulties don't count) is the primary category because that is what is preferred. Really is as simple as that. The runners decided that the additional quests and adjustment of the ending, even if it is slight, were enough to warrant those being constituted as the "True Ending". What the rest of the internet's stance on the endings is (aka, not this speedrun community) is pretty much irrelevant to this.

---------------------------------------- edit on may 9th 2025

To address the edited points, though really this will be the last mention of this;

Firstly, it is strange you mention the rules were implemented as they are because "someone else did it" and "tradition", yet you sit there telling us to look at other games such as Hades and Undertale for how our categories and rules should be laid out. Pretty ironic.

To address your first point, there really is no argument to be made. The way they are laid out right now is objectively how they should be laid out. Both fairly, and for competition. Console and PC aren't competitive with each other, nor can they be. Yes, PC is the fastest platform and it's already been examined to be so. You speak as if runners and moderators haven't looked at the game to properly determine this. We have. It also leads back into your first point about the rules being a "mix of subjective", yet you sit here offering your subjective and rather uninformed opinion I must say about what we should do here. Filters are objectively worse because it's a less practical system than sub-categories, and always has been. Takes 8 clicks to get every platform filtered whilst excluding PC; takes me 2 with a sub-category system. Pretty self-explanatory why a sub-category in this case is the far better option. The rest of your opinion on it just simply reeks of PC elitism, and I would like to point to the many other games on speedrun.com, such as Elden Ring, Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid 2/3 that utilise sub-categories in the exact same way this board currently does. See, I can point at other game examples, too.

Finally, your lasting point for #1 was already addressed in my first post.

If there is further need to divide consoles down the line then it will be done, but right now there is no need.

Your other points appear to just be an attempt at mindless ragebait so infact won't even be addressed at all. You ask why anyone else is antagonistic, whilst responding in a pretty immature and all around pretty antagonistic manner youself. From the very beginning your post was uninformed, such as on the subject of difficulty or supposed "blanket bans", yet you want to try dictate how this leaderboard should be managed? No.

Nothing further will be added on this.

How are they gonna fit all of speedrun.com in a court room. 2.3 million registered users.

That said, I'm fairly sure you got banned because you threatened a prior admin. You didn't get banned for 8 years for cheating.

The text says highlights are being purged down to a 100 hr limit per user. This quote isn't relevant to this. @Gamebuster1990

What this text means is that if you are currently hitting the 100hr cap, your broadcasts won't automatically delete as they are excluded from this limit. Right now you are unable to make new highlights if you are currently above this cap.

Also there's zero incentive for speedrun.com to do this, without some monetary barrier for watching the speedruns. Which, is sort of counterproductive to the usage of the site.

Additionally, hopefully speedrun.com would add a full blown site announcement closer to the date of the highlight purge, because a lot of runs are about to disappear forever, and it shouldn't wholly be down to leaderboards mods to track down sources for each submission. Though, since a lot of submissions are likely about to be edited, some update to the hub with a distinction between new submission and edited prior verified submission would make this process a ton smoother.

Plans for all categories thus far are going to have be purely ending based, as these are the most solid foundations for categories in these games.

So things like defeating Makoto are gonna have to be more of a personal thing, as it doesn't make sense to separate entirely based on such a small difference.

Generally though, nothing is going to be accepted period unless there's a run presented, but don't take that as a guaranteed anything would be added for reasons prior stated.

The link to the discord will be under the title on here. Isn't expired as I just tested.

The extra dialogue adds onto the ending, making it more complete. Thus, this was deemed as the 'true ending' definition for this game.

I am misunderstanding what you mean. If you wish to submit a lunatic run can do so here: https://www.speedrun.com/p3r/runs/new?h=true-end-merciless-pc

For clarification Merciless = Lunatic.

Out of Bounds in Royal saves a rather low amount of time in that effectively a "glitchless" category would be almost the same as a "glitched" run of this. The route doesn't change really at all between the two runs it's just you skip over certain fights. On PS4/PC the out of bounds saves roughly 15-17 minutes, depending on platform due to the speed at which dialogue/loads pass between those platforms, with PC saving less than PS4 due to this.

On Remaster console however, due to the 60fps preventing several OOB, it comes out to save approximately 5 minutes or so.

I'd say it's a coupling of lack of demand and just sort of silly to separate for these reasons alone. In my opinion with this game it's far too low a difference to make a completely separate category, especially when on Remaster Console for instance the difference would be skipping over 3 very fast and easy fights only.

PAL is pointless adding because it wouldn't be competitive.

First off, it isn't faster, as implied in an earlier post of yours. It's far slower. Having a number at the end of your run be lower because of a programming flaw doesn't make your run faster.

As Symm said, these games have far too many categories as is. Every single game in this series does. That's part of the reason they've stagnated over the years. As someone who used to run this series a lot and has spent a lot of time out of it and in other communities, some of which have the exact opposite approach when it comes to categories, the last thing that is needed is further segregation into what would be a completely pointless category. PAL would never be active, nor would anyone run it past a few runs simply because it's empty and a bunch of free world records and higher place times. Then it would die out because the reality is, it's the least pleasant way of running the game, so why wouldn't it? Telling mods things like "it might get more people running the game again" doesn't mean anything, because the PC version is objectively the most accessible version of this game, no one is sitting here being like "I'd really love to run RE2 but the PAL PS1 console version just ain't on there, oh well, guess I'm out of luck."

What would the harm be in having a separate leaderboard?

• Segregates competition further. Not only on console, but on emulator. If it's not permitted on emulator, could quite easily be having this exact same conversation one year from now about why PAL isn't allowed on emulator.

• Takes attention away from people's hard earned runs by falsely presenting certain runs as faster due to a flawed IGT calculation when they are not. I mean, you yourself implied it was faster, meaning it's a easily misunderstood issue.

• Segregates every version where PAL exists into two world records, when that shouldn't be the case. Cannot have PAL and NTSC combined whilst using IGT, so they would have to be separate. There shouldn't be two listed WRs per version simply because of a flawed IGT calculation.

In the end, very few would care about PAL or run it. Whether you want to think there are loads of people sat in the woodwork waiting to run PAL and boost RE2's activity, there aren't. Any activity would be shortlived whilst everyone scrambles to attain free world records from the... like 12 empty categories that would be presented with this change. That's your explanation.

Copying feedback from the other thread:

"It works for me but personally, I do think you should be able to disable visual elements at this point.

Like don't get me wrong, but there's a reason most other sites did away with animated elements, or has a lot of them reduced to a 'hover'. Having them set to 'hover' should absolutely be a choice going forward in my eyes, for names, the rotating colour element, .gif badges and .gif pfps."

Aside from that, I guess the main thing that has to be asked is: if the point of it is to just drag a bunch of statistics from the profile page to a new popup, what exactly is the point of the popup that couldn't just be achieved by going directly to their profile? Like I feel whenever a new feature is brought in, this sort of thing has to be asked, otherwise it's just overdesign. Is it to help reduce overall number of page loads in general or?

If it's from the perspective of how twitter has it, I get it more but in that case I think it needs to be closer to how they have it. A hover that can then be fully moved over and interacted with, whereas a click on their name regardless takes you to their profile fully (which is superior to how discord does it IMO, if you don't want to interact with the popup you don't have to, if you want to it's there). As on twitter it doesn't make a task that was a certain length then take very very slightly longer, whereas with the way you have it (unless you can click their pfp which takes you to the profile) it's simply lengthening how long it takes you to get to their page right now.

It works for me but personally, I do think you should be able to disable visual elements at this point.

Like don't get me wrong, but there's a reason most other sites did away with animated elements, or has a lot of them reduced to a 'hover'. Having them set to 'hover' should absolutely be a choice going forward in my eyes, for names, the rotating colour element, .gif badges and .gif pfps.

Similar thing seems to be happening when swapping sub categories on boards also. When you click a different tab now the page entirely reloads, which I'm sure it wasn't doing the other day.

So like, go here: https://www.speedrun.com/octopath2 and click between the 120fps and 60fps sub category tabs. Doesn't appear to do it with the main categories only sub categories.

A clear way to represent how "good" a run is, is by utilizing human theory TAS times, which are times that utilize RTA viable strats executed flawlessly. Or by comparing to a segmented run that uses RTA strats.

Any kind of statistic that utilizes pure player count is worthless, because when it comes down to it the vast majority of players in every game do not ever come close to reaching high level play in said game. It is usually only achieved by a small subset of players.

That all said, the main flaw I could see with this:

1st (5m 2s 067ms from best possible time)

3rd (1s 067ms from best possible time)

10th (067ms from best possible time)

Is that routes over time adapt and change as the time lowers and people start looking for riskier ways to save time. These supposed times would have to remove safety strategies, which would make the comparison in general kind of misleading. And it kind of means mods also have to know the actual best possible time to begin with, when mods aren't always the ones most adept at their game and are mainly good verifiers / organizers.

Really, the total amount of players within a game can be redundant.

The effect more players sometimes creates is a tendency for the best times to be ground down further due to the record being passed back and forth a lot over time. However, it isn't as if a game with a small amount of players can't have a time that was ground down, as well. This system would pretty much imply any game with a lesser playerbase has a somehow worse set of top times than a game with a larger player count, when that simply isn't always the case.

The reality is, even if you look at a game that is immensively popular, like Super Mario 64, the majority of the people within that game aren't having an effect on whether or not the top times are any better or any worse, because only the top like 20 or so are even really pushing those times down to begin with.

I just kind of hate this idea that because your game has far less players it automatically creates this idea your times are worse, when the whole cause behind your time being very good is the desire for it to be the best it can be, and not simply because your record was beaten and you want it back. That can be a leading factor, but it's not the only leading factor. It's not really the sites place to be implying stuff like this, and if it's not claimed to be the purpose... what is the purpose, then? Just comes off as tacky IMO.

They aren't permitted in the current run if you mean pausing the timer, as runs are RTA. Breaks are fine so long as the timer continues to tick, though.

Discord is here: https://discord.gg/DArA2nN , far easier to communicate on there. SRC forums are still kinda bad.

AS @shovelclaws put it, it's essentially just uncompensated journalism. Why bother?

It seems to very much be about "popularity", but stuff that is popular doesn't really require that much more attention, it's the opposite that does.

The way it's phrased, and on top of that encouraging people to write stuff that they'll more than likely only be credited for in a single line kinda... rubs me the wrong way.

Sounds like Quiet Dude couldn't live the quiet life.

For pings surrounding the recent spamming, maybe an option so you can only be pinged in followed games forums or ran games? I feel like being able to be pinged in 'talk' is going to lead to a lot of misuse.