Essentially buying and using SSD will make it a lot easier for the person to obtain World Record. However for the people who don't want to hand over their money to pay2wr we need to know whether or not to ban or allow SSDs. Here is a strawpoll to vote on it - http://www.strawpoll.me/12086922
Will go ahead and say this, the outcome of this strawpoll will not be a definitive answer as to if SSD will be allowed or not. There are many things that need to be timed first, and a ruling will not be made until we have all the information we can get. Please be patient as this could take some time to figure out. We will do our best to have an answer for you all as soon as possible.
My personal opinion is to make it something in the console category. Like how BBSFMHD distinguishes Original, Slim, and Super Slim PS3s. Installing an SSD is something Sony supports with the PS4, so it makes sense that it would be allowed, but to keep competition up, make it a separate selection thing.
All this, of course, assuming SSD is faster by an insurmountable amount.
This has nothing to do with PS4 vs PS4 Pro because any differences between those in terms of loading is most likely much smaller than SSD vs HDD.
One step at a time.
i alredy posted my opinion on the discord yesterday, but i guess i can post it here again. didn't run KH in a long time, but really interested in KH0.2.
speedrunning should be as accessible as possible. if you buy a PS4 it will always have an HDD. if you buy an SSD and mod your PS4 that's extra money you spend.
even though the SSD mod is officially allowed by sony, it's still a mod.
banning a certain type of hard drive seems arbitrary, but i think it's fair.
Its a modification sure, but the Sony website has a download directory for PS4 System Software so you can reinstall the software onto other Hardrives. I think if Sony has gone to the effort of promoting it and designing the console for simplistic hardrive swaps it should be considered, I think a solution for how leaderboards would be done will be discussed when decided upon and nothing can be taken into much deeper discussion until we research more on SSD & HDD for 2.8 and future titles
Would using in-game time be a good idea? It doesn't include the loads, so it would remove the need to separate SSDs from HDDs.
Depends on the game. If the game shows the in game time at the end screen (ie. BBS) then it could be viable. But for games like KH1 where it doesn't, the last reference of in game time is the final save point.
So, at the end of the day, we still need to have this discussion because when 1.5+2.5 comes out IGT won't be viable. Plus if we did do that, we'd have to change the rules for other games to keep with the consistency and editing the runs to IGT can be near impossible if the VOD doesn't show the end screen with the time.
Would like to start out by saying i dont care which decision is made there is pro and cons for both sides.
In theory SSD should be allowed since like most people said sony allows it and stuff, but that being said it is basically pay to win unless they are separated into different catagorys so people who have SSD compete with others who have SSD.
Im in the middle at the moment, while SSD will make it faster that automatically doesnt mean it SHOULD be allowed, not having it allowed makes it fair for everyone, and coming from a game (BBS) where i was tired of having different loads due to different systems this would make it fair and no one would have to spend an extra (at min) around 60 USD just to compete. That being said if it is allowed it should be its own catagory with other SSD runs.
Im more concerned about PS4 vs PS4 Pro but like timmi said thats not the main point of this thread and it hasnt been tested atm how much of a time difference they are.
I think SSD should not be banned. Haven't been around in a while, might come back to running when new games drop idk either way doesn't matter. Speedrunning is a hobby, most hobbies require some form of money to be spent for the highest level of competition. If you don't want to be competitive then you don't need an SSD, but for the people that want to go the extra mile shouldn't be told they aren't allowed to. With all the different consoles/versions of games people are willing to buy then an SSD shouldn't be a problem for someone whose that dedicated to speedrunning. I clearly remember people upgrading ps3 models from slim to super slim to get better times in BBS but now a $40 SSD is too much? As for the argument of making the hobby accessible, the community already made a decision to require video proof to get on the leaderboards which already makes the hobby WAY less accessible. Plus its not like we're saying "you don't have an SSD you can't run the game". You are free to still run whatever games you like you will just have to suffer a little bit longer load times. The entire point of this hobby is to go fast, I don't understand telling someone to go slower because its not fair to everyone. Lots of things in life are not fair ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I’m going to preface this by saying that I know this is going to come off as condescending. If it sounds like I’m talking down to you, my apologies but I’m writing this in a hurry.
Alright, here we go.
SSDs (and SSHDs) should not be banned. To be clear, I’m not speaking purely for 0.2 but for every current and upcoming PS4 Kingdom Hearts game. Buying different (but accepted) hardware/software has been an accepted action for this community in the past. Want the fastest PS3 time? Super Slim. Fastest PSP time? 3000 series. Fastest 2FM HD time? Japanese version. Now yes, some of these are different categories but none of them were banned. The one major exception being a backwards compatible PS3 for KH2 because of its limited availability, and, last I checked, SSDs aren’t exactly hard to find. So based on past rulings alone, it sets a pretty clear precedent.
However, I understand precedent alone isn’t everything. So let’s look at the big picture – what action has the biggest pros and cons for the majority of the player base, whether it’s someone already running or planning to run a PS4 game, or someone who doesn’t even know about the series yet? If you limit the options, you limit the player base, simple as that. If we only allow HDD then what happens when someone, who has had an SSD in their PS4 since 2014, wants to join in on the fun? Time to go buy a new HDD for their PS4. But if HDD, SSHD, and SSDs alike are all allowed then absolutely anyone, no matter the console or drive, can participate in running these games. So as far as I can see, if the major focus is on the idea of just participating in the community and running these games, not banning is the better choice.
But what if you want to be competitive? Well, if you care about being competitive in a hobby then you better be ready to pay for it. Someone who is interested in advancing in photography buys a better camera. Someone who enjoys cooking buys better utensils. You want the best time in a video game? You buy the best hardware. Paying money for the best results is something you do in a hobby. If you don’t want to spend money, you stay at your current level. And let’s be honest here, an SSD is far from the most expensive hardware for this hobby. A majority of capture cards, let alone consoles themselves, have much higher costs than a simple SSD. And for those of you who don’t follow prices (and I’m going to assume it’s a decent number based off my personal experience with people), here’s a 250GB SATA 3 SSD on Newegg for $65. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA65C52H2175 This is roughly the same cost as importing the JP version of KH2.5 and easily accommodates someone wishing to use an SSD. But what if you want a drive more than 250GB? Well first, 250GB is more than enough space for a KH game so it’s for other reasons and shouldn’t be a factor. But, I’ll humor it. Here’s a 500GB SSHD http://a.co/jePptEi It’s the same size as the original stock PS4 hard drive and still costs under $50. And yes, an SSHD is slower than an SSD, albeit faster than the stock hard drive, but you get what you pay for.
This community hasn’t been afraid of allowing different hardware in the past, even when it was more expensive, there’s no reason for it to end now.
Edit: For clarity's sake, I've updated my post to reflect the size requirement for an SSD (120GB -> 250GB courtesy of Sly.)
TLDR: Banning SSDs has no positive impact for people who just want to participate for enjoyment. If you care about a hobby enough to be competitive, you should be ready to invest in it.
Before I say anything let me just say my goal isn't to offend anyone, so I am sorry if you do get offended by any of this.
I think what I said was heavily misunderstood above, due to various responses saying that "ssd isn't really that expensive compared to other things we require" etc... My problem isn't with the price, it is with fairness. I will directly address a few things to make myself clear. (Once again, since I will be quoting people, nothing personal/no offensive purpose)
"Paying money for the best results is something you do in a hobby." If I am a soccer player and I want to improve I won't buy better shoes, or a better ball. I'll do more fitness exercises and more practice. Simply bringing up examples of other things such as sports and other competitive cases I don't think properly fits here as speedrunning is unique in terms of how it functions. Hundreds of examples could be brought in to support either side and that's why i don't think comparing this topic to other cases really works out.
"I clearly remember people upgrading ps3 models from slim to super slim to get better times in BBS." I don't think BBS is the proper way to discuss this as load times on BBS were a bit weird on how they worked. The thing with ssd is you basically have a flat better time.
"If you limit the options, you limit the player base, simple as that." Video proof required. Even for an 8 hour Terra standard run. I think if we want to focus on not limiting the player-base not banning ssd is not what we should be looking at.
To conclude I personally don't care if it is banned or not as I have no problem buying one, but in my eyes, it doesn't seem fair. The least that could be done to please both sides (by the way at the time of writing this the strawpoll is exactly 50:50) is maybe make separate categories. I think since there is a large amount of people who want to ban it and not ban it, maybe this type of compromise would be best. Just putting this out there as a suggestion.
You need a min 240GB SSD btw, you cant use a 120GB SSD because the min amount the ps4 needs to accept a hard drive is 160 GB so you need a 240 because thats over the requirement , just mentioning it so people dont go and buy a 120 only to find out it doesnt work. Even if im wrong the OS takes up about 98GB (not including new updates) that leaves you about 20gb to install a game which the requirement for KH is 27.6GB according to the PSN store.
SSD's should be allowed, BUT they should be put in a completely separate leaderboard (potentially Misc. Categories) and we should have a disclaimer saying that HDD categories are the "main category." This would satisfy everyone who wants to be competitive or casual with any KH PS4 speedruns, and I'll explain why.
Before I get into the argument, I just want to point out how I stand when it comes to leaderboards and speedrunning.
I believe the #1 reason people are attracted to speedrunning a game and putting runs on the leaderboards is competition. You can argue with me about this, but that's just how I feel. Competition between runners leads to new strats and new routes being found, new breakthroughs, new runners popping up out of nowhere. Data Org I think is a great example. In the past 6 months or so when top runners were consistently active, new strats were being found constantly, runners were PB'ing on an almost weekly basis, and new runners started popping up out of nowhere, and it's been that way as long as I can remember with games like KH2, 1.5, KH2FM, BBSFM HD, and so on. I 100% acknowledge people mostly doing runs just for fun, but healthy competition between runners I feel is the biggest reason people get involved in speedrunning in general.
I've seen a lot of people making comparisons saying "HDD vs SSD is just like Super Slim PS3 vs Slim PS3" and other similar lines of thinking. SSD's are actually entirely different, because they are an ACCESSORY to the PS4, whereas Super Slims and Slims are ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CONSOLES.
Whether or not your PS4 has an SSD or not, EVERYONE has access to an HDD, the bare minimum requirement to run games on a PS4. That's the key difference here. Everyone who owns a PS4 has access to the HDD, meaning (hopefully) everyone already has a way to have directly comparable times. That's something that PS3's don't have. If you have a Super Slim PS3, you're PS3 just inherently runs faster than a Slim, and to have comparable times you'd have to buy a completely new console.
So in my mind, the argument for SSD's is really just "we should use SSD's because we're speedrunners and we should try to go as fast as possible" and I feel like that's a really weak argument. We should try to go as fast as possible within reason. If there is a fast option that lets as many people as possible have comparable times and it's convenient for everyone, including runners with SSD's, then in my mind, the option that includes as many people as possible, aka HDD's, should be the go-to option to generate as much healthy competition as possible.
Let's assume that SSD's and HDD's are on separate leaderboards and HDD's are the "main" category. The only thing runners with an SSD would have to do to do an HDD run is pop out their SSD from their console (which I've heard from others is relatively easy to do) and ta-da, they can do an HDD run. In this situation, everyone can be as competitive or casual about their runs as possible without having to do anything extra.
Now let's assume that SSD's and HDD's are both on the same leaderboard and naturally people who want the best times will want to use an SSD. In this situation, to be competitive you have to pay a price.
I'm not saying I'm opposed to having to pay extra to be competitive in my hobby, but this situation with SSD's is completely different than all the others we've dealt with, and I don't think people have taken that into enough consideration.
This is my opinion on SSD's. We have backwards compatible PS3 as a separate category on the leaderboards because those PS3's are too expensive and rare for most people to buy. The only difference in the SSD vs HDD situation is that SSD's are cheaper than a whole new console and easier to find. However, if we haven't involved money for being competitive, I don't think we should start now. I started speedrunning with a webcam pointed at my TV, you don't need to spend money on a capture card. PS3 fat vs PS3 super slim is a different situation than SSD vs HDD. SSD is something you add on to the console to make the loads faster. Super Slim is an entirely other console. SSD's aren't required for the PS4. Something else to point out, if we allow adding SSD to the console to make loads better, why don't we allow something like a turbo controller? Both involve paying money to gain an advantage. In my opinion SSD's shouldn't be allowed, i don't see how anyone could be mad if SSD was its own category under miscellaneous. (ihavenomoneysopleasedontallowthem)
I agree entirely with BB. Keeping SSD's in a separate category will keep the competition fair and allow new runners & runners who can't afford an SSD to have comparable times to those who do have access to an SSD. It only makes sense to keep everyone on a level playing field.
I don't agree with Adam's opinion of "if you care about being competitive in a hobby then you better be ready to pay for it". Sure, if you're an athlete, you want the best equipment to help you do your best. But in my eyes, paying for better equipment for speedrunning is more along the lines of getting a better monitor. Someone with a shitty monitor can still play just as well. Using an SSD against people using HDD's in the same category would be more like professional athletes playing against high schoolers. It's a clear uneven playing ground. There are physical disadvantages to the high school team that put them at a clear disadvantage. If they're good at the game, they can still put up a fight, but even then, they cannot play at the same level as the professional athletes no matter how well they play that day. Even if the high schoolers are using better equipment, there's clear physical disadvantage regardless. Using an SSD is kinda like that. You can be the best runner and get a would-be world record, but still not get world record due to someone in the top spot being an SSD user. If an SSD user and an HDD user have the exact same run, the SSD user will always be in the lead anyway.
The other argument connected to this is that all PS3 versions are in the same category despite time differences. The issue I see with this comparison is that it's a slightly different situation. A super slim is still a stock PS3. Someone who buys a super slim PS3 hasn't modified their console to go faster. It's just a matter of circumstance. However, someone who uses an SSD has done so to purposely get an advantage. Someone with a super slim console can't control going faster. However, everyone who buys a PS4 has the same HDD by default. If you bought an SSD for your PS4 years ago and got rid of the original HDD, I say, oh well. The people who have SSD's in their PS4's are still a large minority compared to those who still have their original hard drives. Other people shouldn't need to upgrade if you're not willing to downgrade. Getting an HDD is far cheaper than getting an SDD anyway. And if you're not willing to get an HDD, then you can still run by having a separate category.
TL;DR - Putting HDD and SSD runs in the same category would only discourage new runners and make it harder to judge consistency in run speed. By default, everyone is on a level playing field with the default HDD, so those who want the absolute best possible time shouldn't need to upgrade to an SSD. Those with SSD's are in the minority, so those with an advantage will have a clear opportunity to advance higher on the leaderboard than HDD users. I don't understand the issue with having two separate categories or SSD users putting the original HDD back in the PS4. And like I said, if you got rid of it years ago, then downgrading to an HDD is much cheaper than upgrading to an SSD, and not as many people would need to do it if they want to compete on the non-SSD leaderboard. Priorities of the majority before priorities of the minority, that's how I see it.
As of right now SSD and HDD don't seem to make a difference. There was some timings done that lead us to believe that the majority of the load times are just random rather than being dependent on the hard drive speed.
As of right now, there needs to be a bigger sample size. If you have an SSD, HDD or PS4 Pro, do a run and submit it so someone can time the loading screens, also skip all the scenes and show the IGT at the end so we know if there's a difference. Dax pointed out that my run and Sonic's have a 1:13 difference between IGT and RTA where we both have an HDD, so this may mean the times even out in the end, or it could just be a coincidence. Either way, do those runs and get everyone a bigger sample size before a decision can be made.
More testing will need to be done with PS4 Pro though to see if it saves time and if it does, how much.
