I just finished a run and the timing at the end done by the game was wrong.

My run finished around 9 seconds ahead of the current WR but the game somehow didn't add the cutscene at the end to the timer (at least I think that is what happened).

So the final displayed time was 19 seconds faster for some reason even though my run was just around 9 seconds faster.

If you look at my try count you can also see that I somehow start with having 1 death already. I have no idea why that happened.

I think changing the timing method to end the time on the frame the timer disappears and the final cutscene starts makes more sense to avoid any unfair advantages for when the IGT stops early

Link to the run:

Time when the timer disappears:

Current WR: 4:38.36

My run: 4:29.96

Displayed final time:

Current WR: 4:51.85

My run: 4:32.93

It's definitely a very weird issue with the in game timer. It was an issue even before the leaderboard was created. With more people doing runs, it's the perfect time to review what should be considered the final time. Input from the community is key. Calling time once the timer disappears and the final cutscene starts seems pretty fair. Especially when the timer does weird things like that.

I have no objections to updating the rules for submissions. Runs would need to be retimed, but that should be an easy fix.

The game code will need a proper deep dive to find out what exactly is causing the issue. Possibly a programming error?

Fully agree, the death marker at the checkpoint was very weird. The game has random bugs at various locations so that's definitely a new one for me.

My English isn't so good so feel free to ask me if there is anything unclear.

This phenomenon, which can shorten the goal time, can be caused intentionally. Since this is also a technique, I would like to suggest that IGT be treated as the standard time as before.

Link to the setup:

Also, the phenomenon where the number of deaths is not reset occurs when you press start immediately after clearing the game. The corpse also remains in the same position. It is not healthy to inherit the state of the previous run, so I think it is appropriate to reset it by returning to the title.

No worries, your English is perfect.

For the Any% category, I can see this technique being in the grey area since all glitches and timesaves are allowed in the run. However, you do have a very good point. The death counter and death markers not resetting when starting a second run could lead to problems or even abuse to get a faster time.

For this, the rules can be updated so that all new runs must have a death/life counter of 1. This should eliminate any unfairness or abuse in trying to get a faster time. Thank you for pointing this out!

For the IGT, it seems to be rather fair for now. I would love to hear what the other runners think and get their input before changing the timing method again. If the majority think the old rule was better, then it can be reverted and runs retimed to fit the old rule. Hopefully that makes sense.

Also, the phenomenon where the number of deaths is not reset occurs when you press start immediately after clearing the game. The corpse also remains in the same position.

This can absolutely be used to save time on the standard map. Having to perform a full run just to get started on runs seems really lame. So I'm in favour of resetting the level to have the death counter reset.

Does resetting the level also get rid of the shortened goal time?

Near Treasure Hunter Chul, there's a small area that, upon contact, forcibly stops the timer.

From my investigation, this area encompasses the position where the cat stands after the ending cutscene.

Presumably, the program stops the timer by warping the cat to this area after the cutscene.

In other words, this phenomenon occurs when players manually reach the area that stops the timer.

Moreover, it's entirely possible to reliably land in this area by jumping, depending on technique. In fact, I succeed every time.

What I mean to convey is that this phenomenon is fair because it doesn't involve luck. Therefore, I apologize for repeating myself, but I propose once again returning to the previous IGT-based rules for call time.

Since IGT clear times are used in both in-game records and Steam leaderboards, aligning with the existing standard is more intuitive and understandable than creating new rules unless there is a strong reason.

In practice, the astonishing run posted on YouTube with a time of 4:08.36 (IGT) sacrifices about 2 seconds to execute the aforementioned technique, highlighting the split between prioritizing IGT execution and adhering to the new rules of this site.

Link:

Now that we've clarified the principle behind the shortened goal time, I believe it's appropriate to revert to the original rules unless there are compelling reasons to adopt new ones.

(I'm not very proficient in English, so I'm getting some help from an AI. I apologize if my expression seems rude.)

I will do some testing in the next days to verify. But if there is a way to make the timer stop by skill I am totally fine with using IGT again.

The whole intent of my request was to make it fair but I was lacking the knowledge of there being a way to cut the IGT short.

Also: Is there another site for speedrun leaderboards that is popular in asia? Because he got a WR with video evidence and doesn't submit the run here.

@anami1 You're fine, I'm not reading it as rude. Just informative.

@Louuuu There is a different leaderboard site that Asia/JP runners tend to use. I don't remember the name, but I do know some western runners often check their boards for tricks or timesaves we didn't know about. From my understanding, the sites don't generally interconnect or share standings.

This is very good information and gives a new look on why the old timing method would be better. Since the timer could be forcibly stopped like that, that means it could be ripe for cheating and lead to unfair advantages.

At this time, there's a fair amount of evidence proving that reverting to the old timing method would be more fair overall. Unless it can be proved otherwise, we will go back to using IGT. The board is still relatively new so getting the rules defined now should save us all time in the long run. Thank you both for your input!

@AddleTwintone Thank you for being flexible!

@Louuuu I'm not very familiar with other leaderboard sites for Speedrun, as I'm not deeply involved in that culture. However, the increasing number of Japanese players participating in Speedrun of this game is largely due to the influence of a certain streamer.

Consequently, many newcomers to Speedrun, who are not very familiar with the culture, seem to be entering the scene, and the majority of them are simply posting their runs on YouTube. Therefore, I believe the player mentioned earlier also has not submitted runs to any specific leaderboard sites.