Absolutely we should separate the categories.

I will admit I am not entirely aware of the bonuses you obtain from the bonus clear data, I know you get both chests in the first KtR of each floor, but I have also heard people say there are other things as well? I would actually like more information on that.

However, I think it is completely obvious we should separate the categories. There is something that you can do outside of the game which affects the gameplay or at least the options the player has. In response to BB's post, I don't really like the idea of molding this to fit the NG+ definition. I do use the word molding very much on purpose because I don't feel like this is technically NG+. NG+ to me means that you have a previous save file of the game you are playing which grants you bonuses in a new playthrough. The matter at hand is actually affecting the game via other means; not through previous save files of Re:CoM. I think NG+ might be slightly misleading, however I can see the point where we are arguing semantics at this point. The naming scheme that has been proposed that I personally find fitting is that playing the game without utilizing these additional bonuses would remain "Any%"; and using the additional bonuses would be defined as "Any% w/ Clear Bonus", as the game states in english "Clear Bonus" when you open the additional KtR chests.

There is also a point that is brought up when a runner is attempting an "Any%" run (given the definitions of the categories I stated above), and the runner opens one of the Clear Bonus chests on accident, but doesn't use the bonus at any point in the run. I would say that this would still be an "Any%" run. Now I know that this is probably something most people agree upon, but I thought I would throw it out there as well. I don't think runners who want to run "Any%" should have to go out of their way to not have the clear bonuses on their data; IE removing ps2 memory cards, deleting ps3 save profile settings, etc.

Also I would just like to note briefly on GhostWheel's post and I have already expressed these points directly to him in his stream but I wanted to write it down so people could see it. I don't like the notion that these changes should be folded into the current Any% definition simply because they don't "offer a significant route changing EARLY advantage". It should not matter if the change is significant or not. Defining what is significant or insignificant is an entirely new can of worms that should never be opened. If it is different, it is simply that, different. And should have a different category. And same goes for the argument about the relative usefulness of the reward based on the effort used to obtain it. Again, if it's different, its different. I realize that the effort that goes into obtaining the Clear Data for each version of the game is pretty easy to do, and yes most runners of the game will likely already have them on their memory cards, profiles, etc. But the fact still remains, it is an added bonus to the game that is not there initially. I do not think that any point brought up in GhostWheel's post in regards to folding this into our definition of Any% is logical.

Also I realize I said I would note briefly on his post and then I wrote a novel. My Bad.

One more thing that I would like to note on that has been somewhat frustrating to me is an idea that has been floating around. I have encountered a few people, I wont name names, who seem to want to add these changes to Any% because they don't want to make it a category that isn't called "Any%". The idea being that anything that isn't called "Any%" is immediately less intriguing. This baffles me. I have never seen runners who didn't want to run something because it wasn't called "Any%". I have never seen viewers not interested in a run because they found out it wasn't called "Any%". I have seen a few who seem to think this, and I have also encountered someone who just flat out said that exactly. Just because something is not "Any%" doesn't mean it is swept under the rug.