Alright kids, this time it's for real.

I've been looking at the previous speedrunning competitions, which all miserably crashed and burned after interest died out or personal problems came and interceded in the wellbeing of the competition. So I've taken a step back and realized the competition had to be done at a smaller scale. While individual levels are short, verifying all of them from start to finish, while also waiting for the winner to decide on his game, added too much time to what should have been seen as a naturally fast competition (of course, it's all about speed). So I've decided that the best course for the next one would be to ask persons to speedrun an entire game instead of an individual level. This game would be the only one featured in the entire competition, and whoever would have the fastest time (recorded in played frames, not in in-game time units) would be the winner of the entire competition. This will make it easier on everyone in the competition, and it will make for a fiercer and more exciting event.

Another new element will be that instead of being chosen by one person, I'll ask what you people would like to see being speedran. This poll isn't just open to entrants, but to everyone who is genuinely interested in the competition. I'm aiming for a more casual approach to the competition, and it would be great to see what the people outside of it would like to watch. These games will be Mega Man, Mega Man 2, Super Mario Bros. 3, Metroid (any%) and Castlevania. Why two Mega Man games? Both are played in a radically different way, and both are very high quality titles that see constant improvement on their current best time over the many years they have been released. Voting will take place in this topic and end in 30 days time, upon its closure, I'll make a new topic or edit this one with the ruleset and registered people.

On a smaller note, I think interest also dwindled due to the large gap in skill levels between people like Dada and myself and the other players, so we have both decided not to enter this competition and simply act as judges and observers. Another rule I will be adding will be that disclosing your current time will be deemed as an "illegal move", for one, times will be only official when they are officially judged and you might be driving people to an inaccurate assumption, and it also discourages players in a way, those who see the gap between all of them is too large will simply drop out and not submit anything, which isn't what I'm aiming for.

And thus, the outcome of the newest speedrun competition is in your hands. Prepare yourselves, this one might be the good one!

(recorded in played frames, not in in-game time units)

What does this mean? Does it have to be played on an emulator for this? It can't be played on a system and TV?

Did Dada tell you about this? I PMed him not-so-long ago about starting up a new speed run competition. Also I think doing an entire game isn't too good of an idea. Single levels are a lot more manageable, since a lot of us wouldn't be able to do a whole game.

If we must do a whole game, then I am game for either Metroid or Super Mario Brothers. I will pick Metroid.

Yeah, I'm not promising I'm going to take part but I think speedrunning an entire game is just too much. It's not more casual approach at all, it might seem like that to you but believe me, it's not. It wouldn't even be a real speedrunning contest because almost no one here is going to beat an entire game testing for ideas how to do it in a fast or even the fastest way possible. It would just end in people beating games casually, dying and hoping to get a good time. I'd rather see levels than whole games.

I'm glad that it is just more than I that sees that running an entire game is a little bit too large in scope, levels would be way better.

after watching king of kong ive been dying to try a speedrun or something competetive.

ill join in but i wont do a whole game takes way too long imo...

Why do you always pick NES games with low max speed and movement engines with few variable speeds? They only result in boring runs with little difference between them, like the SMB ones last year. It would be much more interesting if it was a fast game with more complex level design.

That's why the Mega Man and Metroid games are there. Runs can vary differently from one to another.

As for the full games complaint, the more level idea might actually be Konix's: to get a certain set of levels through different games to be played (I'm thinking 5 games, all radically different in playstyles), or just going through a full game. While a full game does look a little long, you have to realize that the games I posted have all been beaten in 20 minutes or less (well, except for Mega Man 2, which took 30 minutes). Since the speedruns have to be a single-segment, playing through a game a few times trying to go as fast as possible and finishing in less than an half hour isn't that much really, hell, some shooting games that are ridiculed as being ''too short'' or some other stupid bullshit like that usually ends up being a lot faster than actually speedrunning a game like that.

But I'm considering Konix's option seriously, I should have an idea of a good runnable set of levels/games on NES.

That's why the Mega Man and Metroid games are there. Runs can vary differently from one to another.

As for the full games complaint, the more level idea might actually be Konix's: to get a certain set of levels through different games to be played (I'm thinking 5 games, all radically different in playstyles), or just going through a full game. While a full game does look a little long, you have to realize that the games I posted have all been beaten in 20 minutes or less (well, except for Mega Man 2, which took 30 minutes). Since the speedruns have to be a single-segment, playing through a game a few times trying to go as fast as possible and finishing in less than an half hour isn't that much really, hell, some shooting games that are ridiculed as being ''too short'' or some other stupid bullshit like that usually ends up being a lot faster than actually speedrunning a game like that.

But I'm considering Konix's option seriously, I should have an idea of a good runnable set of levels/games on NES.

But speedrunning it is a lot different since we aren't actual "speed runners" in the sense. The last competition was enough trying to get through single levels, let alone the whole game. Plus levels would allow you to vary the games around easier.

As for the full games complaint, the more level idea might actually be Konix's: to get a certain set of levels through different games to be played (I'm thinking 5 games, all radically different in playstyles), or just going through a full game. While a full game does look a little long, you have to realize that the games I posted have all been beaten in 20 minutes or less (well, except for Mega Man 2, which took 30 minutes). Since the speedruns have to be a single-segment, playing through a game a few times trying to go as fast as possible and finishing in less than an half hour isn't that much really, hell, some shooting games that are ridiculed as being ''too short'' or some other stupid bullshit like that usually ends up being a lot faster than actually speedrunning a game like that.

How long would it take for one of the GWers here to beat those games? The 20-30 minute times are the best times there are and people have reached them by beating the games many, many times, tried different tricks in different levels and just spent a lot of time to get everything right, not to mention how many times it takes to run a whole game without messing up one of the vital parts to get a time that good. Realistically thinking, it takes a lot longer for any of us to beat those games and it's not like we want to beat them dozens of times to get good times. Maybe at best someone's willing to beat the game 3-4 times and even with that the times won't improve that much. It just won't work with full games and it won't be much of a speedrun competition.

I have trouble beating some of those games even when it's not a speed run.

ya you and me m8

I really think that you'll be better off playing a full game than a set of levels.

The prime reason is that it's easier to focus on just one set of physics and capabilities than that of several games. I find it a good idea to run just one game. I think that once you get "into" the game a little, you'll be able to manage. When using multiple games instead of one, there's also the issue of the game being boring to some players, who might decide to only spend a little bit of time on their run or even skip the round entirely.

I personally think that this competition has a better chance of success if we keep the single-game plan. It won't be as tough as you think unless you're interested in playing it at a really high level, but I doubt any of you are (and those that are, good luck!)

You'd be surprised at how much a difference it can make when you know what you're supposed to do. Watching the current world record videos at the Speed Demos Archive would be a nice start.

Referring to the "focus on mechanics" of one game ordeal, I think this is a bit more trivial of a matter when it comes to single levels. I think this cancels out to a degree since you are just focusing on one level, this means that the enviroments don't change as much, plus you won't be playing it as long. Concerning the boring issue, picking one game is even worse I think. When you have one game, as we can see already it seems that more people are already less inclined to join in. Having the game list be dynamic means that more people would feel like they want to be a part of it. I do agree that having examples set on the table is easier for you, but regardless of this, a lot of people still couldn't manage simply because they really aren't capable of it, even if they can watch someone else do it.