Posts for moozooh

Post subject: obligatory AngerFist nameflash
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
Okay, so the next season actually looks quite promising. Just in time for the quarantine! First off, we finally get the adaptation for the holy grail of Korean webtoons: Tower of God—which is something that hasn't really happened before aside from the few very cautious steps. This isn't the only webtoon slated for a 2020 adaptation, either: The God Of High School and a full adaptation of Noblesse will both air in the second half of the year. All of these are big guns, and if they are received favorably, it means other good webtoons may have a chance for a TV series in the future. Imagine Bastard or Home Sweet Home! (And no, not Solo Leveling; that's just Sword Art Online all over again.) Then we have another Koji Kumeta adaptation—that's the author of Sayonara Zetsubou-Sensei and Uchouten Kazoku / The Eccentric Family. Definitely an interesting writer, and the new show has an interesting premise, so I have high hopes for this being the sleeper hit of the season. Then there's the new original Trigger show which, if the last few were any indication, will likely generate a lot of hype and end up a disappointment. :D Hopefully this one will not suffer as much from self-plagiarism and contrived endings. That being said, the director previously worked on Little Witch Academia (also as a director) and a whole bunch of certified top-tier productions as a key animator. So if anything, I suppose we can at least expect excellent visuals. Suddenly, a new 24-episode Ghost in the Shell anime directed by foremost cyberpunk specialists Kenji Kamiyama and Shinji Aramaki! In 2020! After 16 long years! Exclamation mark! No, seriously, this is big. Super high hopes for this. And I just noticed a show based on Hiroaki Samura's latest manga. That is the author of Blade of the Immortal and a bloody excellent artist. As it usually happens, there's a high chance none of that glory will be present in the TV series, but a man can dream, right? There are also a few more potentially interesting, somewhat more adult-oriented new shows, both original and adapted (e.g. Arte, Yesterday no Utatte, Appare-Ranman, etc.), but it's probably too early to be excited about those. We'll see. And of course, the low-hanging fruits of the season: the edgy bloodfest and the usual isekai. I expect these to be trainwrecks, but who knows? I've been wrong before, though unfortunately not too often when I'm being pessimistic about a show. And if all of that wasn't enough, we also get a whole bunch of sequels! Of which I'd like to note the second season of Kaguya-sama and the third season of My Teen Romantic Comedy SNAFU, both among the very best romcoms to come out from Japan. The latter in particular is very a pleasant surprise since the second season aired a long five years ago. Then we have the third season of Kingdom—also coming after a long seven-year break—and the arc that finally got Food Wars axed (for a very good reason). All things considered, this season brings a lot of long-awaited shows to the table and has a very high chance of being the best season of the year by a solid margin. And a special note to AngerFist (and everyone else for that matter): watch Dorohedoro! It's turned out to be a really good adaptation of a fun, wild, and original action manga. One of the few cases where a dystopian setting is used for a good purpose and not just to be edgy. And also watch Castlevania, though it's not really an anime. It's quite good! Both are/will be on Netflix (Dorohedoro only on Japanese Netflix so far, so either wait for the English version or watch the fansubbed version).
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
Niamek wrote:
Without wanting to be mean against China... But I am honestly sceptikal about these facts. Apparently, China has covered some of the news...? Did you find such informations on your research? I found this randomly on twitter : https://twitter.com/muyixiao/status/1240414823600586752?s=20 which is bothersome if we want accurate info about China's action or even numbers. For instance I find that bizarre that they did not have cases yesterday.
China did cover up the news... in December. They've been working with the WHO since then, and I haven't found any confirmation so far that their current numbers are false. That's not to say they are definitely true, but between mildly suspicious official data and outright speculation, I'm going to err on the side of the official data. If there is a solid evidence of recent cover-ups, with real numbers and all, by all means, post it. I did, however, mention that China is not like other countries. They have way more power to limit or even infringe on people's rights to stop the spread compared to the Western democracies. And at the same time they have a lot more money, technology, and managerial sense compared to, say Iran. China can build two hospitals in 10 days in a locked-down city. What other country does this? The answer is none. Nobody else has done this! And despite the exponential increase of confirmed cases, it doesn't look like anyone is trying to. Which doesn't exactly reflect well on the critics when they find themselves in an emergency and unable to replicate what China does right under the same conditions.
CoolHandMike wrote:
Spanish Flu = a coronavirus with strong evidence that it originated in China
Not a coronavirus. Spanish flu was caused by the H1N1 influenza virus also responsible for the swine flu in 2009. Notably, there is no evidence that the 1918 epidemic originated in China. The swine aren't bush meat.
CoolHandMike wrote:
My only problem is from that of a naming perspective. It would be like referring to the first Sega game as "The Sega Game" which is kind of foolish since others have come from China in the past and shortsighted considering new ones are sure to come out in the future. Perhaps we should start to refer to them with a version number. Like the next one will be "The Chinese Virus 2.0"?
So you don't have a problem with the poorest and/or deeply rural parts of a nation resorting to bushmeat practices to sustain themselves but you have a problem with being unable to shame a whole nation for that? Weird priorities, my good man. I mean I agree that letting people hunt wild animals known to be transmitters of disease without any care given to ensure they don't spread it is dumb, but so is a nomenclature stunt that does way more harm than good. It's about as ethically sound as calling school shootings the "American-style shooting", or suicide bombing "the Muslim ritual". Which is to say, not sound at all.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
I had this game as a kid. Wasn't a big fan. It has too much idle time for its own good; the glacially-paced autoscrollers in every second stage were getting on my nerves even in casual play. Good improvement, though, and I appreciate the entertainment choices (especially in the early stages).
Post subject: COVID-19 (coronavirus) compiled information and discussion
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
This is the thread for discussion and collecting reference data, information, advice, and news regarding COVID-19/SARS-nCoV-2/"the coronavirus". Coronaviruses and their names Coronaviruses are a family of viruses known to cause acute respiratory diseases in their hosts. So far there have been seven major species of coronaviruses known to infect humans. * HCoV-229E, HCoV-NL63, HCoV-HKU1, and HCoV-OC43 cause common colds. These species have specifically evolved with humans as their primary hosts. They are continually circulating in the population, with some living within you a good portion of the time (possibly even right now!) and attacking when your immune system is weakened. * SARS-CoV causes a much more virulent and dangerous disease called severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which broke out in an epidemic in 2002–2003 (8098 confirmed cases across 17 countries, 774 dead as of 2005). In that case, the virus presumably jumped to humans from bats (and/or palm civets as an intermediate reservoire), although the particular mechanism wasn't identified. Outside of the singular cases reported in 2004, the virus never reemerged in humans again since then but is presumed to still exist in the wild. * MERS-CoV is the deadliest of the bunch at around 1/3 mortality rate, and thankfully not remotely as virulent as some others. It has caused several localized outbreaks of Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), also known as camel flu, since 2012 (2506 confirmed cases across 26 countries, 862 dead). Most of those have been concentrated in the geographical area around the Middle East and spread to humans from camels. South Korea was unlucky to import the disease in 2015 and borne the highest death toll outside of the Middle East countries. The virus is still active in the wild, and isolated cases are reported every year. * SARS-CoV-2 is the cause behind the current pandemic of the disease called COVID-19 (short for "coronavirus disease 2019") originating in Wuhan, China. Its virulence is similar to that of SARS-CoV, and it's once again presumed to have transmitted to humans from bats (and/or pangolins as an intermediate reservoire). This will be the virus and its associated disease discussed in the thread from this point onwards. The currently known data about the virus and its mechanism of spreading Global statistical data The foremost authorities on the global statistics of the spread is the World Health Organisation, the inter-governmental health agency of the United Nations, which publishes daily situation reports on the COVID-19 pandemic, and the European Center for Disease Control and Prevention (ECDC). Always check their sites for important information and advice. If it conflicts with your local health agency's information in any way, I suggest trusting the international data. Some of the trusted data aggregators used to track the development of the pandemic are the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at John Hopkins University and University of Oxford's Our World in Data. The data below comes from those two sources and will be updated upon reaching major milestones. COVID-19 statistics for 2020-03-24 * Over 400,000 cases are confirmed with over 18,000 fatalities total. * It took over three months to reach the first 100,000, only 12 days to double to 200,000, and a further 5 days to double again. The death toll doubled in the last 6 days. The epidemic demonstrates exponential growth in most affected countries, but there are signs of linearizing thanks to the widespread lockdowns being implemented. * Italy can currently be considered the most affected country, with almost 70,000 confirmed cases and over 6800 deaths, still rising at a sharp rate due to hospitals being overwhelmed and the medical staff gradually falling sick themselves. * China still holds the largest number of confirmed cases at over 80,000 but fatalities have plateaued at around 3200: the spread has slowed down dramatically thanks to strict and efficient containment measures. The death toll took 38 days to double and its rate is currently on the decline. United Arab Emirates and South Korea followed suit by beating all records on per-capita testing and tracing contacts of the confirmed cases on early stages of infection. * The countries who went over 10,000 confirmed cases include China, Italy, Spain, Germany, Iran, France, and the United States. * The most affected countries by fatalities relative to the size of population are Italy (over 100 death per million), Spain (over 45), Iran (over 20), France, and the Netherlands (both over 10). * Over 100,000 people with previously-confirmed cases have made a full recovery. Note: confirmed cases are not total cases; they are the numbers presented by the countries in question, which mainly depend on the number of tests conducted (not every person is tested), and may also be under-reported for political reasons. During an active epidemic, the number of infected is always significantly larger than the number of tested individuals, as the infection spreads much faster and is not apparent until several days after the fact. Countries that haven't implemented proper large-scale testing protocols are (severely) under-representing the spread. In early March WHO estimated the mortality rate at 3.4%, but it is hypothesized that the actual overall mortality rate is closer to 1–1.4% owing to a large volume of asymptomatic, under-reported, and/or misdiagnosed cases (sources: 1, 2). South Korea was the first country to deploy aggressive statewide testing, and as of 2020-03-20, they stood at 316,614 individuals tested, 8652 confirmed cases, and 100 fatalities total (1.16%), which is very reassuring and a great example of swift and effective government action. With that being said, if the virus infects 20% of the world's population, that still puts some 15–20 million people at risk of death if left without immediate treatment. Symptoms The most common are fever, dry cough, fatigue, and sputum production. Take note that most of these are shared with many other respiratory infections. Here's how the list compares to other common conditions that may be confused with COVID-19: A major identifying factor is shortness of breath (dyspnea, common characteristic of lung infections) in the absence of runny nose (rhinorrhea, common characteristic of upper respiratory tract infections and allergies). If you are short of breath, consider contacting your doctor or an epidemic hotline immediately. Risk groups * People over 60 * People with chronic respiratory diseases (e.g. asthma) * People with other serious underlying medical conditions, such as cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes * Potentially, smokers * Potentially, immunosuppressed patients (but there is ongoing research on deliberately using immunosuppression to combat a certain severe symptom) In short, if your immune system is compromised, the sickness is likely to develop faster and/or in a more severe form once it's contracted. Spreading * The virus spreads via microscopic liquid droplets that are dispersed in the air when you're coughing or sneezing, or smeared over surfaces by hand. These droplets can stick to surfaces and hang in the air for over an hour depending on environmental conditions. Notably, cardboard can hold the virus up to 24 hours, plastic and stainless steel for 2–3 days (sources: 1, 2). * Technically, the disease becomes contagious before the host starts exhibiting apparent symptoms, but the main mode of transmission is still via the respiratory symptoms and the associated liquids. The probability of infection upon exposure also depends on the viral load in dispersed liquid. The data on asymptomatic spread is inconclusive at this point. * The virus does not spread via other body liquids and excretions (e.g. blood, urine, sperm, etc.). * The virus does not seem to infect or be spread via domestic animals (source). * Generalized data suggests a high sensitivity to temperature amd UV spectrum radiation, including direct sunlight (source). * The virus does infect children, albeit over half of them only develop mild symptoms or none at all (source). Considering their generally lax understanding of sanitary norms, it is very important to monitor their interactions with elderly family members and other people belonging to a risk group. Period of infectiousness * The median incubation period is estimated to be between 4–5 days (sources: 1, 2), with a range as wide as 2 to 14 days possible depending on the viral load and other factors. 97.5% of infected are said to manifest symptoms within 11.5 days. * Median time from onset to clinical recovery for mild cases is approximately 2 weeks; for patients with severe or critical disease it is 3–6 weeks (source). * The time period from onset to the development of severe disease, at which point the patient needs to be admitted to an ICU, is 7–10 days (sources: 1, 2, 3). Among patients who have died, the time from symptom onset to the outcome ranges from 2 to 8 weeks (anecdotal evidence suggests people with compromised immune systems die quicker). * Traces of the virus can persist in the organism for two weeks after the symptoms have vanished (source). Singular cases have been identified where the virus persisted for up to 37 days total (source). In other words, even after you have recovered, you are not fully safe for the others just yet. Testing * Tests are conducted by taking throat or nose swabs or collecting sputum samples and checking them for the virus RNA. The results are available within one to several days depending on how quickly the samples are transported and the size of test and report backlog. * This type of test isn't 100% accurate because it depends on the availability of the virus-carrying material and the viral load in it, staff experience, and the time lag between testing and reporting. It will also not identify people who have already recovered from the virus and may not longer be at an immediate risk of infection. * Blood and urine do not yield the virus. Stool samples aren't reliable, either. If you are offered a test based on those, it will not give you any conclusive results on SARS-CoV-2 presence. * Blood tests can, however, show antibodies for the virus at a later stage of the infection or after the recovery. The upsides to this method is that it's simple, quick, and can be done at home using a specifically developed test kit. The downside is it's highly prone to false negatives because the antibodies don't manifest until the later stages of the infection (generally when the immune system has already taken the upper hand). * The turnaround time is largely a question of logistics and the availability of personnel and the necessary facilities. Faster tests may be coming, but the actual testing time is not necessarily the biggest contributor to the overall turnaround time. Misc. findings * Investigations are still ongoing with regards to the risk of co-infection with other viruses among the COVID-19 patients. * There have been multiple reports about once-recovered patients that were tested positive again. The data on this is inconclusive and may involve faulty testing methodology or relapse after an incomplete treatment (see above on the time periods during which the virus may be active). A new study suggests rhesus macaques don't get reinfected by SARS-CoV-2, but it hasn't yet been peer-reviewed. More data is needed. * Many genetic differences have been found in the isolated virus specimen, which have been grouped into two types (sources: 1, 2). There is an ongoing debate as to whether these constitute distinct strains, or whether any of the two were a recent mutation. There is no conclusive data on the virus's potential for mutation, but it's been suggested that an eventual mutation is to be expected. * Investigations are being proposed to see if it's feasible to pre-infect people with a relatively harmless competing virus that would inhibit SARS-CoV-2's growth or at all prevent it from causing a disease. Preventive measures Hand and mouth hygiene is the first and foremost preventive measure. Most are common sense and are recommended regardless of the ongoing pandemic. * Soap, other detergents, bleach, typical window cleaners, and rubbing alcohol inactivate the virus. Any alcohol will do, even in lower concentrations (as low as 30% was confirmed to work). * Wash hands as frequently and as thoroughly as feasible. * Don't share cups, bathwater, cigarettes, etc. with people you aren't already intimate with. * Avoid unnecessary direct contact between your skin and surfaces of common public use (railings, doorknobs...). If you must touch one, don't touch your face afterwards until you have washed your hands. Using knuckles to press buttons or push doors is a good idea to limit exposure. * Keep track of easily-contaminated surfaces in your home (handles, doorknobs, remote controls, switches, tablecloth...) and sanitize them regularly. * Change towels (especially hand towels) and bedsheets regularly. * Cough and sneeze in your elbow or a paper tissue (dispose of it immediately afterwards). * Don't sneeze or blow your nose in cloth napkins. Use disposable tissues instead and discard them immediately. Social distancing * Refrain from kissing people whose mental well-being doesn't depend on it. * Refrain from any physical contact with the elderly as much as possible. * Maintain a safe distance of at least 1 meter (ideally 2) from people not wearing masks, if it's feasible. You never know who is contagious; could be them, could be you. * Don't confuse social distancing with emotional distancing. The feeling of isolation exacerbates depression and other potential mental issues. Communicate regularly and check up on people you haven't heard from in a while. Respiratory masks help contain the water droplets carrying the virus from your nose and mouth and limit their range when you sneeze, cough, or deeply exhale. They are mainly needed to protect others from yourself rather than yourself from the others. * The use of masks is not recommended unless you expect to make close contact with infected people or suspect being infected yourself. * If you are infected and absolutely have to leave home (to get food or to visit a medical facility), do wear a mask at any time contact with other people is expected to avoid spreading the infection. For this reason, keeping a small supply of 5–10 masks at hand might be a good idea. * But don't hoard masks. * If you have to wear one, any disposable surgical mask will do. The more specialized respirators (N95-class) don't offer significantly higher protection against respiratory infections compared to regular disposable surgical masks. Quarantines and lockdowns are enacted in the most severely affected countries. Going by China's example, this is a very effective measure, especially if enacted early on and if confirmed cases are studied to expose infection chains. Different countries' ability to enforce it and attend to needs of the quarantined varies depending on the strictness of their government and the strength of their economy. Most countries are not like China in this respect. Do not expect similar levels of containment efficiency relative to the population density. Nevertheless, they are necessary until treatment is sufficiently available. What to do if you get sick * Don't panic. :) * Call the epidemic hotline provided by your state health agency or the local center for disease control and follow their instructions. * Notify your workplace/school/etc. Don't go there if possible, and start practicing strict social distancing immediately if you haven't before. * If you live alone, notify your closest relatives or friends who are able to tend to you and don't belong to any of the risk groups. Ask them to bring you an essential supply of daily necessities (food, prescripted medicine, sanitary stuff, etc.) for the next few days. Don't be shy to trouble them. * If you live with a pet, arrange for somebody trustworthy in advance to look after it if you have to be hospitalized or become bedridden. If you provide the person with spare keys, inform your relatives/friends you've notified earlier. In the absence of exact instructions, follow the usual respiratory disease regimen: * Get a lot of rest, don't strain the body and mind unnecessarily. * Keep the room ventilated. * Eat easily-digested and nutrient-rich food (common choices include porridge, yogurt, boiled and/or pureéd vegetables, omelette, chicken broth, etc.), dial back on all spices. * Keep everything you ingest close to body temperature: the fewer body resources are spent adjusting it, the more can be spent on fighting the disease. * Same applies to shower temperature. If you have a high fever or find it difficult to move around, wipe yourself with a wet towel instead. * Keep your phone, drinking water, medicine, and sanitary tissues close at hand. * Mild fever is your friend; avoid reducing it unless it exceeds 39°C/102°F. * Keep track of the symptoms, write any notable changes down in a notepad (this way your doctor or attendant can have easy access to your notes if your condition worsens). Forecasts * A popular number quoted around puts the estimate of people infected worldwide in the course of the epidemic at 40–70%. They all seem to trace back to Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch, and in that interview he specifically said it was 40–70% of adults. He later revised it to 20–60% of adults, which roughly translates to 1–3 billion people over 16. * There are no conclusive forecasts on the timeline of concurrent infection and mortality, but separate quotes can be seen estimating the peak between late spring and mid-summer (sources: 1, 2). Take these with a grain of salt; they are likely to be revised in the near future. * It is reasonable to expect that many more countries, especially those with high population density, will issue lockdowns and bans on social gatherings in the coming weeks. * It is not yet known whether seasonal weather changes will affect the spread dynamics in any way, but based on the temperature ranges across all affected countries, there is no apparent indication that it affects anything at all. What makes COVID-19 different from some other dangerous and/or widespread diseases It's both violently contagious—it spreads very quickly and very easily without requiring direct physical contact—and at the same time it has a protracted incubation time to ensure the infected person carries it around unknowingly and can spread it further before falling sick—which is how it got imported from China all over the world. It is a very insidious disease. To put the numbers in perspective, in comparison with seasonal flu—the most regular and widespread epidemic disease—the infection rate is over 1.5 times higher (an average person spreads COVID-19 to 2–2.5 other people as opposed to ~1.3 other people in case with flu), has about an order of magnitude higher hospitalization rate, and the mortality is at least an order of magnitude higher as well. We also have flu vaccines available, and the development time for novel flu strain vaccines is also relatively quick because they are much better understood and easier to manage. In this respect, it's not just the relatively high mortality that makes it so dangerous, but the fact that it has the potential to spread so quickly and under the radar. Additionally, the mortality rate will naturally spike as soon as medical services become overwhelmed and the infected people are left without necessary treatment. The last disease of such speed and magnitude of spreading was the Spanish flu of 1918–1920 which infected about a quarter and killed ~1/10 of the world's population at the time. In terms of the overall danger, the main difference between now and then is that we have better access to hygiene, medical facilities, information networks, and international cooperation compared to a hundred years ago when most countries were already busy with WW1. Medical facilities remain the weakest element, however, as their availability is limited compared to the potential number of the infected. What is this about "flattening the curve"? You may have seen this animation: It generally explains the idea, but omits one important detail: the healthcare system capacity line isn't actually there in the middle—it's closer to the bottom. As mentioned earlier, medical facilities are very limited compared to the number of potentially infected. Most developed countries are only able to provide intensive care to 0.005–0.05% of their population at a time—and those have to be shared with causes other than the new virus which don't really go anywhere. If a country doesn't curb the spread very early on (so far only South Korea had managed to linearize the mortality rate before the number of confirmed cases exceeded five digits), even doubling its number of unoccupied critical care beds may still not be enough despite the lockdowns. You can think of it this way: in theory, if you lived in a developed country, didn't belong to any risk groups, and had some form of health insurance, contracting a disease like COVID-19 would not inherently be life-threatening even if you happened upon its more severe form. But if you catch it at the same time with 10,000 other people, you can end up in a situation where nobody will be available to provide the help you need. In this respect, if you haven't contracted the disease yet, the closer you come to the peak, the more dangerous it is to get infected. It is also important to understand that saturation of medical facilities is very likely unavoidable even with total lockdowns unless treatments come soon enough. The London Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team recently published a modeling study on Great Britain and the United States containing this graph: The red line at the bottom is the critical care bed capacity and the blue line is their best case projection of their occupancy. They haven't identified scenarios where it would be possible to avoid massive oversaturation. This is generally the case for most other countries as well. Does this discredit the flattening concept? Quite the opposite: it demonstrates that most countries are already behind the schedule on flattening their curve. They still need to do it, but it won't become as comfortably flat as the animation may suggest. What's with the abnormally high (>10%) closed case fatality rate? You may have noticed that several countries experience an unexpectedly high closed case fatality rate (CCFR, deaths divided by a sum of confirmed recoveries and deaths), e.g. 45% in Italy as of 2020-03-24: Some interpret it as the true fatality rate of the disease itself, e.g. what's the percentage of people that die even if treated, and start panicking. This is misguided for two reasons. 1. All or almost all deaths are reported to national health agencies daily because almost all of them happen at the hospitals. On the other hand, only hospital discharges are reported daily. Cases of mild condition patient recovery have a significant lag because the vast majority of them aren't being actively monitored, and they probably won't be until they come to report their condition themselves. 2. Fatalities naturally spike when the number of patients in serious and critical conditions exceeds the number of intensive care beds, which is what's happening in Italy and some other countries right now. They simply cannot be provided with the help that would've kept them alive otherwise. 3. The denominator doesn't include any undetected (e.g. misdiagnosed or asymptomatic) cases which constitute a significant portion of total cases. We only know as many cases as we test, so the smaller the percentage of tested population, the more the error. In order to illustrate how this affects mortality statistics, let's take a country with a known high percentage of tested population: South Korea (stood at 6,148 tests per million people, or 0.61% of their total population, as of 2020-03-20), so that we can be sure there aren't as many underreported cases: There you go: 3%, in line with the WHO predictions. And if they had tested not <1% but ~100% people, it would've dropped even lower, as discussed above. Note that this isn't because Korea has better medical facilities than Italy, or better tests, or anything else like that. It's because they reacted earlier, tested more people, and generally put themselves in complete control over the situation, so their CCFR is more representative of the disease's true FR. The situation with treatments and vaccines Vaccines Multiple teams around the world are working on prospective vaccines, including China, the US, Russia, and several European countries. All antiviral vaccines are based on inactivated viruses, viruses with similar genetic code, or parts of the relevant genetic material to provoke an immune response and hence pre-condition the immune system for rapid response to a real virus. An inoculated person will not be significantly affected by the disease; their immune system will deal with it before it becomes dangerous. All vaccines go through a series of trials intended to determine their efficacy, proper dosages, and possible adverse effects. These last for many months, typically over a year, before they are approved for use. US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci and UK Chief Scientific Adviser Patrick Vallance, both very competent people, predict at least a year before a proven vaccine is attained. It is not impossible that meaningful results are produced earlier, but it is highly unlikely and you should not count on that. Additionally, if the virus mutates significantly, the antibodies created by a vaccine may become incompatible with the new strain, and will require a new vaccine. This is currently the case with seasonal flu, which mutates regularly and prevent old vaccines from working. If the same happens to this virus, of if the antibody count wanes significantly over time, it may require regular re-vaccination and/or re-development of the vaccine. Treatment Treatment will not make a person immune per se, but will help the immune system fight against the infection, at which point, if successful, the organism may acquire at least a partial immunity of its own. Until this happens, you will have to live through the disease, but before that it would be a good idea to avoid being infected in the first place. Unlike vaccines, treatments can bypass parts of clinical trials if they are used as a last resort in a critical case with no better options available. This will likely be invoked in the upcoming months, which hopefully will accelerate the treatments' adoption for patients in less-severe conditions. There are multiple prospective treatments being investigated: * Remdesivir * Mesenchymal stem cells * Hydroxycholoroquine + azithromicyn * Convalescent blood serum * Camostat * Favipiravir Note: Do not take any of these without an appropriate medical guidance! See also * An updated guide to the coronavirus drugs and vaccines in development * Research and Development on Therapeutic Agents and Vaccines for COVID-19 and Related Human Coronavirus Diseases Economic impact Several affected countries have enacted limits on long-range transportation and public gatherings. So far, the hospitality industry (travel agencies, hotels, tourist attractions, and restaurants) has been the most affected by the restrictions; governments are looking into bailout options for the affected businesses. To do: update this section with more research and links to expert commentary. I follow the health agencies' guidance. How else can I help? Volunteering Several governments have launched volunteering campaigns (such as this one in the UK). Be on the lookout for calls from your municipality and/or register in the local volunteer center if you have one. There are reports from all over the world about people who have engaged in individual initiatives, such as buying groceries and other encessities for their sick or elderly neighbors. This is more risky but may be worth a shot if you can secure an ample supply of basic protective equipment (disposable masks, gloves, and sanitizer). If you decide to do this, absolutely ensure that you minimize the risk of both contracting the disease and spreading it further to the vulnerable people you are trying to help. Folding@Home Stanford University's popular cloud computing platform, currently based in St. Louis School of Medicine, has recently launched a number of coronavirus-related projects that can help find potential mutation vectors and treatment mechanisms, and subsequently met a surge of new contributors, which you can join at any time. It is also a great alternative to a room heater if you feel cold and/or would like to simulate some of that beach experience you've been denied due to the lockdown. :) Folding is a highly computationally-intensive task, so old/weak desktop computers and most laptops may not receive high-priority work units which demand urgency. A good baseline for efficient folding is a modern gaming-grade graphics card (think GeForce GTX 1060 or better) and/or a 12+ thread CPU (Ryzen 5 1600 or better). Good case ventilation is highly recommended to reduce fan noise and temperature-related strain on PC components. Folding in a poorly-ventilated case may damage your system! * Go to the official site and pick the download that suits your system. * Install the client, preferably with the screensaver option checked. * If you want to fold as part of the TASVideos team (which I have just recently set up), choose "Set up an identity" and input 251131 as the team ID. This is purely optional and doesn't affect anything in particular, but may grow your e-peen. * Configure the power budget and set the target research to "any disease" (in most cases you will be assigned a coronavirus-related folding task). * If you are unsure whether your PC's ventilation system can handle the heat, keep the power slider on Medium or below. If you want the process to be as unintrusive as possible, put it on Light, enable the screensaver, and let the PC run overnight when the electricity is cheap. * Sometimes one or more of your folding slots may get stuck at "downloading". This is a server-side issue due to the work unit distribution servers being overrun by requests (this is technically a good thing) and being unable to generate tasks in time. This can sometimes be fixed by restarting the application and letting it choose another WU server, or just waiting for 10–20 minutes or so. You can also donate to them directly to help get the needed server capacity up. * The web UI sometimes glitches out if you restart the application. You can still control everything via the application's own UI (if you're on Windows, it should be in your tray). Timeline of major events 2019-11-17: First case detected (but not recognized until later). 2019-12-30: China notifies WHO of the outbreak in Wuhan. 2020-01-08: Discovery of the new virus publicly announced, genome sequences published. 2020-01-13: First case outside China. 2020-01-23: Wuhan and other Hubei prefectures go on lockdown. 2020-02-11: Total deaths exceeds 1000. The disease is named COVID-19. 2020-03-07: Total confirmed cases exceed 100,000. 2020-03-09: Italy goes on lockdown. 2020-03-11: WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic. 2020-03-12: Denmark and Ireland go on lockdown. 2020-03-15: Spain goes on lockdown. Austrian province of Tyrol goes on lockdown. 2020-03-16: Czechia goes on lockdown. Malaysia goes on partial lockdown. Philippine area of Luzon goes on lockdown. 2020-03-17: France goes on lockdown. 2020-03-18: Belgium goes on lockdown. 2020-03-19: California is the first American state to go on lockdown. 2020-03-20: Confirmed cases exceed 200,000, fatalities exceed 10,000 total and 1,000 per day. Argentina goes on lockdown. Italy overtakes China by total death count. 2020-03-22: Confirmed cases exceed 300,000. 2020-03-23: Recovered patients exceed 100,000. UK, New Zealand, and the Netherlands go on lockdown. 2020-03-24: Confirmed cases exceed 400,000. Useful links * JHU pandemic tracker: https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 (mobile-friendly version) * Our World in Data statistics: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus * Worldometer tracker: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ * World Health Organisation COVID-19 portal: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019 * European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en * US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: https://www.cdc.gov * Graphic tool for understanding how containment measures affect infection spread: https://art-bd.shinyapps.io/nCov_control/ Share your experience with the pandemic and any interesting news regarding COVID-19 development and link your sources—I will add everything important to the post. Scientific articles posted on specialized archives are preferred to general media outlets. (EDIT 2020-03-24: Added sections on helping and CCFR, updated statistics, added some more links and cleaned up a few paragraphs.)
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
So after renaming bsnes into higan and splitting bsnes out again, byuu decided to merge everything in a yet another project named after himself while simultaneously renaming himself to crank up the degree of confusion. :) From what I gather, all of his emulators share the codebase in relevant parts, so accuracy-wise, higan will still be the main one to watch for potential TAS cores while byuu is the one intended for everyday use and will not be more accurate than higan; at best identical. Also, based on what I see in the recent posts and changelogs (where's the one for v108?), no immediate improvements over the current state-of-the-art cores are expected in higan yet? In any case, "ambitious" is probably an understatement for this whole thing, especially if he intends to keep maintaining all all three of his emulators (though I don't know why he even needs bsnes at this point). Knowing byuu's perfectionism, I do wonder if he won't have troubles finding strong collaborators for it. But good luck to him, anyway.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
Ohh, now that you mention that I see what happens there. That's nice!
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
Dunno about tiers; personally, I've never seen the game before and found the cutscenes the most entertaining (actually downright hilarious) part of the run. Gotta love how the heli pilot gets fed up with the clearly useless guy just running around aimlessly, picks him up mid-mission, and shits bombs all over the place. Or all over the sky, as in stage 5 (where no military objects can be seen in the bombing range, but it's clearly a terrorist country, so might as well). You had one job, Eric! tHe EnD!111 Lmao. The gameplay itself looked very tight, but I don't have anything else to say about that.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
kaan55 wrote:
It could potentially start a flame war like I may have unintentionally done with this post.
Yeah, to be honest I feel like this post in particular contained more unnecessary things than whatever SonicFan53 has been doing. The fact that you recognized it yourself did not make it any less rude. In particular:
kaan55 wrote:
So either try to port the tools over to Bizhawk or shut up.
This sort of attitude won't do at all. Boct1584 did nothing to deserve your lashing out at him.
kaan55 wrote:
Also Sonicfan53 I would not suggest unnecessarily mentioning the differences between Gens and Bizhawk at all if possible.
He's free to mention that. Documenting objective emulation differences is potentially valuable. If a flamewar occurs because somebody isn't pleased with the differences, it's a separate problem and it will be dealt with accordingly. Better leave that to the forum staff to concern themselves with than gatekeep it. A sidenote to SonicFan53: the only reason why some people aren't quite happy with your posts or how you go about posting is that you don't exercise restraint expected of a public forum user. It's actually quite simple. Think over your post content before you press "submit", edit posts instead of following them up with extra details, use existing topics for relevant questions whenever possible, and don't automatically assume that whatever you're doing is important enough to announce before any consequential results are produced. Maybe consider going on IRC or Discord first if you need immediate feedback. A public forum such as TASVideos is not a chat but a document of discussion, collaboration, and research; treat it as such, and everyone will be happy.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
I wholeheartedly support Maru's branching suggestion.
Shinryuu wrote:
We've started to make a version which respects yours and Deign's gameplay so we're not abusing DelayObjectGlitch at all.
This is easily the best news I could hope for. As Maru correctly anticipated, for me this run has already gone into the no man's land as far as entertainment is concerned. I presume forgoing the use of DelayObjectGlitch would also prevent any persisting graphics glitches, because that's about on the same level as ending stages early in terms of the entertainment impact. That being said, this is a massive body of work regardless, so big respect for having finished it. And best of luck on the low-glitch version! Deign's version of this TAS is my favorite so far, so I'm sure I'll enjoy the improvement as well. :)
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
No Dorohedoro, huh? Tut-tut. Go read the manga asap. :D Overall, this seems like the weakest winter season since 2014 by a good margin. Aside from Dorohedoro I'll be watching Eizouken (because I have complete faith in whatever Masaaki Yuasa is doing), the new Haikyuu, and uh... probably nothing else unless a sleeper hit emerges (from the toilet, like Hanako-kun?) and proves itself by the end of the season. As for Madoka, its third movie as well as virtually every other sequel or spin-off to other popular series that came out in the past few years have made me extremely wary of shitty writing. I'm not aware of a single one that wasn't mediocre at best.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
CoolHandMike wrote:
Technical could mean many things. What about runs that are extremely time consuming but boil down to brute force approach to find really fast sections? It may only use a single trick but may be dozens of hours. But should another run that uses some assembly information that only took the author a couple minutes to acquire get a higher rating?
In a nutshell, technical rating serves the purpose of avoiding mismanaged expectations in common cases where a run has high technical rating and low entertainment rating (the opposite has also been a thing but is quite rare). If ratings were to be folded into one, these runs would most likely be at the bottom of the list despite being well-produced; having a separate metric to recognize a potential discrepancy is often useful—especially for the shorter runs where the subject of entertainment isn't as well-defined, or, conversely, very long runs that are likely to be skipped by anyone except people who have played the games in question. For this metric to be more representative of the actual level of technical prowess, it would need stricter guidelines and rating privileges—e.g. limited to judges and people who are deeply familiar with the game—but unfortunately we don't have enough of those for every TAS to justify that, so it ends up being a mixed bag of opinions subject to massive cross-pollination with entertainment rating. As it stands, different people have different scales and rating methods that may or may not be based on the guidelines Memory linked. Some base their rating on the impression of effort put into research and optimization involved, which often depends mainly on how verbose the submission message is or how closely they've been following the production progress. Some don't give it too much thought and put either a safely high value or otherwise a value they wouldn't be able to rationally explain. Some base their rating on the perceived likelihood and/or magnitude of potential improvement, with the obvious pitfall of guesstimating. Various combinations are also possible. Honestly, I don't think there is a method that wouldn't miss the mark completely every now and then, and there is no consensus about which one is better because all of them are very crude approximations. What constitutes the average and the baseline is also different between many people; e.g. some believe that 5.0 is the acceptable minimum for a published TAS (because we aren't supposed to publish bad ones!) while others use the entire scale regardless. Since we neither can nor want to enforce a single standard for this, you're free to come up with a system that you consider sensible and easy enough for yourself to remember and have a feeling for when rating runs down the line. As long as you can explain to yourself why you've given a certain rating to a certain run, it's probably good enough.
CoolHandMike wrote:
Entertainment is also poorly explained. Look no further than Masterjun's Mario 3 run. The video itself contains next to no game play but you had people rating wildly differently for different reasons.
Entertainment is subjective on so many levels that it's actually impossible to even make a guideline that everyone would agree with. Vote as you see fit.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
warmCabin wrote:
You had to manipulate the speed of a cloud in the background!? Yes vote just for that!
This. (Ironically, this run is more glitched than GlitchMan's version.)
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
feos wrote:
Also I'd like to see my other points discussed, they mention bigger problems
Pretty much none of them actually are. Combined with the ones you've mentioned I can identify the following concerns. 1. The infinite score patterns—have already been addressed above. 2. Using continues. Arcade games have been designed pretty much from the very beginning to invalidate a score made using more than one coin (and in many cases deny some of the later-game content), and all high-profile players, scorekeeping authorities, and related communities abide by that principle, so there isn't much room for debate here. Coins are an inherent pay-to-win mechanic, an external resource, so it only makes sense to disallow it in any sort of a serious competitive scenario. 3. Whether to mandate game completion if the optimal scoring strategy involves a game over prior to completion. This is pretty much the only point of contention because there is no single universal consensus on it (unlike with continues), but I'd go with making game completion mandatory for the sake of consistency; besides, that's also what Japanese scorekeeping organizations favor as well (JHA, and Arcadia before it, accepts scores on partial completions of a new game only until a full completion becomes available, which overrides an earlier one even if the final score is lower). 4. Infinitely looping games. Provided they have an actual kill screen that makes scoring finite, it's fair game for the Vault, since its point is, in principle, to document optimal solutions when they fail to entertain. The demand for unique content in this respect is quite arbitrary. We chop off tons of valuable unique content by making large improvements that obsolete earlier runs, and I see this as a much worse problem than adding content that happens to be repetitive. After all, no-one forces anyone to watch past the first loop if there is no actual difference to the gameplay. Hell, no-one even forces anyone to watch a scoring run if they aren't interested in the scoring. I mean I don't watch those multi-hour RPG runs for that very reason. For me, this run was more watchable than those. But hey, some people want them, who am I to judge? Surely some people want this kind of content, too. All of these aren't emerging problems; they are basic principles that need to be agreed upon beforehand, which solves every related problem well in advance. If you can think of any others, sure, let's discuss them. Perhaps a separate thread is warranted. And with that in mind, let's try this again: What is the actual problem with having highest score as a Vault-able category? What makes it an unreliable or otherwise unwanted metric? Speedruns have all sorts of trade-offs and extra restrictions: high-glitch vs. low-glitch, taking damage vs. damageless, using deaths vs. deathless, max speed vs. speed/entertainment trade-offs, etc. Scoreruns are typically far less ambiguous in this respect: it's either a higher score or it isn't. After the basic principles have been established, there should be no further ambiguity. So far you've called the goal of highest score "arbitrary", "fundamentally ambiguous", and "hard to measure", but it really isn't any of that; these descriptions are borderline FUD based on no actual cases where it was hard to determine whether something was an improvement (or even a good score, period)—you just came up with some vague imaginary scenarios that haven't been problematic since the very beginning of organized score tracking. And all the while multiple national and international organizations and sites have tracked records based on this very metric for longer than you and I have been alive. Surely they have figured it out—why can't we? As I repeat again, it's just a simple counter that can safely be taken at face value (barring the problem with running out of displayed digits, which is adequately solved by memory watch as in this case—a tool we have that unassisted scorekeepers don't!). You don't have to be a PhD to tell that 100 points is more than 99. I honestly don't understand why this seems so difficult; it's really anything but.
feos wrote:
Are we past 2012 yet?
Well, are we? The reason this discussion happens at all is that the run has to either comply with an (arbitrarily chosen) entertainment barrier to make it to the Moons or be rejected as ineligible for the Vault as per its goal choice. In other words, you're trying to determine whether to filter out a technically well-made run by its goal choice—based on a very representative selection of a dozen forum members. You can theorize upon whether the audience is entertained all day, but the truth of the matter is that TASVideos forums have absolutely laughable user presence for anything unpopular, and even then the response has been mixed rather than strictly negative. None of the members of the Bongo community Lizstar is from commented here (or at least they didn't identify themselves). But if you look at YouTube, you'll see (as of right now) the temp encode has 425 views. Unless there is some gross cheating involved (which I severely doubt), some four hundred people have at least partially watched this run, of which less than 3% bothered to vote in this thread. There are more likes there than there are votes here. This suggests to me that a non-negligible audience exists for this run. But let's be frank here, the chances of it making it to the Moons by entertainment is incredibly slim. So yeah, it's 2019, we have a submission requested by several hundred people on a more visible/accessible platform, and you're about to reject it based on a technicality that artificially reduces the scope of the site. And before that, you suggested that having a run with repetitive content in it hurts the site somehow, which also reeks of the 2012 rhetoric. Thanks for making my points for me, I guess.
Spikestuff wrote:
You can see this Touhou TAS (superplay) that maxes the score out at 2,429,908,660 points.
What makes you believe it maxes the score out? It only maxes out some of the counters. The score can theoretically be increased further. Nothing suggests it cannot.
ViGadeomes wrote:
high score is only valid if we prove that it's the highest score reachable on the game accepted as a full completion/100%.
I'm sorry, but this demand is absolutely ludicrous. No-one demands that speedruns be proven unbeatable upon submitting, so why should scoreruns be? In 100% runs, the item count is a restriction (in other words, a secondary goal): it's still a speedrun for the fastest completion, except the player is obligated to collect all items. The run doesn't end when the last item is collected—it ends when the game is completed with all items collected. But the score is not a restriction; it's the primary goal in itself. Everything else can and must be sacrificed for the sake of the highest score. A submission for the highest score should be fine as long as the strategy is sound, there are no obvious mistakes, and it beats all available records—in other words, the same general requirements we put on fastest completion submissions.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
feos wrote:
We can't judge research behind a movie, because it's not verifiable and not reproducible.
That's not what I meant. What I meant was that you generally don't want to shy away contributors whose approach commands diligence. Why would you not want more quality-made TASes on the site? If a policy becomes a problem, maybe it makes more sense to change a policy. Especially considering it has to do with goal choice and not submission quality—it's not like anyone here suggests dropping standards.
feos wrote:
With pure fastest completion and full completion our definitions are simple and verifiable. The allowed set of goals can't be painlessly narrowed down further, because those are the most popular speedrunning categories, they have the highest demand, and they are fairly competitive. And it can't be painlessly expanded either.
Competing for the highest score has been a thing since Space Invaders—some two decades before speedrunning even became recognized as a separate hobby, let alone a cybersport discipline. High-score superplay VHSs and DVDs have been made and distributed e.g. in Japan since the early 90s. For many games such as 2D shooters, puzzle games, etc. where manual progression of gameplay is either very limited or isn't even the point at all, it typically remains the most sensible metric of success. It's neither ambiguous nor arbitrary; it's literally a number that only goes up. If a game tracks score, it is typically shown right there on the screen at all times. Many games have elaborate scoring systems where getting an optimal result, or even figuring out the optimal strategy for reaching it, is far from trivial, which makes it interesting for anyone competing in that game.
feos wrote:
What we require for games that have no ending is already exhaustive, and playing the game farther just to get a certain score count won't add any unique content.
Games that loop indefinitely don't have a maximum score by definition, so it's not even a problem...
feos wrote:
When a score just overflows at some point, it may take hours of identical gameplay, which has little speedrun record or even superplay value.
...Yeah, I seriously doubt that ever becomes a problem. If the game has an infinite scoring pattern, it just means the game doesn't have a maximum score, so there's no point trying to reach it to begin with. The arcade score tracking authorities have delisted all games where an infinite scoring pattern was discovered, which is the right way to go about it. Also, I don't see droves of prospective TAS producers lining up to make multi-hour runs just because max score is accepted as a valid category for the Vault. If that problem ever emerges, it would only signify to me that the site is doing too well—which is not something I would say about it right now.
feos wrote:
But if it fails to entertain, it doesn't mean we should shove it in through the back door.
That's kind of the point: right now it looks like shoving though the back door, but it doesn't have to be. There is no liability to having runs like these—well-made, with natural and clearly defined goals—on the site, even if the game isn't popular. We are way past the point where having "too many runs on the site" was a legitimate concern (if it ever was, really). The first time there was a discussion about that, the site had only around 300 active publications, and now we have over 2000. None of the platforms serving gaming content—be it video streaming services, game stores, or something else—have been as picky as TASVideos when it comes to disqualifying content for goal choices that happened to be misaligned with its policies at the time of submission. It's like the site is continuously afraid to expand and is trying its hardest not to, treating any relaxation of its rules as some sort of a dangerous compromise that may hurt it one day (though it never actually has). Something to think about in any case. I think I said everything I wanted on the matter; the rest is up to you.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
What an absolutely bizarre game choice. What an absolutely bizarre game to have a dedicated community around it. Boggles my mind! The TAS itself is surprisingly watchable (disclaimer: as I keep running out of free time, I've ended up watching almost all videos—not only TASes—at the highest speed that still allows me to understand what's going on, in this case 1.75x), although you only really need to watch loops 1, 6, and 7 to get the full experience in my opinion. It felt rather basic at first but the constantly increasing speed of the dinosaur adds some intrigue: will the character be able to outrun it on the next screen? Will they have to change their route this time? Not that it made it very interesting, but at least I did watch it to the end. Now to comment on the goals: this is an arcade game, and the vast majority of arcade games are made with scoring in mind (because having a scoreboard on the cab is one of the principal ways to get you to challenge them upon beating the game, so you keep spending coins), so going for score is definitely not a misguided choice in this case—and neither is looping the game until the kill screen. Moreover, what made me watch this TAS in the first place was the fact that it was presented as a bona fide research project rather than something picked up to get another publication on the site. It shows genuine care and intellectual insight into the subject matter—and, game choices aside, that is exactly the approach I think we cherish the most here, in principle. A person who is actively seeking the game's limits out of love for it is the person most likely to end up with a superior result. This raises an interesting question: whether we can accommodate high score completions into the Vault for the games that warrant them (read: mostly arcade games and their ports) the same way as regular any% runs if they don't meet requirements for a higher tier. It feels like it would open up some doors for fresh and high quality content brought as the result of such a research. Rejecting a run like this—and this one in particular—on a technicality would feel quite counterproductive to me because it's evident there is at least some audience for runs like this (I mean, even this game actually has its own community...), and considering the diligence involved, we would be very glad to have this run without having to ask extra questions if only the policy did account for the goals in question. So I'm with Memory on this matter.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
I did not find it boring, but the constant interruption of movement did become notably irritating halfway through. I can see it becoming a much more pronounced problem over the course of a full run. Would choosing a lower difficulty level (e.g. Hurt me plenty) help mitigate the problem? Could it possibly provide the right balance between the supposed challenge and smoothly flowing movement?
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
That's semantics. "All items" is the Iji community shorthand for the set of items the run author had in mind: all ribbons, posters, and Supercharges. There is no "official" designation in the sense of the game showing a percentage of items collected, but these three types of items are special in the sense that 1) none of them are required for anything; 2) there is only one of each per sector; 3) the game tracks your progress with two of them (the posters and the ribbons). The goal of this run is getting all ribbons, posters, and Supercharges; how you choose to call it is not very important, but the community calls it "all items" because that's convenient. They've chosen not to include all the other items in "all items" because some of them are mutually exclusive (so technically it would be "most items" at best) and the others require idiotic amounts of backtracking and idle actions (like wasting ammo to pick up more ammo, or wasting armor/life to pick up more armor/life). It benefits no-one, hence no-one runs it. In any case, the game's author has also speedrun it (and had the fastest any% time on version 1.5) and joined discussions on other sites. You can ask him what he thinks of this definition of "all items" and of the runs currently on the Workbench.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
Radiant wrote:
However, according to the game's author, "all items" means all basic weapons, jump and armor upgrades, and the trapmine (in addition to all posters, ribbons, and supercharges).
That's not "according to the game's author" since the author does not define speedrun categories for the game anywhere on that page. The speedrun community does, which is reflected at Speedrun.com. The nomenclature is also addressed in the submission text. If you have a problem with an "all items" run technically not picking up all items, have it called "all ribbons, posters, and Supercharges".
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
The game tracks several levels of player aggression which depend on their kill counts and some other plot-relevant choices. Aggression affects both gameplay (enemy AI, fights, itemization, and paths through levels change somewhat) and story progression (different sound effects, dialogue options, and endings). There are several possible endings in 1.6 and more are added in the currently unTASable version 1.7 which is superior for most intents and purposes. IIRC the overall breakdown goes as follows: • Innocent/full pacifist: 0 kills, Iosa spared—only available on Normal through Extreme/Expert. This is what this run is aiming for; it is recognized by the game as such and presents Iji with a secret weapon before the final boss. • Pacifist: 1–50 kills total. Similar to the above in most aspects but much easier to attain. No secret weapon at the end, different ending. • Standard: 51+ kills. This is technically the "fastest bad ending". • Full berserk: something like over 300 kills total (I don't remember which version had which number, but IIRC it was just over 50% of the total enemy count throughout the game), Tor executed. Most of these endings are also altered by other gameplay choices (e.g. spare/kill a certain NPC). Going full berserk is infeasible in an any%—too many detours to take—but might be something to consider for an all-items run since more areas are visited.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
Okay, so I've watched the run from the beginning, in its original form (that is, with non-fixed graphics). This was essentially my third time seeing it as I'd already known what almost every relevant room looked like from Sniq constantly supplying me with spoilers, and then there was the reveal stream. Let's start with addressing the elephant in the room—the X-Ray glitches—which isn't exactly anything new: I'd already discussed it at length in the any% submission thread, on Discord, and probably someplace else, so I won't be drawing any fancy infographics this time. Unfortunately, the 100% items category makes the issue even more complicated. For the uninitiated, the short version of the argument is that the legacy "no major glitches" categories were left for the audience that enjoys seeing the content that is skipped or otherwise bypassed in the more glitched categories; abusing the X-Ray results in glitches that are for most intents and purposes "major" and "game-breaking", but just a notch short of crossing the hard definition line, weaseling into the legacy categories basically on a technicality. I'm not the only one who's unhappy with this state of things. The G-mode glitch (the one that allows backdoor access to Lower Norfair and Maridia by dematerializing one-way obstacles) is the less contentious of the two; it looks cheap and disappoints by doing everything offscreen, but there's no arguing it makes the routing far more convenient. I'm not a big fan of it, but I can accept it having a place in a run of a legacy category. The superjump, however, is the boon and the bane of this run at the same time. The sheer amount of times it's used in this run is astounding, and in several cases—notice this, Sniq!—I would actually call it the coolest way of traversing a given room (one example that particularly stands out is getting the two items in Maridia's main street). The ability to quasi-recharge the shinespark, holding the charge through several rooms at a time, is also something SM players have craved for since before the GBA Metroid games and the Redesign hack made it a reality last decade—albeit separately from SM. But in this case it also proves to be a Faustian bargain: in exchange for the near-uninhibited travel, it makes one unable to see where Samus is traveling (since the screen is dimmed and left mostly unupdated), and it also breaks graphics in a way that badly interferes with perception and compounds over time. Most of the run is thus spent with broken graphics. They become a nuisance in Norfair, start really getting on one's nerves around the return to Red Brinstar, and turn actively aggravating after the Plasma superjump. At that point I can no longer call the onscreen action entertaining. It's just Samus wildly zipping between the VRAM junk. It becomes incredibly hard to relate to what's going on. It begs the question, "can't you just zip to the end already?" This is not the sentiment I hope for when watching a Super Metroid TAS. Now for the unequivocally good aspects of the run. I have followed its development very closely and was able to witness many cases of a given room gradually becoming more optimized. The level of outside-the-box thinking in this run makes even the current any% look trivial. New techniques have been found. Approaches that were already considered optimal have been improved further.1 Every room has been rethought from the ground up. Sniq's ability to keep in mind the dozens of strats, tricks and techs discovered over the past fifteen years of Super Metroid TASing is second to none. That's why some (most?) of my favorite parts of the run are those before the Speed Booster, such as the entire Pink Brinstar, the pre/post-X-Ray room, and the entire bubble section of Norfair. Albeit some of the later rooms that don't take advantage of the X-Ray glitches are similarly great, such as this room in Norfair or this room in Wrecked Ship. This is where Sniq's ingenuity shines the brightest; superjumping past the obstacles or traversing them offscreen makes me feel cheated out of tasting TASVideos's finest wine. The latter problem is, of course, not specific to Super Metroid. I lamented it even in games that I normally don't care about much, such as the NES Megaman games where a whole bunch of amazingly inventive glitches would disappear overnight with one huge and comparatively boring level skip. Should I accept it as part of the inevitable road towards absolute optimization? Possibly. Do I consider it a loss in terms of entertainment? Definitely. Do I feel the run entertaining? If I go by the unadulterated emulator output, it's not as entertaining as cpadolf's, sadly. It's more entertaining in multiple places, but the overall experience is irrevocably marred by glitches evidently too powerful for a legacy category. Where the previous 100% is a 10 in entertainment for me, this one is a 6.5 at best. With a heavy heart, I vote meh. Please know that I cast this vote with utmost respect and dedication to your craft. 1It's also why it didn't sit too well with me that the run was submitted with a relatively large known improvement at MB2 that harkens back to the pre-TAStudio era. It felt to me like the run's integrity was compromised in more ways than one. I apologize before Dan for forcing his hand and before Sniq for my coercive tone. I shouldn't have held my opinion hostage considering it wouldn't have changed much in the end.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
dan wrote:
I am a little disappointed that you inserted me into this the way you did. This is Sniq's time to shine, and this thread should be about him.
I only did so because Sniq kept deferring to you when we discussed it, but I understand your sentiment. I've been thinking about it as well, and I will post my full comments later today.
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
Watched the fixed-graphics version on oatsngoats's stream yesterday. Withholding my vote and further comments until the Mother Brain 2 situation is solved (dan?).
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
Nice. I wonder if there are any other objects or platforms in the game that allow such kind of zipping as those treasure boxes. Some half-tile ledges, maybe?
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5789
Location: Away
dwangoAC wrote:
I hadn't thought about that pun at all
Gotta be careful with that, heh. Narrowly avoided a publicity flop. :p