I still disagree with that one. Either you can write stuff to your menu or you can't. If you don't want it, ban the glitch that allows it. No weird arbitrary middle ground please.
Well, if you want to ban any glitches that allows you to obtain items without picking them up in the game "legally" (what legally means is probably debatable since there are probably lots of ways to get items unintentionally such as getting them out-of-order, etc; what I mean is simply to pick them up in the game without any memory glitches), then that's fine with me.
Yeah, you can totally restrict what glitches are allowed in a certain category. We already do it with MST.
The problem is that many people here want to have their cake and eat it too and it creates a convoluted mess.
I would like to see bombchu insanity as much as anybody, but not at the cost of making a totally messy, convoluted, arbitrary category.
Either allow RBA or don't allow it. I am for allowing it, but I wouldn't be very sad if we disallowed it.
I would be very sad to see the runner duplicating all the heart containers and heart pieces out there... kind of destroys 100% for me, which would be showing off the game and collecting items in the coolest way possible.
How about:
- Obtain all unique and persistent items/upgrades
- end the game
The biggest difference from what slowking suggested is that heart pieces/skulltulas could be considered 37/100 separate items, where duplicating one just gives you multiple of the same item.
The persistent requirement is there to exclude items that are obtained and then permanently lost, such as small keys, silver scale, etc.
I understand the motivation for wanting to allow duplicating heart pieces, but then, it just seems silly to stop at 20 hearts, when you can clearly get more than that, but then it'd also be dumb to require getting 255 (or whatever the max is).
How about:
- Obtain all unique and persistent items/upgrades
- end the game
The biggest difference from what slowking suggested is that heart pieces/skulltulas could be considered 37/100 separate items, where duplicating one just gives you multiple of the same item.
The persistent requirement is there to exclude items that are obtained and then permanently lost, such as small keys, silver scale, etc.
I understand the motivation for wanting to allow duplicating heart pieces, but then, it just seems silly to stop at 20 hearts, when you can clearly get more than that, but then it'd also be dumb to require getting 255 (or whatever the max is).
What is a unique item?
Are epona and the cow unique items? Well they only exist once, so they must be. They are persistant.
Are rupees in chests unique items? Well the chests stay empty, so they must be. They are persistant if you never use them.
Are small keys in dungeons unique items? Well the chests stay empty, so they must be. They are persistant if you never use them.
Also what does "obtain" mean? How did you not obtain a song when you RBA it into your inventory? You didn't have it before, now you have, ergo you obtained it.
Sorry but this is just the same as before, where you need 14 different sub-rules to clearly define what is meant.
- Max out the start menu without any corrupted items
( - RBA and item duplication are banned)
- end the game
That is a clear definition.
What is a unique item?
Are epona and the cow unique items? Well they only exist once, so they must be.
Are rupees in chests unique items? Well the chests stay empty, so they must be.
Are small keys in dungeons unique items? Well the chests stay empty, so they must be.
I wouldn't consider either epona or the cow an item at all.
Rupees, regardless of where they come from are neither unique, nor persistent.
I addressed small keys already.
Also what does "obtain" mean? How did you not obtain a song when you RBA it into your inventory? You didn't have it before, now you have, ergo you obtained it.
Yes, that's correct.
Sorry but this is just the same as before, where you need 14 different sub-rules to clearly define what is meant.
- Max out the start menu without any corrupted items
( - RBA and item duplication are banned)
- end the game
That is a clear definition.
What constitutes maxxing out the start menu? Does that include things that are only in the start menu when you are in certain areas (such as a dungeon)?
If you want to nitpick, your definition isn't clear either.
Unique: Something of which there exists only one of. Therefore, rupees and keys are not unique. So we can count those out.
I would define an item as something that shows up on the item subscreen. Epona and the cow does not, therefore they are not items.
Obtain is difficult to define, however. But that is something that has to be defined regardless of how we define the goals.
Btw, how do you define persistent? Is the fairy ocarina persistent? Clearly, it is unique, but it is later replaced by the Ocarina of Time.
What constitutes maxxing out the start menu? Does that include things that are only in the start menu when you are in certain areas (such as a dungeon)?
If you want to nitpick, your definition isn't clear either.
I don't want to nitpick, I want a clear definition and the one you suggested still needs a lot of explaining. Too much explaining.
I think it should be clear what was meant with the start menu. You are not going to run into every dungeon to check the specific start menus there.
But in the interest of clarity:
- max out the start menu, you get when pressing start in Hyrule Field, without any corrupted items
( - RBA and item duplication are banned)
- end the game
EEssentia wrote:
Unique: Something of which there exists only one of. Therefore, rupees and keys are not unique. So we can count those out.
I would define an item as something that shows up on the item subscreen. Epona and the cow does not, therefore they are not items.
So according to that definition heart pieces are not unique... or rupee chests are also unique. At least the ones with 200r inside, because they only appear in a few locations and once you opened them, they are gone. Same goes for small keys.
Btw, how do you define persistent? Is the fairy ocarina persistent? Clearly, it is unique, but it is later replaced by the Ocarina of Time.
No, it is not. Neither is hookshot.
So according to that definition heart pieces are not unique... or rupee chests are also unique. At least the ones with 200r inside, because they only appear in a few locations and once you opened them, they are gone. Same goes for small keys.
I would actually consider small keys unique. However they are meant to be used, then lost forever, so they are not persistent.
Perhaps persistent is the wrong word, but i'm not sure what would be better. To clarify, i mean something that once you obtain can never be lost (except by memory corruption or such).
Though that excludes shields, and tunics, so i guess the definition would still need tweaking.
I don't get the weird contortions made here.
For example MST is clearly defined as:
- get all medallions and stones
- beat all the trails
- RBA is banned
- end the game
Why is a clear definition that is good enough for MST not good enough for 100%?
Why do we have to resort to obtaining "all unique items", which is extremely vague, when we can just outright say what to get or max out and if needed ban some glitches, just like MST does?
I actually feel we are pretty close in our definitions RachelB. I would just like to get some clear wording down, that doesn't require an explaination to understand.
- Max out the menu by legally obtaining all items without any corrupted items in there.
I still disagree with that one. Either you can write stuff to your menu or you can't. If you don't want it, ban the glitch that allows it. No weird arbitrary middle ground please.
Why not? Have this in your definition, and you can get all the things you could by banning RBA, only getting to make it more fun by RBAing non-essential items, such as bombchus.
Slowking wrote:
But still, what does max out the menu mean? Only the stuff you can see at the end of the game (dungeons have their sub-menu, after all), and does that include the map?
Dungeon stuff shouldn't be included. It can only be seen in that particular dungeon. Thus it's obviously not important to the whole games state.
Again, if we go down that path we would have to open all the chests in dungeons and all that crap. That is a rabbit hole we don't want to go down, imo.
That is in your opinion, though. I'm sure many people would not feel a 100% run is complete without that. Also, why not define full dungeons in the same way that IL runs define full dungeons?
If we allow RBA and heart piece duplication, which I think we should, Epona could be skipped.
But that would defeat the entire purpose and bring us back to the "super-RBA" example! You say you want to avoid those cans of worms, but if you bring that example in, then why not duplicate all 36 heart pieces? RBA the upgrades? heck, why not RBA all possible obtainable items and duplicate all 100 skulltullas? If we allow heart duplication to skip Epona, all those questions arise. In fact, I think the idea of attempting to "skip Epona" is exactly what goes against the spirit of a 100% run in the first place!
For example magic beans. If you have to remove cutscene triggers, you have to plant all the beans to get 100%. Again, it opens a whole can of worm if we require anything outside of the menu.
I don't think that's a problem. We can simply delay on getting the beans until after getting bugs, and we're right there to plant them.
As for me, I vote EEssentia's definition, including both Epona and the cow (could be gotten right after Epona with little route change)
If you want, we can just provide an exhaustive list of every single item that needs to be obtained, then define the goal as obtaining all of those, and ending the game.
But that would defeat the entire purpose and bring us back to the "super-RBA" example! You say you want to avoid those cans of worms, but if you bring that example in, then why not duplicate all 36 heart pieces? RBA the upgrades? heck, why not RBA all possible obtainable items and duplicate all 100 skulltullas? If we allow heart duplication to skip Epona, all those questions arise. In fact, I think the idea of attempting to "skip Epona" is exactly what goes against the spirit of a 100% run in the first place!
- There is no Super-RBA, so can we please just drop it? It's a straw man argument and I won't indulge it.
-You can not RBA all the upgrade nor any items, except 1-2 bottles, because AGAIN there is no Super-RBA and there never will be.
- If you don't ban item duplication, heart pieces can ofcourse be duplicated. If you ban it, they can't.
- Skulltullas can never be duplicated, since markers show up on the map, for areas where you have collected all of them. Since the map is part of the inventory and needs to be maxed out skulltulla duplication is out of the question.
- We wouldn't allow heart piece duplication to try and skip Epona. How many straw men would you like to build here? We would allow heart piece duplication, because it is a glitch in the game that can get you a 100%-menu faster. But again, it can be banned.
RachelB wrote:
If you want, we can just provide an exhaustive list of every single item that needs to be obtained, then define the goal as obtaining all of those, and ending the game.
I really don't see that being neccesary. Really what is ambigous about a maxed out menu?
If you want, we can just provide an exhaustive list of every single item that needs to be obtained, then define the goal as obtaining all of those, and ending the game.
...Which is what Grunz was trying to do.
The reason why we can't have a simple definition like in the MST is because, by its very nature, the 100% run is completely arbitrary. Opening a 5-rupee chest and opening a heart container chest makes no difference to the % completion, since it's one more chest open. However, it makes a huge difference in terms of our arbitrary concept of 100%. So yes, an exhaustive list seems to be the only option besides simply getting everything.
Also, sorry if I offended you, Slowking, but I really did think that you meant by "allowing heart duplication". If you want I'll edit that part out. And the "super-RBA" doesn't seem like a strawman, more like a reductio ad absurdum.
Unique: Something of which there exists only one of. Therefore, rupees and keys are not unique. So we can count those out.
I would define an item as something that shows up on the item subscreen. Epona and the cow does not, therefore they are not items.
So according to that definition heart pieces are not unique... or rupee chests are also unique. At least the ones with 200r inside, because they only appear in a few locations and once you opened them, they are gone. Same goes for small keys.
I would say that heart pieces are unique because there are a finite amount of them and not ubiquitous (only found in specific locations).
Conversely, I would say that rupees are not unique because they are infinite and ubiquitous (can find them anywhere).
Although that doesn't answer the question of heart piece duplicating. Skulltula's are tied to unique locations (hence what makes them unique), so would we say heart pieces are tied to specific locations also?
I think the better word for "persistent" would just be "permanent".
Gee this is tough on the brain to think through...
Gets made fun of for still playing his NES and N64
well what about random chests then? They're permanently opened. It'll always be possible to find loopholes in any 100% definition, so I think an exhaustive list, however arbitrary, is the best only option (unfortunately).
I think the better word for "persistent" would just be "permanent".
That's too easy and/or i am retarded. Not sure which.
I really don't see that being neccesary. Really what is ambigous about a maxed out menu?
My issue with it is more that it doesn't include things which i think should be included, such as maps, compasses, and boss keys.
Also, i do not think it is appropriate to ban any tricks outright. If we do not want something to be used, it makes more sense to define the goal in a way that would preclude using them. If that can't be done, then there's probably no good reason they shouldn't be allowed.
Honestly, I think the best definition is somewhere along the lines of collecting all finite items that show up as part of the HUD or the Menu screen at any point of time (that includes dungeon items such as keys).
Maxed out is rather vague and doesn't say how the process of getting these items is done (though that could be a strength, too; but I still think it is too vague).
I would define collecting as the process where the game registers the acquisition of an item via the intended method by the game developers (ie, Link actually picking up the item and showing it above his head in this example).
This probably picks up unnecessary stuff, but from what I see, it's kind of the middle ground between some "pick up all unique items" and "max out subscreen."
Keep in mind that there are many items in the game that are neither persistent nor permanent. Take bottles as an example. Just capturing something in them transforms them into some entirely different item!
I would say that heart pieces are unique because there are a finite amount of them and not ubiquitous (only found in specific locations).
Just like small keys and golden rupees.
Small keys and golden rupees aren't permanent though so the "unique and permanent" idea would reject those but not heart pieces.
RachelB wrote:
julianface wrote:
I think the better word for "persistent" would be "permanent".
That's too easy and/or i am retarded. Not sure which.
It is easy which is the point, but I also think it is a very good threshold to determine what should count as 100%. I also don't see it as any less effective than saying persistent.
Gets made fun of for still playing his NES and N64
My issue with it is more that it doesn't include things which i think should be included, such as maps, compasses, and boss keys.
Well we could include dungeon start menus. There those things would be included, although I really don't think they should be. But I'm flexible on that matter.
The main problem I see with this is that that would also include the dungeon map screen and maxing out the dungeon map would be stupid...
I guess we could just not include map screens in the definition and ban skulltulla duplication outright. But this is getting pretty arbitrary again.
Also, i do not think it is appropriate to ban any tricks outright. If we do not want something to be used, it makes more sense to define the goal in a way that would preclude using them. If that can't be done, then there's probably no good reason they shouldn't be allowed.
Arbitrary goals are against tasvideos rules and I for one think that is actually one of the good rules. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
"Oh I would like to use this glitch for this, this and that, but don't you use it for that!" You can't just pick and chose when and for what to use a glitch. Either ban it or allow it.
MST bans RBA. It doesn't just ban RBA to get the Stones or Medallions and for good reason.
Again if you get into: You must collect stuff so it disappears from the world, you are opening a big can of worms, because then you have to collect EVERYTHING that permanently disappears from the world. Otherwise it won't be 100%, if things permanently disappearing form the world is your definition of X%.
EEssentia wrote:
Unless we want to ban RBA, we should, because otherwise the runner can just duplicate everything.
