This topic is for the purpose of discussing #2405: wwmarx's GG Sonic the Hedgehog in 18:21.47

Just looking at the listed run time you'd think this was slower than the previous submission. It's not - the added time comes from improvements in GH1 and SB2 causing the infinite score counter to rear its ugly head, but in-game time should take priority, dammit! :p In the absence of listing as such in the submission text, I decided to jot down the completion times for the levels and compare them to the TSC times (in parentheses): Green Hill 1 - 0:19 (0:18) Green Hill 2 - 0:22 (0:22) Bridge 1 - 0:25 (0:20) Bridge 2 - 1:53 (not tracked - auto-scroller) Jungle 1 - 0:28 (0:25) Jungle 2 - 0:27 (0:33) Labyrinth 1 - 0:34 (0:27) Labyrinth 2 - 0:56 (0:56) Scrap Brain 1 - 0:27 (0:27) Scrap Brain 2 - 0:43 + 0:14 = 0:59 (1:14) Sky Base 1 - 0:22 (0:22) Sky Base 2 - 0:09 (0:08) It appears that Bridge 1, Jungle 1, and Labyrinth 1 have significant improvements and that there's probably a way to fine-tune GH1 and SB2 to squeeze an extra time unit out of them. A more experienced runner than I will have to offer feedback to that effect. I'm going to withhold my vote until someone else can render input. Aside from that, I have a couple more side comments: As far as the Sonic games are concerned I have a preference for going for in-game time over frame time, and so I'm wondering if there are any points where stopping just before the end sign results in the loss of a time unit (any more experienced runners out there care to comment?). More relevant to the run - there's a segment in Bridge 2 around 0:40 where you roll over a bunch of bridge tiles, causing a lot of lag and looking very sloppy. Is it possible to jump over the bridge completely and avoid that? This is a run I've highly anticipated, and I look forward to seeing whether further improvements are possible...

Out of curiosity, when this submission appeared, for a little while there was no link for Discussion or Voting. Why was that? Also, I don't really have anything informed to say about the run. Thanks sgrunt for bringing up the times from TSC.

Out of curiosity, when this submission appeared, for a little while there was no link for Discussion or Voting. Why was that?

A glitch in the site code that has been occuring at random with new submissions for the past 6 months or so.

Ok, this is an important tip for authors, judges, and publishers. If the discussion forum fails to be created with the submission simply edit the submission. The editing will trigger the discussion thread. Either a judge, publisher, or the author themselves can do this.

Delete this post please.

It appears that Bridge 1, Jungle 1, and Labyrinth 1 have significant improvements and that there's probably a way to fine-tune GH1 and SB2 to squeeze an extra time unit out of them. A more experienced runner than I will have to offer feedback to that effect. I'm going to withhold my vote until someone else can render input.

Is there a video on these TSC times? I can not imagine how someone in real time saves 3 seconds during bridge 1 or 7 seconds in the labyrinth 1.

I am still disappointed that it is the GG version being run.

The Jungle-2 version of SMS is very complicated. The scroller does not follow and have to jump without seeing. I chose the version of GG, which is faster on several points.

Sorry I haven't commented on this run yet... First off, I will repeat what mike89 mentioned in the previous thread about Bridge 1: you can spin before launching off the teeter-totter/see-saw things then hold right for massive speed. Here is an unimpressive example of that (it doesn't seem to save time vs yours, but if it was done correctly like in Sprint's old videos, it will): http://dehacked.2y.net/microstorage.php/info/1695293183/alden-Sonic1GGMarkIV.mmv Incidentally GH2 is also a second faster in this one, possibly because I don't stop before the sign (which I don't think is needed because this is in game). As far as the time on GH1, the record of 0:18 was on the SMS version which is fairly easy to do unassisted. I still don't believe it's possible on the GG version, but I'd of course love to be proven wrong. (My record was about 10 in game frames faster than yours, again probably due to you stopping before the sign, but still about 5 frames short of 0:18). I asked about the labyrinth time on TSC but met no reply. I believe it is some sort of zipping.

I'm not entirely sure what's going on in Labyrinth 1 myself - I've never seen a method for it, and even using the vertical zip doesn't come close (as demonstrated here). It could be some strategy unique to the SMS version, although that already makes no sense as the level is substantially longer in that one. GH1 limits at a low 19 on GG (as alden showed, a couple of times, after I got my systems mixed up and insisted 18 was possible), but Sky Base 2 should definitely be going to eight seconds. I also cannot remember how Jungle 1 goes (my speedrun uses a strat that only yields 34), but after watching that level in the TAS, my response would've been "something like that". One other improvement from me: in Scrap Brain 2 the fastest way to lose the life is to have the enemy on the last platform take you out. alden: I haven't watched your WIP but my understanding is that the best method of the Bridge 1 physics abuse is to bounce off the checkpoint, for which you need a fairly high jump (and also from a fairly high platform). I think that the second bounce then puts you on the moving bridge, and off the top of my head that's enough to get across to the other side at breakneck speed.

Aside the already discussed points, something bugs me.

I am still disappointed that it is the GG version being run.

The Jungle-2 version of SMS is very complicated. The scroller does not follow and have to jump without seeing. I chose the version of GG, which is faster on several points.

I'll quote myself and Flygon in the other Sonic 1 submission:

It is a TAS, jumping without seeing means NOTHING.

Ah, the eternal SMS Vs GG debate. Well, the way I see... GG SMS At least you (TASer, player and TAS viewer) can see what is going on in the SMS vesion. The GG screen zooms WAY TOO MUCH in Sonic.

In my opinion, the SMS should be used, instead of the GG one. In the GG, the player is guided by signs with arrows to avoid pits. Sega really should had thought better about the porting of this game to the GG system. Wonderboy: The Dragon's Trap got a MAJOR overhaul to fit GG's screen. Sega should have did it with all SMS-to-GG games.

Stop complaining. It is, the author's choice. He wants the Game Gear, I respect that. The run is good, the Game Gear is good. If you want the Master System version done then well do it yourself. You are insulting effort by people who worked hard. Move on and get publish this.

I remember posting Aldens 18 sec GHZ SMS on Youtube. Anyway I watched the run and it was okej. Pretty much what I expected it to be. I just wish you could skip that score tally, it drives me insane. Edit: removed the Youtube link to Aldens 18 sec GHZ 1 because I didn't want to "make things worse".

Stop complaining. It is, the author's choice. He wants the Game Gear, I respect that. The run is good, the Game Gear is good. If you want the Master System version done then well do it yourself. You are insulting effort by people who worked hard. Move on and get publish this.

You are insulting my intelligence using weak arguments for defending a choice. IIRC, TASVideos is about discussing if the video, game choices, gameplay and gameplay choices are good enough to be published, not a personal dump of anyone's videos. It's not called insult, it's called "criticism".

Move on and get publish this.

Oh, please, don't ever demand anything from anyone. well, if you're a troll, I just bit it.

I am no troll. I just stand alongside with people. Noob Irdoh is play on words for Robin Hood. A good heart, but bad English so I am a noob inside.

I sort of agree with Noob Irdoh here, though I do think the "Move on and get publish this" statement was a bit too aggressive. The issue for me is a question of tone. Saying "I think this run is bad because the SMS version is so much better" is not really fair to the author or respectful of the author's work. I think a better statement to make would be "Ok, this version is fine, though if a run on the SMS version gets finished in the future, I think that should obsolete this." This latter statement is much more constructive while getting the same point across. I guess the question that OmegaWatcher raises is: Is a GG run of this game going to be satisfactory? I believe the answer is yes. I've enjoyed watching this run, and until I see a better run (possibly on SMS instead of GG), I will be happy with this run on the workbench. Some points have been raised about the supposed inferiority of the GG version; as of now, none of those actually ruin the experience for me, though that is just a matter of opinion. The other important question is: How improvable is this run? Alden and mike89 suggest some alternate tactics, and it's up to the judges to decide how much this run should be improved. However, the question of how improvable this run is should be a separate question from which system the game should be run on. Also, I believe this is the main question which should determine the judging of the run.

[...]Alden and mike89 suggest some alternate tactics, and it's up to the judges to decide how much this run should be improved.[...]

I would like to see wwmarx's comments on the suggestions before any decision on publishing is reached - I personally feel the suggestions have merit, and at least one or two have been made since his last comment here.

This run will be judged on this run's merits, not the merits of another run (for another system) which has yet to be made. If and/or when an SMS version of the same game is submitted, we can discuss whether this run deserves to be obsoleted. As mklip2001 said, a better question is whether this run is of the appropriate quality to be published. Several points have been brought up, the validity of which I would like to hear from the author.

I don't see any reason why we have to put up a debate here? There shouldn't be too much of a big deal as to what system that Sonic is being played on. Did I ever heavily criticize Sonic being played on Genesis? Never. -_-

I think that there could be both versions, with one being 100% emerald collection... I also think that it should be the SMS version since that is already going to be slower than the TSC times. Also I think GG looks better despite being squished down small... de gustibus non est disputandum

Why GG? As I said, the GG version is faster. Sonic is faster. The SMS version is just beautiful. It is sad to think that they are voting NO only because they prefer the SMS version. TSC times I got no response from authors about time. I do not know even if they are GG or SMS. If there is any secret to running, only they know. 1 Bridge I did not understand the suggestions of Alden and Mike89. I have already done what was suggested. This run is 2 seconds faster than the previous. (sorry, my english is terrible)

In the absence of listing as such in the submission text, I decided to jot down the completion times for the levels and compare them to the TSC times (in parentheses): Green Hill 1 - 0:19 (0:18) Bridge 1 - 0:25 (0:20) Jungle 1 - 0:28 (0:25) Labyrinth 1 - 0:34 (0:27) Sky Base 2 - 0:09 (0:08)

I know there has been some discussion regarding this already, but since I'm not very familiar with TSC and their record keeping, could I get a couple answers from people (mike89, upthorn possibly, any other TSC regular) in the know? Is there differentiation between GG and SMS timing, or do they get lumped together? Are there tricks or glitches that are SMS exclusive? Were there any major flaws (technically) that you saw with this run? (I know alden has discussed one already, any others?) From my perspective and current knowledge, this was technically well done, although stylistically it was lacking quite a bit, particularly with the autoscroller stage. Since there are both visual and gameplay differences between the SMS and GG versions, I see no problem with possibly having two runs, but that can be decided if an SMS version ever gets submitted. My opinion, prior to hearing some more information from others, is that this run looks good enough to be published. I'll wait for some more information before I make a judgment though. EDIT: Having reread some of the previous posts, I'm changing my opinion to one of marginal publishability, because of the possible improvements to Bridge 1, and the inconsistencies of goal choice (i.e. stopping before the sign to save real-time when aiming for in-level time)

Good news, my speedrun's up on SDA, and Bridge 1 in that demonstrates the trick I've been trying to explain for some time now.

om, nom, nom... *burp*!