Sonic Central > Rules Revisions
About Sonic Unleashed PS3/360 night scores...
Parax:
--- Quote from: Thorn on June 14, 2009, 08:05:06 pm ---This is confusing: how does the debate over the ability to spam respawning enemies have anything to do with the amount of normal enemies in an area?
--- End quote ---
That was in response to your idea that we should cap combo bonus instead of removing charts where infinite is possible; I'm bring up issues with implementing a cap.
--- Quote ---It's not the matter of "banning a glitch" that I'm pursuing -- it's the matter of treating the patch for it as a different version of the game.
--- End quote ---
Because it essentially IS. It's a slightly different version of the same level. The level layout is exactly the same, as is the way the engine functions/works. The only difference is the presence of an invisible wall. How is it any different just because it was released over XBL? How about if they released a patch that made a functional change to the engine? Would you argue that we should wipe all the charts?
--- Quote ---On the subject of Sonic & Knuckles Collection and the two disc versions of Sonic 3D Blast being "rare": a quick Google search for those three games revealed downloads for all of them, and Saturn emulation on PCs has gotten to the point that it can be run at full speed.
--- End quote ---
Then I'd argue that said glitches should be allowed.
Thorn:
--- Quote from: Paraxade on June 14, 2009, 08:16:16 pm ---
--- Quote from: Thorn on June 14, 2009, 08:05:06 pm ---This is confusing: how does the debate over the ability to spam respawning enemies have anything to do with the amount of normal enemies in an area?
--- End quote ---
That was in response to your idea that we should cap combo bonus instead of removing charts where infinite is possible; I'm bring up issues with implementing a cap.
--- End quote ---
It's not difficult at all to put "In areas with respawning enemies..." at the start of the statement laying down the rule. To the best of my knowledge, there are no respawning enemies of one type within combo distance of those of another type (e.g. there aren't any infinitely respawning Rex enemies right next to a Big Mother that infinitely spawns enemies), so the rule wouldn't even have to consider the case of linking the two combos together. Of course, there could be one odd case that I'm not remembering, but banning the majority of instances due to one minority is silly -- THAT would be a case where you'd remove the individual level from the chart, such as Hot Shelter - Gamma in Sonic Adventure.
--- Quote from: Paraxade on June 14, 2009, 08:16:16 pm ---
--- Quote ---It's not the matter of "banning a glitch" that I'm pursuing -- it's the matter of treating the patch for it as a different version of the game.
--- End quote ---
Because it essentially IS. It's a slightly different version of the same level. The level layout is exactly the same, as is the way the engine functions/works. How is it any different just because it was released over XBL? How about if they released a patch that made a functional change to the engine? Would you argue that we should wipe all the charts?
--- End quote ---
Yes. Yes I would. Or rather, I'd request the game be split into two charts if people really wanted to play with both versions of the main engine.
--- Quote from: Paraxade on June 14, 2009, 08:16:16 pm ---
--- Quote ---On the subject of Sonic & Knuckles Collection and the two disc versions of Sonic 3D Blast being "rare": a quick Google search for those three games revealed downloads for all of them, and Saturn emulation on PCs has gotten to the point that it can be run at full speed.
--- End quote ---
Then I'd argue that said glitches should be allowed.
--- End quote ---
But that's only one of the issues: would you also argue for the addition of the version-different charts, given the newfound availablity of the games? Plenty of people have said "no" for the reason that the charts wouldn't see any new competition... if a chart has x total competitors, less than x/10 competitors actively play. Unleashed DLC is nearing this limit already, and the latest pack just came out last week.
...I, of course, say yes, else I'd've never brought up the example in the first place.~
Parax:
--- Quote from: Thorn on June 14, 2009, 08:26:49 pm ---It's not difficult at all to put "In areas with respawning enemies..." at the start of the statement laying down the rule.
--- End quote ---
In areas with respawning enemies, what? You aren't allowed to combo off them? that's a bit difficult. >_> If a Big Mother happens to spawn enemies then you'll get a higher score and there's nothing you can do about it. If a wizard happens to heal an enemy you're in the process of trying to kill then you'll get a higher score and there's nothing you can do about it. Implementing a rule only makes sense when it's something that a player has to do deliberately; and while you may not be able to get combos in the 1000+ range without deliberately spamming them, there's still minor differences of a few thousand points that vary based on whether some of the above happens. For a rule to work you'd basically have to say that a Big Mother isn't allowed to spawn enemies in your run, or wizards aren't allowed to heal enemies, etc. And it's more likely to happen when you have low strength and are trying to rack up a combo bonus as high as possible without getting anything that could lead to infinite to occur.
--- Quote ---Yes. Yes I would. Or rather, I'd request the game be split into two charts if people really wanted to play with both versions of the main engine.
--- End quote ---
That makes no sense then, to force everyone to redo their stats with the new version especially when the game will still have old stats that are no longer possible saved on the stats screen. Nobody wants to compete in a game where their stats could be wiped at a moment's notice because SonicTeam decided to patch something.
--- Quote ---But that's only one of the issues: would you also argue for the addition of the version-different charts, given the newfound availablity of the games? Plenty of people have said "no" for the reason that the charts wouldn't see any new competition... if a chart has x total competitors, less than x/10 competitors actively play. Unleashed DLC is nearing this limit already, and the latest pack just came out last week.
--- End quote ---
I would say no based on that the game's already been around for a while anyway... though now I'm thinking if there should be some sort of cutoff point as to when new versions of the same game should stop being allowed on the same charts, eg. if they released a new version of a Genesis game where every level has some sort of new glitch where you can skip straight to the end or something. Or even a case like S1GBA, though that version is different enough that it doesn't play even close to the original.
Thorn:
--- Quote from: Paraxade on June 14, 2009, 08:41:06 pm ---
--- Quote from: Thorn on June 14, 2009, 08:26:49 pm ---It's not difficult at all to put "In areas with respawning enemies..." at the start of the statement laying down the rule.
--- End quote ---
In areas with respawning enemies, what? You aren't allowed to combo off them? that's a bit difficult. >_> If a Big Mother happens to spawn enemies then you'll get a higher score and there's nothing you can do about it. If a wizard happens to heal an enemy you're in the process of trying to kill then you'll get a higher score and there's nothing you can do about it. Implementing a rule only makes sense when it's something that a player has to do deliberately; and while you may not be able to get combos in the 1000+ range without deliberately spamming them, there's still minor differences of a few thousand points that vary based on whether some of the above happens. For a rule to work you'd basically have to say that a Big Mother isn't allowed to spawn enemies in your run, or wizards aren't allowed to heal enemies, etc. And it's more likely to happen when you have low strength and are trying to rack up a combo bonus as high as possible without getting anything that could lead to infinite to occur.
--- End quote ---
You've completely misunderstood me. The full rule would be something along the lines of "In areas with respawning enemies, you cannot achieve a combo of more than ___." I am NOT saying you cannot hit respawning enemies at all. I'm simply proposing a limitation to how often. Set the blank at a number that still lets you finish off the Big Mother or whatever with your low-strength werehog and permits accidental hits, but that gives a low enough combo bonus to not be much different than killing the Big Mother quickly and saving Time Bonus points.
While I've got it on my mind, accidental breaking of the rules has never been an excuse before. I've lost countless good ring attacks due to accidentally trigger Super/Hyper status or entering a bonus/special stage.
--- Quote from: Paraxade on June 14, 2009, 08:41:06 pm ---
--- Quote ---Yes. Yes I would. Or rather, I'd request the game be split into two charts if people really wanted to play with both versions of the main engine.
--- End quote ---
That makes no sense then, to force everyone to redo their stats with the new version especially when the game will still have old stats that are no longer possible saved on the stats screen. Nobody wants to compete in a game where their stats could be wiped at a moment's notice because SonicTeam decided to patch something.
--- End quote ---
Having two charts would require people's stats to be wiped? One chart would allow the glitch, the other wouldn't. There's been a slew of people around TSC asking for shortcut/non-shortcut divisions, and this seems even more practical due to the fact that it's using two different "versions" of the same level, as you put it.
--- Quote from: Paraxade on June 14, 2009, 08:41:06 pm ---
--- Quote ---But that's only one of the issues: would you also argue for the addition of the version-different charts, given the newfound availablity of the games? Plenty of people have said "no" for the reason that the charts wouldn't see any new competition... if a chart has x total competitors, less than x/10 competitors actively play. Unleashed DLC is nearing this limit already, and the latest pack just came out last week.
--- End quote ---
I would say no based on that the game's already been around for a while anyway... though now I'm thinking if there should be some sort of cutoff point as to when new versions of the same game should stop being allowed on the same charts, eg. if they released a new version of a Genesis game where every level has some sort of new glitch where you can skip straight to the end or something. Or even a case like S1GBA, though that version is different enough that it doesn't play even close to the original.
--- End quote ---
The fact that the game's been around for a while dictates whether or not new charts can be added? We've added Special charts for Rush, Heroes, and Chaotix long after charts for said games were first created. While there's not a whole lot of competition, what little there is is from the people who care about competing in the game (champions, high-ranked people, and people who just plain like the game). We're not here to pamper to the people who stopped competing in a game, we're here to cater to those that are competing in it right now.
Parax:
--- Quote from: Thorn on June 14, 2009, 09:41:46 pm ---You've completely misunderstood me. The full rule would be something along the lines of "In areas with respawning enemies, you cannot achieve a combo of more than ___." I am NOT saying you cannot hit respawning enemies at all. I'm simply proposing a limitation to how often. Set the blank at a number that still lets you finish off the Big Mother or whatever with your low-strength werehog and permits accidental hits, but that gives a low enough combo bonus to not be much different than killing the Big Mother quickly and saving Time Bonus points.
--- End quote ---
eh maybe that would work... but saying "you can't get a combo higher than x" still doesn't limit how many times you can get that combo.
--- Quote ---Having two charts would require people's stats to be wiped? One chart would allow the glitch, the other wouldn't. There's been a slew of people around TSC asking for shortcut/non-shortcut divisions, and this seems even more practical due to the fact that it's using two different "versions" of the same level, as you put it.
--- End quote ---
No, but banning a trick that the best stats have to use because it was patched out and then wiping the charts would. >_>
--- Quote ---The fact that the game's been around for a while dictates whether or not new charts can be added? We've added Special charts for Rush, Heroes, and Chaotix long after charts for said games were first created. While there's not a whole lot of competition, what little there is is from the people who care about competing in the game (champions, high-ranked people, and people who just plain like the game). We're not here to pamper to the people who stopped competing in a game, we're here to cater to those that are competing in it right now.
--- End quote ---
No, I'm referring to new releases. Just thinking if a new version of a game came out where much lower times were possible long after the original came out it wouldn't seem fair to track them on the same charts... but there's also not much point to having separate charts for every single different version of a game (I'm thinking we'd have Sonic 1, Sonic 1 Cell Phone, Sonic 1 GBA, etc...).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version