[TimpZ]

If you trust a player to not show a video

And what if you don't?

You're not even reading my posts. You're just avoiding them by invalidating them, just to bring up the same point later that I have already adressed without taking into account what has already been said in the thread.

[SpinDashMaster]

You're not even reading my posts.

There's a few reasons for that.

And what if you don't?

There's one of the reasons. If means if. Since you don't trust the player, then video proof is to be required for everything. Therefore the question doesn't pertain to you.

It boils down to two simple mechanics. You either trust the userbase outright and allow the whole system to go unchecked, or you require videos from everyone on everything. Anything in between is partial as defined before.

[Brian]

If I were to vote, I'd vote to require videos for every stat upon submission, AND the idea of banning a portion of the emus.

[TimpZ]

It boils down to two simple mechanics. You either trust the userbase outright and allow the whole system to go unchecked, or you require videos from everyone on everything. Anything in between is partial as defined before.

I trust most people on here, but in general I believe trust has to be earned. If you submit unlikely stats, you get a BS call. In most cases, these are resolved adequately, I'm merely arguing for a way to make it harder to cheat in them. If your name is Romulo, I trust you not to cheat no matter if you're using Gens or a potato.

Calling out people that get times that the community deems as unlikely have never been a problem before, no matter if you deem it partial to oldbies or newbies. They got a time you don't trust they got and you want adequate proof. Generally a video is regarded as better proof than a photo or simple explanation of the route and might even be required in cases where a really good time was achieved. I don't think Gens videos provide that kind of adequate proof and therefore I'm arguing against its validity as such.

[SpinDashMaster]

Oldbies are just as fair game for BS calls as newbies. Consider the cases of smizzla and Strong Bad, both longtime users of the site whom both have ended up banned for their eventual call-outs.

I don't care if you're romulo or a potato, if we're going to start requiring video proof, we have to require it for everyone.

[RigidatoMS]

Requiring videos for each stat is a nice thing, but as I said before, some people may just not like it. But speaking of methods to help having a more clean chart, allowing just non-TASable emus to be used, and requiring a video of every stat to be recorded - not that you NEED to upload it too, it's just for the cases where someone gets called, in which case, the absence of a video voids the stat right away - would be a good way to do so.

You're totally right, but that will be a problem for me. I use non-TASable Android emulators and, usually, in my little Galaxy Pocket. When I'm not, I'm playing in my Tablet, but I fell sometimes more accurate in one or in other. And I can't work with videos, because I'm more concentrated in SHeroes, where I can do video proofs a bit better. And I never expect to get a personal record while recording. That's why I have a lot of screenshot for proof, including Sonic 2 Android stats that I needed to erase to do the Emerald Hill 1 RAing.

[fastnaturedude]

This thread seems like it's more of an argument over video proof and whatnot between TimpZ and SDM than an actual debate over emulators. :|

This isn't whether or not we require video proof for every stat; this is IF we ask for video proof and it's given on an untrustworthy emulator, then it's insufficient.

[SpinDashMaster]

We've been down that road already too. You can't run on the thesis of only not trusting an emulator when it comes time to show proof via a video.

You can't allow an emulator to be used if a video from that emulator wouldn't even be accepted. That's complete bull.

If there is no video requirement for certain situations, then the player must be allowed to use whatever emulator they want since they aren't being tracked nor asked to show proof.

[fastnaturedude]

... that'd be the point of the rule change, making a certain emulator be used by EVERYONE so that if one person gets called out, there's no long debate about whether or not it's a TAS, no grey area? Right?

[SpinDashMaster]

There lies a problem with that position as well, since we have already shown that effectively all emulators are TAS-able in some form or another. We can't settle down into a "whitelist" or even a single emulator, because it becomes impossible to draw a tangible line between TAS-able and non-TAS-able.

This forces two lines to be drawn into the sand.

Either all emulators must be allowed or none at all.

Either all stats must require video proof or we continue only requesting videos when needed. (In the case of the latter the videos would undergo the same scrutiny they always have.)

[TimpZ]

it becomes impossible to draw a tangible line between TAS-able and non-TAS-able.

In theory, everything is TASable. Nothing is unTASable, including a model 1 Genesis running the original carts.

There is a very obvious spectrum of difficulty regarding TASability tough. On Gens Rerecording it's as easy as using the instruction manual for the emulator. On Gens Plus it requires a bit of hex knowledge and google-searching skills. For Fusion, it requires very advanced coding knowledge and tens if not hundreds of hours of dedicated work.

I don't think drawing a line at some point would bring anything but gains in the verification process nor that it would bring a major discomfort for everyone using emulators assuming a very clear rule is made. Exactly where the line should be drawn can be discussed by the community as a whole, but putting it anywere lower than Gens Plus would be slightly ineffective without additional rules since it would be harder to determine the exact variation of emulator used.

[Brian]

There lies a problem with that position as well, since we have already shown that effectively all emulators are TAS-able in some form or another. We can't settle down into a "whitelist" or even a single emulator, because it becomes impossible to draw a tangible line between TAS-able and non-TAS-able.

Ok, I'm done with this, I already said that ruling out some emulators is as easy as listing which built-in tools should make an emu forbidden for competition purposes, hell, I even listed some of them!

And as TimpZ said: "In theory, everything is TASable. Nothing is unTASable, including a model 1 Genesis running the original carts." So the whole point here is to make a rule that makes doing a TAS much less easy, that's all.

I already said my opinion and proposed a solution, always trying to be as clear as possible, but I'll do it one last time.

Ban some emulators based on their built-in tool, such as anythin regarding slowing the game's speed, or re-recording, I don't know, think of something.

Now you got 2 options regarding videos:

You can require them upon submission, or you can just require them for LD cases. Now don't come saying that doing this is the same, as anyone would still be able to pass out unnoticed until we call them, just like it is now, because in the case that someone is called out, not having a video or having one made on a banned emu would void your stat right away. But remember, you can always choose to require the videos for every submission, so don't make a big deal about the second idea.

I'm really tired of this topic.

[Parax]

I dunno, it seems like it'd be incredibly easy to effectively TAS a run with just save states. Disable status messages, savestate wherever you want, and record your run in real time rather than with an emulator recording feature. Then after you finish it's a simple matter of cutting off the video where you save state and joining it back on the first frame after that in your next successful "segment". If we're talking about banning features that make it easy to cheat should we not ban save states?

[Brian]

I thought about that, but there's 2 main problems, most if not all emulators have save states, but if there's a good emulator out there that doesn't have it, then it's fine, or not, because the second problem is that some people could say that not having save states available makes the process of speedrunning much more time consuming and blablabla. But if I could choose, I'd choose making save states a bannable tool for any emulator.

[RigidatoMS]

I thought about that, but there's 2 main problems, most if not all emulators have save states, but if there's a good emulator out there that doesn't have it, then it's fine, or not, because the second problem is that some people could say that not having save states available makes the process of speedrunning much more time consuming and blablabla. But if I could choose, I'd choose making save states a bannable tool for any emulator.

But the save states are already banned, right? This topic is going too far and there were more than 100 replies. And we're losing our time with this topic that I consider pathetical.

[Brian]

I was talking about banning emus that have built-in the save state tool. I'll fix the sentence: "I'd choose making save states a bannable tool for any emulator to have."

But I don't see this being approved anyway, just throwing out the idea. At least Paraxade got the point about banning the tools as a way of making this rule, so I don't have to explain that again.

[SB737]

I dunno, it seems like it'd be incredibly easy to effectively TAS a run with just save states. Disable status messages, savestate wherever you want, and record your run in real time rather than with an emulator recording feature. Then after you finish it's a simple matter of cutting off the video where you save state and joining it back on the first frame after that in your next successful "segment". If we're talking about banning features that make it easy to cheat should we not ban save states?

Official emulators such as Sonic Mega Collection Plus and Sonic Gems Collection, have savestate functionality available, would they get banned too? Personally I think banning savestates is a step too far, there's been a lot of discussion lately about where TSC's going. And personally I don't think that everyone in this topic knows what's trying to be achieved by it, or everyone has different ideas. Generally, from this topic, I get the idea that people are just throwing ideas around, and looking for a solution to make it as hard as possible for people to BS. BSing is always gonna happen, nothing can be done about it, you can ban emulators, even official emulators, but that doesn't stop someone BSing. The reply people will give me to that is that when people get called up they can't provide proof from a TASable emulator (or from what is seems now any fricking console as you can TAS with anything apparently). My outake on that is let the Admins do THEIR job, they've done a fantastic job at picking out BSers (and that's not the hard part from what everyone's saying), and then getting to the bottom of people's activity, and coming to the correct conclusion, if they get presented with evidence it's their decision on whether it's valid or not. To be honest there are ways around everything, if someone wants to BS, and know what they're doing, then they'll manage it. To get 80% at a game and get a decent chunk o sitewide points you only need a bunch of orange stats, with some record ring attacks and you'll get it. Submitting fake stats like that and slipping under the radar isn't really hard, obviously the more it's done, the more noticeable it becomes, and if someone stays outside the community and never proves their skill in some way, then suspicion will arise, but we have admins for a reason and I'm gonna stop talking because I'm beginning to waffle on somewhat :V. lol

So what I'd like to know is where is this topic going? From the title I get the idea that TASable emulators are wanted to be banned, however alot of other things are being discussed here, perhaps around that ultimate subject, however (and can you even use however straight off the back of another however in a sentence lol) to come to an agreement we need to know what people are trying to achieve.

So could someone officially say exactly what is trying to be achieved? Ban Emulators, ban TASable emulators, require videos for everything, require videos for red stats, have a go at someone's sarcasm? yer i'm confused :P

And sorry for the wall of text.. I got a little carried away, and if I've said something that isn't relevant or has already been addressed then I apologise as all the posts I was catching up with were quite alot to take in.

[SpinDashMaster]

I already laid the battle lines down. People just want to try to shift it away from that. The only balanced decisions that remain are banning ALL or NO emulators, and requiring ALL stats to have videos attached or to never make videos mandatory (TSC's current stance as the rules are written is the latter for both).

The fact that nearly every emulator has a savestate function and could sneak that into a video blurs the lines between TAS-ability even further.

Anyone trying to take discussion away from those two decisions is bringing us in loops. No matter how hard you try, it will always return to this ultimatum.

[fastnaturedude]

I already laid the battle lines down. People just want to try to shift it away from that.

Maybe because not everyone in the topic agrees with you? This is a group discussion, forcing your opinion on everyone doesn't help anything <_<

[SpinDashMaster]

This isn't me forcing anything, especially not an opinion, and definitely not my opinion.

And from the looks of it, this "group" is going in circles and getting pissy with each other. It's time to bring an end to this.

[Brian]

Ban all emulators that have no TAS tools other than save state and require videos upon submission. Or if you really can't see the middle ground between your 2 options, just go by allowing all emulators but require videos for all stats. That's all for me, from now on I'll just watch, see ya guys o/

[RigidatoMS]

I'm sure that I'll listen Brian_pso, vote for banning none emulator and requiring videos for all stats without playback and watch this topic until admins close this 4ever. That will be hard, because I can only take screenshots.

[Naegleria]

I think upon making a submission, users should be asked if the runs were done on console/emu and which one in particular.

If they say emu then ban their ass.

[Parax]

I honestly think just leaving all emulators unbanned and strengthening proof requirements for all emulated runs is the best option. Most of the suggestions in this thread are really messy and weird half-solutions that won't really accomplish anything.

Also, I don't think faking runs by TASing is as big of an issue as some people in this thread seem to think it is. Most competitors submit legitimate stats and the ones that don't usually leave a tell somewhere and get caught, like SonicBoom said. With higher proof requirements it'll be even harder for them to slip something by.

[SpinDashMaster]

I agree with that ruling, Parax. To solidify it in the competition rules, it would go something like this:

* You may use any emulator for competition; however, any action performed during the run (be it an in-game action or use of an emulator function) that cannot be replicated on console voids your stat, and a recording must be submitted to the website for each stat you would submit this way (Emulator-provided videos such as .gmv's or .giz's, or raw video files will suffice).

[TimpZ]

I would think that requiring the input files would be a good compromise regarding emulators that support it. However requiring raw or encoded files from all emulators for all submitted stats would probably mean people would opt to use the ones with TASing functionality, which is against my original intention of at least putting people at a disadvantage using them. Though catching cheaters with an input file would probably easier anyway honestly.

I'm presuming emulators such as Genesis Plus GX for the Wii would fall under the same rule?

[Brian]

This does the job, I like it.

Editing just to say that I just loved the new forum layout, it's so much easier to not get lost between posts and explicits the level of power that someone has, which is useful for newcomers, great job to whoever did this.

[SpinDashMaster]

@TimpZ, yes, pretty much any emulator usage will warrant video requirement. We are considering making exceptions for minor games such as SPA/Rivals etc.

[Biblet2014]

I agree with having people have video proof of the time but some people do not have a capture card so they cannot capture it from TV and theu do not have the game or console so I dissagree on the Emulator part.

[Parax]

Surprised you all actually agree on this. Okay then. :P

Only issue now is where should people host these files? An ideal solution would be uploading straight to TSC, but that functionality doesn't exist, so people will need to either upload to an external site (no idea which one), or they'll have to attach it to a forum post.

I guess we could say you need to post the giz in the random .giz thread, and then link to your post in the stat comment? Or maybe there should be a separate thread for that, especially since this wouldn't be limited to .giz files.