Blind UV-Max

[Amph]

does someone is trying to do a blind UV-max in the shortest time? it would be more challenging than doing the map so mayi times to make your run perfect

obviously it work only on wad that you have not played yet

or just recording his first run?

[Dragonfly]

Isn't that pretty much what 90% of all FDA's are already?

[Maes]

Dragonfly said:

Isn't that pretty much what 90% of all FDA's are already?

What are the remaining 10% then?

[Dragonfly]

UV, not max? Percentage not accurately calculated :P

[Maes]

I thought that FDAs (without any further qualifier) were just about finishing an unknown/firstly attemptd level -not necessarily under UV-MAX rules.

[Amph]

Dragonfly said:

Isn't that pretty much what 90% of all FDA's are already?

sry i didn't know about FDA, they are blindly playthough? but i see that they are on a single map not the entire megawad

[Maes]

Amph said:

sry i didn't know about FDA, they are blindly playthough? but i see that they are on a single map not the entire megawad

Well, to play an entire megawad in FDA style, you must not die on any of the maps ;-)

But maybe there's a "megawad-length FDA" category, where the purpose is exactly that.

And yes, a genuine FDA, in theory, should be done "blindly", as a test of a player's general Dooming skills with an unknown map, kinda like an exam. On the other hand, conventional speedruns are highly coreographed, highly rehearsed routines and techniques refined by continuous trial & error for specific maps (often, under specific source ports, too).

Of course, just like with any "honor system", you can only rely on a player's honesty when he submits a demo and claims that this was his first -and only- FDA on a particular map so far, performed within a reasonable time limit (e.g. 1 hour) after the map's (supposed) first release.

I hope you understand that unless this entire procedure is overseen/refereed (e.g. preventing contact between mappers and competitors/players, releasing a new map at a precise, agreed-upon time and questing submissions of any demos at a specific agreed-upon time after that), anyone could claim whatever they want.

[rehelekretep]

the Doom speedrun community sometimes arrange races, where the maplist is somewhat randomised, then told to participants who then try and achieve the best times on maps within say, 1 week. i think that is the closest to what you were asking about?

[Maes]

I would be even more restrictive, at least when single maps are concerned:

• A jury/commission agrees with both players and mappers that on a certain day and time, a map will be released and made available for download from a location chosen by the jury.
  
• Realistically, the map should be released to the jury alone some hours beforehand, tested and deemed to be finishable before being entered in the competition. The jury's trial of the map will also determine a realistic FDA time to set (e.g. if by save scumming it takes 20 minutes, allow at least 40 or even an hour for players). Of course, no "leaks" must be caused by either the mapper or member of the jury.
  
• Once released, a timer starts, and players must produce a demo according to COMPET-N rules within the allowed amount of time, then e-mail it or upload it to a server controlled by the jury. The limited submission time is absolutely necessary IMO in order to negate the use of save-scumming or TAS tools, which, even if effective/transparent, require a significant time overhead to use.
  

Incidentally, that's how many online interview/exam processes are carried out.

Of course, I realize that as long as this sort of thing is done purely for hobby/fun, nobody is really gonna enforce such rules. Things will change dramatically if you slap the word "competitive", "league" before it, or there are prizes involved. But AFAIK, even more real-life "Cybersport" events just expect players to be familiar with standard levels/maps/campaigns of a given game, not to be good in face of an unfamiliar setting.

[baja blast rd.]

Maes said:

And yes, a genuine FDA, in theory, should be done "blindly", as a test of a player's general Dooming skills with an unknown map, kinda like an exam. On the other hand, conventional speedruns are highly coreographed, highly rehearsed routines and techniques refined by continuous trial & error for specific maps (often, under specific source ports, too).

Nah, most runs aren't that hard-worked. You have guys like SAV88 and such who have impressively meticulous demos, but most demos posted these days have more modest levels of effort put into them.

I think what you are saying is something people say to diminish speedrunners' accomplishments (OP's "it would be more challenging than doing the map so mayi times to make your run perfect" line is similar, and a VERY naive line at that) but it seems like people who say this overlook a lot of things. The most important is that fundamental skills of Doom generally aren't what is being practiced for a given run. Take any run with cyber two-shotting for instance; it's not like they relearn two-shotting for every single map. The runner probably already can fight a small cluster of revenants without taking damage in his or her sleep. The runner probably already can efficiently kill a bunch of monsters scattered around a room. Etc. etc. etc. (And if they can't reliably do any of these things, they'll practice it a lot for one run and then have that skill in their repertoire going forward.) The 'rehearsal' and 'choreography' is more for the map-specific chaining together of actions, which is to say, that, yes, if you watch a bunch of runs by a particular player, you'll indeed get an accurate sense of how good their discrete Doom skills -- the actions in the chain -- are. It's not as if their seemingly effortless fighting of individual mancs at near-point-blank range or something is a big lie that they mastered in just ONE map and will have to relearn for the next map. :D Sure, that specific tricky vile jump, or the way they fire rockets at a precise angle to suppress a cubby PE a couple thousand map units away, or any other more outre things like that are probably 'rehearsed' for the specific map and not easily replicable under more casual play conditions, but fundamental Doom skills are. Some runners admittedly blur the line (Qaatar for instance), but if you know what you are looking at, you can tell the difference.

I've noticed some players think speedrunners are trying to fool them about their level of skill or something. It's kind of silly. Maybe they just think EVERYTHING has to be rehearsed because no one can be that reliably good at basic fighting? Idk. Watch some streams or something.

[Maes]

That would be like saying that ballet dancers have no skill, because they rehearsed the same moves again and again many times, before performing before an audience.

It's true that they rehearse the particular moves of a specific performance a lot, before executing that particular performance before an audience, but that doesn't take away the fact that they must also train regularly in more "generic" moves, maintain physical shape and mental discipline, and invest many years of their lives in order to get at a level where they might be considered good enough in their trade. So in no case are they posers, tryhards, or skill-less hacks that just manage to pull a stunt due to sheer patience. Talent, disciplpine and training remain essential.

A fairer comparison would then be between a ballet dancer and a professional (or amateur) entering a dance competition: the ballet dancer has to train very hard for a very specific performance, the dance competitor would have to be ready for any number of challenges (OK, not master ALL kinds of dance style, but e.g. in a Latin dance competition, he should be equally versed in Salsa, Rumba, etc.). And YES, both need to train, but in different ways, and for performing different things.

Replace "ballet dancer" with "COMPET-N speedrunner" and "dance competitor" with "FDA (speed)runner" ;-)

A similar comparison may be drawn between e.g. a professional pianist or violinist giving a specific performance, and an master jazz musician, improvising live. They BOTH are musicians, obviously. They BOTH must train at music, obviously. But what they will required to perform, in the end, couldn't be more different.

rdwpa said:

I've noticed some players think speedrunners are trying to fool them about their level of skill or something. It's kind of silly. Maybe they just think EVERYTHING has to be rehearsed because no one can be that reliably good at basic fighting? Idk. Watch some streams or something.

That depends. If a demo is clearly marked as "TAS", then there's no deception, but unless the author is someone otherwise well-known for his non-TAS performance, there will be doubts about his actual skill level. That's normal.

Sometimes however, a performance is recorded that can either be the result of TAS OR extreme ultra-specialization/intimate knowledge of a map. A perfect example of that is the built-in demo of PPPP.WAD (both by TimeOfDeath, under an alias). There, stunts like shooting a BFG ball so that teleporting monsters exactly intercept it and die instantly are pulled. Sorry, but NO amount of "generic" skill at Doom can cause a player to think "Hmm....I'd better shoot a BFG ball in that specific direction at this specific time, because something is gonna happen".

The catch here is that TimeOfDeath's skill is already undisputable, that was his map, so he could do that and more. But what if I, a nobody (from a speedrunning standpoint) managed to beat his performance through sheer, monomaniacal dedication, and published the demo to prove it? What would the reactions of the community be then? Would I be considered the next ToD, or a hack/TASer?

[baja blast rd.]

Honestly I have no idea what you are talking about.

It seems like you are idly theorizing on the subject, and aren't very in touch with the game as it is actually played and don't watch many demos (either maxruns or FDAs) on even a semi-regular basis.

Anyway, the main thing is that good maxrunners collectively are substantially better at casual play (and FDA play) than the average. #1 at one might not necessarily be #1 at the other (there are even some speedrunners who don't even care about casual play), but there is not the hard separation you have invented in your overdramatic theories. That's just wrong.

It's somewhat misleading to lump all maxruns together (i.e., a 1-minute infight grind won't resemble a 10+-minute run in an adventure map), but nearly all runs have strong elements of improvisation and are far from 'note-by-note performances'. (Good) FDA play likewise has a very strong undercurrent of routine (and application of rehearshed concepts!) in it. The bleeding over is strong. (I don't think these analogies are particular useful btw, so if you respond I'd rather it be about Doom and stuff. :P)

[Maes]

rdwpa said:

Honestly I have no idea what you are talking about.

Not my problem.

rdwpa said:

Anyway, the main thing is that good maxrunners collectively are substantially better at casual play (and FDA play) than the average.

Which was exactly my point. Just like ballet dancers and professional dancers are better than the average Joe pretending to be Travolta ;-)

rdwpa said:

(Good) FDA play likewise has a very strong undercurrent of routine (and application of rehearshed concepts!) in it. The bleeding over is strong.

That's really not different than any sport or discipline: there are things that ALL serious practitioners/competitors must master and know how to perform to a certain level, to set them away from casuals. My point is that after a certain point, there are also specialized sub-classes of performance which require specialized/focused training. Since COMPET-N/speedrunning/FDA essentially ARE Doom's analogy of a sporting event or a performing discipline, analogies are inevitable, since the same concepts often apply verbatim.

[Jayextee]

Saying that speedrunners aren't skilled due to the amount of rehearsal involved is the same ballpark as scrubs claiming that grinding combos in Street Fighter's (or whatever) training mode is somehow cheating.

It isn't. And if you wanna git gud, it's a thing you just do. The concept of a blind UV-Max is an interesting curio, but there are so many ways a mapper can create traps that require fore-knowledge to get the most out of, that I doubt it could have any real or lasting competitive potential.

But I'd try it for fun anyway, you never know -- reminds me how I personally beat Sinkhole from Ancient Aliens' par time on my first attempt (even if I didn't Max it) so surprises do indeed happen.

[Maes]

Jayextee said:

Saying that speedrunners aren't skilled due to the amount of rehearsal involved is the same ballpark as scrubs claiming that grinding combos in Street Fighter's (or whatever) training mode is somehow cheating.

That's yet another mechanic often present in video games, an "exploit", which however rarely appears in real sports. And when it does, it often warrants a change in the official rules of the sport, or a paradigm shift in order to maintain competitiveness. For example, look at how the High Jump technique has evolved:

today nobody would use anything other than the "backward flop" at the highest level of competition, and everybody trains for it specifically. I wonder what older athletes must have thought of it ;-)

Sometimes it's simply due to the average level of the competitors going up. E.g. Olympic skeet shooting was once just 100 targets, which had to be raised to 150 for the modern variant at some point, simply because the average competitor could easily hit 100 targets. Another example, Formula 1 rules change every year.

Even in video games, there may be leagues or enforced rules regarding them e.g. "no grinding in way X", or in the case of upgradeable characters, checks to ensure that any gains/leveling was gained by legit ways, whether to allow some techniques or characters in a league or competition etc.

All of this simply in the context of a sport with rules.

However, what defines something as a cheat, an exploit, a hack, an unfair advantage etc. is often the result of a jury or a community, therefore largely a political decision. And as with all political issues, debating can only go so well (read: not at all), and not everybody will be pleased.

[Jayextee]

Unlike sports though, such things are hard-enforceable via the game's actual code and parameters; should, of course, updates and/or patches be made to re-balance.

To use FGC lingo "if it's in the game, it's part of the game"*.

*; tournament-banned 'boss' characters notwithstanding, although these bans are often automatic and largely uncontested.

[Maes]

Doom's COMPET-N and FDAs are indeed a special case in that they are performed off-line, and there's a kind of tacit gentlemen's agreement -a honour system, if you like- that any submissions, unless specified, are the result of one's own effort alone, by playing in one go and in real-time.

In theory, they can be screened for unusual inputs, signs of TAS-like tampering etc. but I don't know how effective they are or if any entries were ever contested on those grounds.

[Linguica]

rdwpa said:

It seems like you are idly theorizing on the subject,

Maes?? Never...

[CapnClever]

Amph said:

does someone is trying to do a blind UV-max in the shortest time?

As a speedrunner myself, this sounds supremely grating. Consider:

• If you die during your one and only attempt, too bad.
  
• If you fail to kill everything, too bad.
  
• If you fail to find all the secrets, too bad.
  
• If you manage to do all of these things but not fast enough, too bad! Since we're caring about shortest time, longer records are irrelevant.
  
• No second chances, just move onto the next map regardless of your success. (Or, as is implied by the OP's second post, the next wad.)
  

Some of us participate in blind races of Doom mapsets, but I don't think anyone would be interested in also adding the caveats of "no dying" and "kill everything and find all secrets", or at least more than the one time for whimsical novelty. It's applying way too many challenges at the same time. If you do happen to find someone doing this, that's cool I guess.

You might want to look into the DWIronman threads for something similar: one attempt through the whole mapset, no saves, ranks are based on fastest completion. It's not a UV-Max or anything, but most people are blind or semi-blind (i.e., played it forever ago) going in.

Maes said:

And yes, a genuine FDA, in theory, should be done "blindly", as a test of a player's general Dooming skills with an unknown map, kinda like an exam.

I thought the point of FDAs had more to do with providing mappers with a fresh player perspective. Is there a substantial community of people who watch FDAs to measure and rate player skill?

[Maes]

CapnClever said:

I thought the point of FDAs had more to do with providing mappers with a fresh player perspective. Is there a substantial community of people who watch FDAs to measure and rate player skill?

Not currently, since FDAs tend to attract players who already are indisputably competitive/good at Doom, so nothing new could be gained by judging them based on a FDA, and nobody ever put his rep on the line because of an FDA.

I think most FDAs are held with slightly laxer rules though, e.g. plain UV (not MAX) completion, unlimited retries (within a set time limit) until you finish it or give up, so essentially a "best effort" approach by part of the player. Judgment/comparison with other players is also a bit more critical/involved, especially if maxing is not achieved or required.

[Beginner]

Amph said:

does someone is trying to do a blind UV-max in the shortest time? it would be more challenging than doing the map so mayi times to make your run perfect

obviously it work only on wad that you have not played yet

or just recording his first run?

"Blind" and "UV-Max" are kind of mutually exclusive. UV-Max considers that player knows where enemies and secrets are located and how to avoid map from suddenly malfunctioning. Blind playthrough considers he doesn't know any of it. In "Blind UV-Max" final times depend more on luck than route, ammo, health and enemy management, simply because when player goes in blind there's no fucking way he's gonna know that, let's say, author decided to make some random patch of random sky-wall a shootable switch that opens up a secret in a weird part of the map.

[Maes]

Even in a blind run, in the end, if you really have to compare the performances of player A and B, everything can and will eventually be taken into account, including play style (e.g. preferentially cowardly/running or killing everything?), exit health/armor, average damage, secrets and items, etc.

That is, if you consider a blind run under the light of a highly competitive activity. If it was just as part of a playtesting (e.g. "Is this map completable by a Doomer of reasonable skill, who has never seen it before?") you don't need to take any of the above into account.

Beyond that, we delve into the metaphysical: "But a really good player has, among other things, an intuition for secrets!" *rolleyes*