7 ms·

As someone with absolutely no knowledge of speedrunning community norms, it’s very interesting to see how a practice that is fundamentally about exploiting gene

• darkwater 2y ago
  I have your same knowledge but what you mention seems pretty normal and even human, no? You exploit some difficult to exploit bugs and you don't want easy tricks to be used instead. Although following this logic I don't fully understand why TAS are allowed.
  • __s 2y ago
    What do you mean by allowed? TAS runs aren't put on leaderboards against RTA runs
    • nurettin 2y ago
      Everything is allowed as long as you cat honestly. Some present no challenge (like idspispopd and run to exit makes no sense) so nobody runs it.
      • mst 2y ago
        Aha! Doom noclip so you can run through walls. (the first google result I got for idspispopd did not say _which_ cheat code it was, so figured I'd mention)
    • darkwater 2y ago
      No idea, I'm no expert at all in the scene :) it's just how TFA closes its story.
      • __s 2y ago
        TAS can often be used as proof of concepts on upper bounds of what's possible / fastest Things can often start TAS only & then progress makes it possible for human execution, like OOT Max Child% guay hover: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULodSWYC8TI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULodSWYC8TI (which then is executed in the actual run 4 hours into 5 & a half hour run: https://youtu.be/NyCklbB0ok0?t=15034 https://youtu.be/NyCklbB0ok0?t=15034) Route's will often first be shown with LOTAD (low optimization tool assisted demo), before others start trying to execute it in RTA conditions
  • aithrowawaycomm 2y ago
    I think of TAS as a code competition, almost like demoscene, whereas tool-free speedrunning is more e-athletics.
  • ChoGGi 2y ago
    TASes aren't allowed in regular categories (I'm sure they are somewhere), they're used to find the fastest way possible then human players try to reproduce it.
• __s 2y ago
  Note this is what categories are for. The category sets the rules. There are glitchless categories (which define glitching, see Ocarina of Time which has restricted & unrestricted glitchless categories since the game is so broken: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2ebZ94KGlVw https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2ebZ94KGlVw or how glitched categories include no-SRM & no-ACE)
• vanderZwan 2y ago
  It's not a particularly complex or surprising "ethics" though: the point of competing between speed-runners is an honest comparison of human skills, so all exploits require full disclosure to ensure a fair comparison and the ability to agree on which skills are actually being compared. This is why tool-assisted speedruns are separated from human speed runs, for example.
  • szvsw 2y ago
    > It's not a particularly complex or surprising "ethics" though Yes, you are mostly right, but it’s still interesting (and positive!) that the community landed on an “anything goes so long as you are honest” set of norms. As someone without much (well, any) interaction with speedrunning communities, it’s still fun to see how other internet communities have codified or tacitly established their operating procedures, expectations, norms etc.
    • dahart 2y ago
      What is interesting or unique about honesty as a shared norm? You are, again here, despite trying to deny it elsewhere in this thread, claiming the “anything goes” part within the bounds of the game and within the rules of the competition is somehow reflecting on the community norms and making this “interesting”. It’s like trying to say “Oh wow it’s so interesting that marathon runners have their own ethics; they can just run as fast as they want as long as they don’t take shortcuts”.
      • krisoft 2y ago
        > they can just run as fast as they want as long as they don’t take shortcuts In fact that is not how marathon running works. If you take certain drugs that is frowned uppon, even if you are honest about it. Similarly you can’t break the legs of the competitors. That is heavily frowned uppon even if you are honest about it. These are not obvious. There could be a full-doping version of marathon running but there isn’t. There could be a combined martial art&marathon running competition where you try to hurt your opponent without getting hurt while running a marathon distance but there isn’t.
• cbarrick 2y ago
  No, I think you are misunderstanding. There really isn't an "ethics" of what exploits are allowed or disallowed. Speed running communities generally don't care what exploits you use, as long as you are up-front and honest about it. The idea is to have apples-to-apples comparisons. You did a 100% run with no exploits? Cool, let's compare that to other people who also ran that category. Your friend did an any% run with save file manipulation? Also cool, let's compare that to others in the category. If you modified your save file mid run, but tell everyone else that your run should be compared against other runs that did not modify save files, that's clearly dishonest. The problem isn't the part about what exploit was used; it's the part where he lied to the community about which category it should be classified. Also, the core aspect of speed running is speed: the amount of time it takes you to complete the game. If you are modifying save files outside the game after you start a run, you need to record that time.
  • szvsw 2y ago
    > Speed running communities generally don't care what exploits you use, as long as you are up-front and honest about it. That is, precisely, a set of ethics! > There really isn't an "ethics" of what exploits are allowed or disallowed. It sounds like there is: disclosed exploits are allowed, while non-disclosed exploits are disallowed. This is very clearly a set of ethics. It is different than that of industry, where generally speaking trade-secrets and non-disclosure of methodology is often considered critical to business success, short of establishing protected IP; in academia, disclosure is putatively the norm but there is plenty of partial disclosure of methodology rather than complete… etc. > The problem isn't the part about what exploit was used; it's the part where he lied to the community about which category it should be classified. That puts it very precisely, and also highlights his unethical behavior in the context of speedrunning’s norms around ethical representation of achievements.
    • dahart 2y ago
      Whether someone was honest or lied in competition isn’t a unique set of ethics anywhere. Yes they use ethics, and those ethics are shared with society’s notion of ethics. You’re failing to make a case that speed running has their own norms.
• lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
  > its own notion of ethics, legitimate and illegitimate exploits, etc. There are run “categories” for any given game. Super Metroid’s arguably most prestigious category used to be called “Any%”, referring to the required item collection percentage as distinct from 100% or Low%, and now it’s called “Any%, No Major Glitches” because someone discovered that you can go out of bounds with the X-Ray Scope and a door. It specifies “major” glitches because the run otherwise makes heavy use of (among others) a “minor” glitch called Mock Ball, which lets you move in morph ball form at regular form running speed. Ultimately, the community has to agree on what is major and what is minor but it’s usually moot until a new exploit is discovered. It is interesting and it makes a whole lot of sense once you look at it from this angle. The categories actually have pretty rigorously defined rules precisely because there is so much competition involved.
  • jordigh 2y ago
    It also depends on what is "fun". Major glitches in Super Metroid make you skip too much of the game and that just isn't fun to watch. Speedrunning is a spectator sport, so spectators ultimately determine which categories are the prestigious ones.
    • djur 2y ago
      An example I'm aware of is the Lufia II No Major Glitches/No RNG Manipulation run. That game is very easy to make essentially deterministic with RNG manipulation, but like most highly technical RPG runs it's long and exhausting. The No RNG run not only bans RNG manipulation but also certain very rare drops that RNG manipulation is usually used to obtain. Why? Because otherwise, the optimal strategy would be to grind runs 10 minutes at a time until you got the rare drop from an early boss, and that's not fun. So the ruleset is designed to be accessible for runners who aren't interested in pathological optimization.
  • immibis 2y ago
    You can always play whatever you want - you just can't rank it on leaderboards if it doesn't follow the rules of that leaderboard. TASes break every rule and are pretty cool.
• dahart 2y ago
  You’re framing this in a very funny way. This is not at all the same thing as the Astros scandal. Astros didn’t break the agreed upon rules (edit: I’m wrong - human sign stealing was allowed, but electronic sign stealing was not). Groobo did break the agreed upon rules. There is no “own notion” of ethics here, and it’s presumptuous and incorrect to suggest that exploiting games during a game exploit competition somehow reflects on ethics and makes the cheating “interesting”. Cheating and ethics in a competition is defined by what the agreed upon rules are. Perhaps ironically, your comment is developing it’s own notion of ethics.
  • travisjungroth 2y ago
    > Astros didn’t break the agreed upon rules. They did. Using electronic devices to communicate during a game (I guess besides the dugout phone) is banned. They were watching the video feed in the clubhouse. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston_Astros_sign_stealing_scandal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston_Astros_sign_stealing...
    • dahart 2y ago
      Ah, you’re right, thanks. I read that sign stealing was allowed, and missed the parts about devices being banned.
      • szvsw 2y ago
        Runners on 2B are allowed to try to steal signs if they can crack whatever set the pitcher and catcher have switched to (well they use pitch com now); the astros used live video feeds to pick up the signs even with no one on base as well as computer assisted methods to crack the codes, and then related the pitches to the batter via the dugout.
  • szvsw 2y ago
    > This is not at all the same thing as the Astros scandal. Astros didn’t break the agreed upon rules. Sheesh, didn’t expect to re-litigate WS‘17 on HN today… I concede that there was at least some gray area in the codified official rules and the 2001 directive around electronic transmission, but it very clearly was a violation of the norms, IMO, and the Giants-Dodgers binocular incident in the 50s and its reception is good precedent. > There is no “own notion” of ethics here, and it’s presumptuous and incorrect to suggest that exploiting games during a game exploit competition somehow reflects on ethics and makes the cheating “interesting”. That’s not what I was suggesting was interesting to me. What interests me is the social phenomenon that is what the actual members of the community deem to be acceptable or in this case unacceptable, how the the community works to identify violations of norms, and then handle with the fallout.
• tialaramex 2y ago
  Yes. All of human culture is like this. When you do something nobody did before or are faced with a moral dilemma you've no prior experience with it's often unclear whether what's "Good" and what's "Bad" in some general sense and so the reaction may be based on "vibes". Dick Fosbury's weird jumping style? No rule against that, but equally the committee could have seen it and said "No, that's not OK" and forbidden it by the next event. They did not, Dick seems like an athlete, this is a new technique, fine by us - and today everybody serious uses this style (the "Fosbury Flop") or one based on it for jumping. Modern Contract Law mostly comes back to "Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Co" in the 19th century. This is about a quack medicine (Carbolic Smokeballs don't prevent Influenza) but the legal question was: If you specifically advertise that if people do a thing (use your Carbolic Smokeballs) and an event happens (a customer catches Influenza, "flu") you will pay them a lot of money (£100 in the 1890s) - well can the advertiser say they didn't mean it when asked for the money? Mrs Carlill seems like a nice lady, everybody hates people selling quack medicine, so obvious Carlill wins - but setting out explicitly why she wins forms the basis of an important part of modern civil law. That advert is an Offer, the choice to buy and use the Carbolic Smokeballs was Acceptance, she caught flu, therefore now Carbolic Smokeball Co. owe Mrs Carlill £100. If you've ever heard about why people would buy a seemingly worthless thing for $1, or about the peppercorn rents, or wondered why you're told you "agreed" to a bunch of legal stuff you don't care about and haven't actually read - that all comes back to Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Co. Maybe if she'd been an awful smug Karen trying to get paid for moaning and they were selling a pretty good (but not 100% effective) cure for flu, judges would have instead figured out why she does not get paid and our case law would have turned out very differently. [Edited to fix typo]
  • Y_Y 2y ago
    It's a good story but I think you oversell it. Carbolic Smoke Ball was heard in 1892, peppercorn rents (literal and figurative) predate that case by hundreds of years.
    • ricree 2y ago
      To elaborate on your points some more: the basic building blocks of contract law were already well established by the time Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball came about. The main question at hand was whether these could apply when the offer was made to the public at large rather than to any specific person or group.
• dahart 2y ago
  > Edit: children have helped point out the precise notion of ethics - no exploit is unethical on its face, so long as it is disclosed (Edit: I know I goofed here) Calling people children for correcting your assumptions breaks HN guidelines, please review: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Whether video game exploits are ethical was never a question.
  • lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
    Children comments to theirs, not childish commenters. For what it’s worth, I thought the same thing on first read before I realized another interpretation.
    • dahart 2y ago
      Sorry! You’re right. My bad assumption, I’m embarrassed. Apologies to parent @szvsw.
      • buttercraft 2y ago
        FWIW, I completely misinterpreted their comment too. I thought they were talking about actual young people and the intersection of innocence and ethics or something. Never would have connected it to "child comments."
  • shakow 2y ago
    > Calling people children for correcting your assumptions I'm pretty sure that's an abbreviation for “children comments”.
    • dahart 2y ago
      Yep, my bad.
• nottorp 2y ago
  Speedruns aren't only about exploiting glitches. For example, I only watch glitchless speedruns. That's what I'm interested in. People who are interested in speedruns including glitches want all of them to be disclosed though.
• sandworm101 2y ago
  >> a practice that is fundamentally about exploiting generally unintended mechanisms within a system design That is true of all racing. From NASCAR and F1 to the Olympic 100m, everyone operates on the bleeding edge of "the rules" ... at least that's where winners play.
• rpdillon 2y ago
  I think this notion of ethics is: "Don't lie."
• bigstrat2003 2y ago
  Honestly, I really can't stand speedrunning because it is so focused on glitches most of the time. No glitch categories exist, but are by far in the minority. I don't find it interesting to watch people exploit programming bugs, I want to watch people play the game as intended at a high level of skill.
  • djur 2y ago
    This really isn't true. One of the most famous speedrunning games is Super Metroid, and its two glitchless categories are the most actively competitive ones. Ocarina of Time glitchless had a new world record a few months back. Glitched speedruns tend to get more coverage in gaming media (because "runner completely breaks game" is clickier than "runner plays game 0:01 faster than previous runner"), and they tend to show up a lot at marathons (because they're faster), but generally speaking if you don't like seeing glitches there is plenty of content out there for you.
• scott_w 2y ago
  What’s being described in this article is separate from regular exploits, though. Hacking invalid seeds and items into your game are clearly not even speed running. It’s like riding a bike round the London Marathon and declaring victory.
• sixtiethutopia 2y ago
  This kind of "ethics" is common in many different areas. For example in rock climbing there's no cheating, only lying. There's nothing wrong with hangdogging a route (relying on the rope/gear to rest while ascending a route) but if you then tell people that you redpointed the route (climbed the route start to finish without relying on the rope/gear) then you're a liar.
• remram 2y ago
  You're equating deviating from the intended way to play a computer game you own with lying to entire communities of people. I do not understand it. One of those things has nothing to do with "ethics".