Rayman 3 scores

sfn42 · Jan 13, 2014

raymancool_bis said:
Hunchman801 said:

Cut said:

Just out of interest, why is there a german Wiki although this community doesn't have a german forum?

Click to expand...

We have quite a history with forums in other languages here. When PC was created in August 2003, we had a German section too, unfortunately it was extremely inactive (the other two sections being very lively due to people's huge discontent with the way the official forums were managed) and was deleted that same month. Retrospectively, it wouldn't have cost us much to keep it longer, but things went fast back then. We tried again with a Dutch section in July 2006, but it was deleted for the same reasons in May 2007. And finally, an Italian section was created in December 2009 and didn't make it past January 2010 due to inactivity again.
The Dutch forums probably failed because all Dutchies speak English anyway, and the Italian forums because of the size of the community (how many Italian Rayman fans have you met?). I'm not entirely sure about the German forums, but surely the key factor to Pirate-Community's success was its members, and in particular a handful of members who have brought great activity and/or high-quality discussions, as they attracted a lot more members, and unfortunately we never had any such people on the German side. CC helped me translate the forum names and other stuff to German back then, maybe he remembers and can think of other reasons things didn't work out. The fact that I didn't know a word of German back then probably didn't help, though the Italian forums have shown that speaking the language is not sufficient.
Truth is, we'd love to have a German section at PC, not just because it'd be cool to brush off my German but for the mere reason that it's always been our goal for PC to offer the best services to the largest amount of people within the Rayman fandom and beyond. But we've learnt from our mistakes and this could only happen if we had enough motivated people ready to keep it active!
In the past, I remember considering mergers to build upon existing communities, but except for Gigaman's forum that never happened. Not many targets and way too much ego.

Click to expand...

wow potato i didn't know any of that
are there any german or dutch or italian (or any other ) rayman forums that we can try to merge with this place? all would benefit i think

I don't know of any. The German community used to be pretty big, but most people have left by now and our forum, TSF, is not really fit for a merger because it's actually not really a Rayman-forum, but more of a video games forum with a big Rayman section. Also, it doesn't really have any active members at this point.

Hunchman801 · Jan 13, 2014

raymancool_bis said:
are there any german or dutch or italian (or any other ) rayman forums that we can try to merge with this place? all would benefit i think

Well unfortunately I don't know of any active Rayman forum in one of these languages. As a matter of fact, I don't really know of any other active Rayman forums.
And even if there were, it's always complicated. You want to be sure that the place you're merging with at least partially shares the same values and spirit as yours, you need to reach an agreement with the owner of the place... it's often a long way.

Adsolution said:
Wasn't it just explained why they dropped the forums outside of those in English and French?

I still believe there's some potential within the German community, though now it's probably much smaller and scattered. If only we had more members!

Sajiki · Jan 13, 2014

finally finished hhq with a score of only 101k.. but seriously the combos in this level involve so much rng.. really one of the least fun levels :/
at least i got all 4 big combos in part 2 and all 3 in part 3. part 1 was just meh.

DTUCC · Jan 13, 2014

that's a pretty nice score you have in HH. So at this point, TOTL is still left, right?
Did you notice the PM is sent you a few days ago?

Sajiki · Jan 13, 2014

DTUCC said:
that's a pretty nice score you have in HH. So at this point, TOTL is still left, right?
Did you notice the PM is sent you a few days ago?

no i didnt will read it now.
totl is next, but sbtc und lotld have around 60-80k easy points. plus the around 45k from totl we will see where i land..

i wont edit my hof score until im satisfied though. suprise surprise :mrgreen:

Xenon · Jan 13, 2014

Thank you Cut for the detailed response, and thank you for arguing the IPG's case sensibly. The glitch is a game changer, which still puts us on different levels. That doesn't mean however that I still wish to condemn it. The more I think about the glitch, the closer I come to the conclusion that we may have to accept it into the HOF, despite my (and others') reservations, despite it changing how we play a level in a very negative way, and despite the fact that it goes against everything I love about playing R3.

I haven't changed my mind about the glitch itself. I think it's good that you discovered it, I think it's good that we've discussed it here in great depth, but I think its presence in the game is regrettable. And I don't think it's moved the game forward, to be honest. What I have changed my mind about, is that with this particular glitch we, as a community, are in a position to banish it. I don't think we are at this stage.

That's not to say that this discussion has been unnecessary, blown out of proportion, or anything like that. In fact, a lot of what has been said on the Austro-German side of the argument has been a load of tripe. Hopefully though this will move the disussion to new shores and we'll be able to find common ground more easily.

sfn42 · Jan 13, 2014

Xenon said:
That's not to say that this discussion has been unnecessary, blown out of proportion, or anything like that. In fact, a lot of what has been said on the Austro-German side of the argument has been a load of tripe.

I consider a lot of what the contra-IPG side posted a load of tripe as well, so I guess we're on the same page, then. :wink:

But seriously, I respect your opinion. That's what I came here for, share opinions about the IPG and discuss its implications on the game as a whole. I felt that became impossible, once the idea of splitting the HoF or even deleting IPG-users from the HoF was introduced and then repeatedly pushed forward, as this kind of veiled threat that I felt I had to constantly defend against.

I've also never denied that it changed the game, because it did, there is no doubt about that. To me, it's the biggest change to the game since we started making videos of combos and put them on Youtube (which I consider a huge paradigm shift). I hope we can discuss this change and other changes that may come some day with a positive or neutral attitude.

EDIT: And Congrats to Sajiki. Well done! 100000+ in HH is a great accomplishment.

MandM81 · Jan 14, 2014

I believe it’s time to move on and try to reach a solution everyone can live with.

I have played the IPG for a few days and it was like playing a new game with a completely different set of rules. In fact, with the IPG R3 has become a whole new game. The IPG has removed the boundaries in the gameplay in a way that allows you to move around fairly freely and to revisit rooms that were never possible in the old R3.

Purists, including myself, have been outraged by this and it has certainly divided the community. I have been dead against it having any place in HoF, but the way Cut has presented the IPG game it has some merit and I acknowledge it’s worthy of a competition in its own right.

There is no reason why the old R3 and the IPG R3 can’t share the same HoF. With inspiration from Xenon, Rolesfamily, Adsolution and others I will suggest we add an extra column to the HoF where moderators can indicate the method used.

There has been a concern that two different HoFs would “demonize” players using IPG. This by no means the intention. We use one HoF and the indication whether IPG has been used should everybody be able to live with. It’s a compromise but also an acknowledgment that the old R3 and the IPG R3 are in fact two games with very different rules.

Cut · Jan 15, 2014

I totally understand your feeling about the IPG being a completely new game(-play), it's something strange, odd and new, I'm sure nobody would deny this. But in my opinion, the IPG's strangeness alone can't legitimate a differentiation in context of the competition, because it would be exactly this if using the IPG would be a criterion on the HoF which represents the Rayman 3 competition. For instance the shoe and the snowboard are completely new gameplays too, totally different from the Rayman we are used to play in ~90% of all parts this game provides. Rayman never was one universal stringent gameplay with it's very specific characteristics, we everytime had outliers. With the big difference, that we know these since 11 years, the IPG since 4 months. Sure you may argue that everybody decides on his own to wheter use IPG or not - a choice which isn't given at the snowboard/shoe-parts of this game - but in my opinion, there is no rational reason to resign on the IPG if there is the possibility to use it, both in LOTLD2 and TOTL2. From the view of competition, the IPG is absolutely fair, there is not a single point difference between the platforms. Everybody is able to achieve the same amount of points out of it, so I can't see the reason why we have to differ between IPG-players and non-IPG-players in the HoF, which is indeed the personification of the Rayman 3 scoring competition. There is the Lums-Bug, which causes platform-differences in the dimension of almost 1000 points. It's not fair from the view of competition, but nobody ever took care about this in the Hall of Fame, everybody just accepted his fate (remember your/CC's discovery in DOTK. Heard any serious complaint from a PC-player?). Why now the differentiation? There are many elements in the game which are highly debatable in context of fair competition, but the IPG is far away from that. I'm not sure whether I could accept the IPG's mentioning in the HoF as an original precedent when it's totally fair. Especially when I think about the discussions we had in the past about eventual changes in the HoF due to elements which are definetly not fair, and that we were far far away from doing just the tiniest change in the HoF.

Xenon · Jan 15, 2014

That isn't the reason for the controversy around here though. The issue is more to do with walking through walls, escaping death, gaining infinite powerups and that sort of thing.

Out of interest, M, will you be using the IPG to improve your score, regarless of the outcome?

MandM81 · Jan 16, 2014

Xenon: No, I stand by my sentiments about the IPG R3. While it’s interesting, as a curiosity, to be able to get the green gem in the secret room in TLOTLD part 2 for 9.000 points, it is not done by a clever new idea. It’s done by changing the rules of the game.

Using one glitch, the swim, to bypass several rooms in order to reach a certain area and then use another glitch, the IPG, to acquire infinite Powerup is not the way I wish to play R3.

I will continue to play R3 the classic way. I have some ideas for improvements I will try out. The goal is reaching 860k eventually.

Will the IPG make you want to re-emerge as an active player?

Cut: The “classic” R3 and the IPG R3 are different games with very different rules, as you have pointed out yourself in your posts. Thus they cannot in all fairness be part of the same competition. A fair solution, in my opinion, will be to indicate in the HoF if the IPG rules are used.

As for the Lums question in DOTK, you know, for many years pc players actually had the advantage as they were the only ones who could get the Lums. Console players didn’t complain at the time either. I still wonder why the Lums conversion is different for pc and consoles.

DTUCC · Jan 16, 2014

MandM81 said:
As for the Lums question in DOTK, you know, for many years pc players actually had the advantage as they were the only ones who could get the Lums. Console players didn’t complain at the time either. I still wonder why the Lums conversion is different for pc and consoles.

i hate to stop you here but i have always complained about every version difference that showed up in R3 and I always will.

any new person joining RPC would just see the "IPG-column" in HoF as a branding to players who used obscure methods that allowed for higher scoring. on the other side, the "purists" can freely continue to abuse their razoff glitches, lums glitches and superjumps as they wish. now, please show me the fairness in branding players just because you don't like the ipg.

in fact, if you are so keen on bringing fairness to the competition, let's get right onto how we judge the missing vortex, the lums glitches and the hoodflyers (yes, those actually bear massive version differences!!), as those have a far greater impact on the fairness of our beloved competition. i didn't see anyone complain about those EVER, yet you go out to judge the ipg right away.
when it comes to theoretical maximum scores, factoring in the hoodflyer-maximum in TOTL part 3, XBoX reaches 105.819 points, PC gets 105.469 points. PS2 can be happy, as they can improve their score by a whopping 120 points to 104.619 and GC players will have to settle 104.019. (Oh hey, that's even less than the previous max!)

the "classic" R3 has never been fair in any way, but i didn't hear too many complaints from anyone back then..

Xenon said:
That isn't the reason for the controversy around here though. The issue is more to do with walking through walls, escaping death, gaining infinite powerups and that sort of thing.

while this has never been the main reason for the controvery, is should still be one of the main concerns. if it's not about the fairness of the competition, i don't see why the HoF should even be included into the discussion. we might as well just relate a wiki-article to the ipg and move on, if it's not about the competition.

MandM81 · Jan 16, 2014

CC: The issue here is not the minor differences on the various platforms. The issue is that we have a community that is divided over a glitch that completely changes the rules of the game. I’m sure you as an experienced player can see the difference between Lums conversion and the IPG.

The HoF, with a few exceptions, consists of players who have used the classic rules to reach their scores. Many players are inactive now, but as you have seen during this debate, some players are still improving their scores in the HoF.

It must also be clear to you some players will not use the IPG rules to improve their scores, while some (a few?) will use the IPG as a score enhancing tool.

What is the problem with respecting both sets of players in the HoF? This can be done elegantly by adding an extra column to the HoF as described. This solution should benefit everyone as everyone can use the HoF.

Sajiki · Jan 17, 2014

MandM81 said:
I’m sure you as an experienced player can see the difference between Lums conversion and the IPG..

do you even notice how condescending you are?
i for my part wont accept such a kind of stigmatizing of the hall of fame based on subjective impressions of certain players. there have been enough objectively explained reasons which have been discussed to death by everyone but you. but you know.. probably im not an "experienced enough player" to even being able to "see the difference". so better ignore my post like the others i wrote.

edited typos

Xenon · Jan 17, 2014

I'm undecided on what to do with the HOF in terms of IPG columns, but Sajiki, please stop talking about subjectivity as if it's somehow irrelevant. I thought we buried this argument several pages back and moved on.

A message to all: it would be nice to have some fresh opinions about the issue. If someone, anyone is reading this thread right now but too scared to click the reply button, please, do so, regardless of your position in the HOF. At the moment it seems to be six or so people discussing this, and it's impossible to draw a fair conclusion based on what one, two or three people say.

Adsolution · Jan 18, 2014

Sajiki said:
do you even notice how condescending you are?

What about that was condescending? People get offended way too easily in this thread.

DTUCC · Jan 18, 2014

MandM81 said:
It must also be clear to you some players will not use the IPG rules to improve their scores, while some (a few?) will use the IPG as a score enhancing tool.

basically, what you are implying here is, that if a group of players tomorrow chooses not to use the razoff glitch to improve their score, we'll have to consider how we handle this issue in the HoF, maybe by adding an extra column so they can compare their scores on equal footing.

Xenon said:
I'm undecided on what to do with the HOF in terms of IPG columns, but Sajiki, please stop talking about subjectivity as if it's somehow irrelevant. I thought we buried this argument several pages back and moved on.

subjectivity is completely irrelevant from a competetive standpoint. it's the same in sports, you'll never see a ruleset in soccer, football, baseball or whatever be changed just because a group of people don't like it. it always has to happen based on objective reasons that explain why said rule is bad/unhealthy for the competition.

Adsolution said:
What about that was condescending? People get offended way too easily in this thread.

the issue of branding players with an extra column in the HoF does appear a lot more offensive than people make it out to be, imo. while i agree with you that it's never a good idea to be offensive in a discussion like this, i do understand sajikis point, considering he's been ignored by all of you for several pages to go now.

Xenon said:
A message to all: it would be nice to have some fresh opinions about the issue. If someone, anyone is reading this thread right now but too scared to click the reply button, please, do so, regardless of your position in the HOF. At the moment it seems to be six or so people discussing this, and it's impossible to draw a fair conclusion based on what one, two or three people say.

i do like this idea. let's see what people have to say. i'll be looking forward to it!

MandM81 · Jan 18, 2014

DTUCC said:
basically, what you are implying here is, that if a group of players tomorrow chooses not to use the razoff glitch to improve their score, we'll have to consider how we handle this issue in the HoF, maybe by adding an extra column so they can compare their scores on equal footing.

But we are not talking about the Razoff glitch, are we? We are talking about a glitch that alters the rules and the gameplay to such an extent it makes R3 into a very different game.

The solution with an extra column in the HoF came out as a compromise that would benefit all players, pro or con IPG. If we don't reach a sort of consensus we'll all just go back into the trenches.

You have made strong arguments in your posts about the differences on various platforms. If you look at the HoF, there is already a column that shows which platform has been used to reach a particular score. The same can be done with the IPG without branding anyone.

sfn42 · Jan 18, 2014

MandM said:
I’m sure you as an experienced player can see the difference between Lums conversion and the IPG.

I can see the difference: One enables fair and equal competition between players on different platforms, the other restricts fair and equal competition. One guess which one does what.

Let's look at a few number with regards to the impact of the IPG:
1/9: the number of levels affected in their total score by the IPG (TOTL)
2/48: the number of parts currently containing an IPG (LOTLD 2, TOTL 2)
12410: the number of points the IPG is worth in total points (ignoring the possibility of a Hoodflyer-maximum without IPG for now)
1.42%: the percentage of points enabled by the IPG (based on CC's total score)

For comparison's sake, let's have a quick look at launching glitches:
3/9: the number of levels affected in their total score by the launching glitch (CF, DOTK, SBTC)
7/48: the number of parts currently containing a launching glitch (FC4, CF2, DOTK7, DOTK8, SBTC1, SBTC3, TOTL2)
~11500: the number of points the launching glitch is worth in total points (this is a rough estimation, since the distinctions are not often quite clear, as in SBTC)
1.32%: the percentage of points enabled by launching glitches (based on CC's total score)

These numbers make one thing very clear: the impact and game-changing quality of the IPG has been overstated. Its impact on the maximum score is very similar to that of launching glitches, as these numbers show, and is actually really small when we look at the game as a whole (98.58% of all points have nothing to do with an IPG).

MandM said:
The HoF, with a few exceptions, consists of players who have used the classic rules to reach their scores. Many players are inactive now, but as you have seen during this debate, some players are still improving their scores in the HoF.

So, if we follow through with your argument, the IPG should be banned because players who didn't know about it, didn't use it? Or are you trying to say that the HoF should only include techniques that a majority of players used. I guess you could say goodbye to your HoF-score, then, considering you used a plethora of (glitch-)techniques that few to no other players used. Every player is free to use the IPG, there are no limitations on it.

MandM said:
It must also be clear to you some players will not use the IPG rules to improve their scores, while some (a few?) will use the IPG as a score enhancing tool.

And? Most people will not use the Razoff-glitch, either. Or how about the launching glitch in the snowboarding part? Even fewer players have used that. Whether one uses or doesn't use a certain technique is a personal decision, but it can NEVER influence the competition as a whole. And, as everyone can use the IPG, any exclusion of it from the competition would have no foundation other than personal preference and that is just not a valid reason.

MandM81 said:
You have made strong arguments in your posts about the differences on various platforms. If you look at the HoF, there is already a column that shows which platform has been used to reach a particular score. The same can be done with the IPG without branding anyone.

You are aware that the platform is part of the code. It is not an outside modification and therefore on a different level altogether.

MandM said:
What is the problem with respecting both sets of players in the HoF? This can be done elegantly by adding an extra column to the HoF as described. This solution should benefit everyone as everyone can use the HoF.

What is respectful about giving IPG-users a kind of special mark in the HoF, branding them as different, questionable, even, making outsiders think that they used some sinister and abnormal ways to get to the top of the ranking? This is not a solution but an attempt by you to diminish the accomplishments of certain players and restrict the freedom of the HoF. That's not a compromise but an atrocity.

I personally hate that we have to discuss this again and again but as long as you keep up with your attempts to ride roughshod over the integrity of the competition, then, I feel, there is no choice but to stay on this level of discussion. I didn't think that the hope expressed in my previous post, that we could discuss solely the in-game effects of the IPG in a positive or neutral manner, would be shattered so quickly.

@Xenon: I guess we have a very different view on what constitutes a "fair conclusion". To me, it is a decision based on objective criteria. I have once again provided those in my post. The contra-IPG-side, on the other hand, has failed to provide any and keeps rehashing the same pseudo-arguments that have been refuted a billion times already.

MandM81 · Jan 18, 2014

Sfn: As always it’s a pleasure to see how you manage to call your opponents ignorant and less informed, while you claim to have sense and objectivity on your side.

- Razoff and other glitches. There are glitches in the game, surely, but I don’t buy the premise that these glitches and the IPG have anything in common. Triggering the Razoff glitch doesn’t make you go through walls, give you infinite Powerup or allow you free access to the whole part. Neither do any of the other glitches mentioned. Many players do not use the Razoff glitch because they haven’t gotten there yet in their game. I used the Razoff glitch for the first time myself when I reached about 800k points.

Players chose not to use the IPG for different reasons. It’s not because they haven’t reached a certain level, it’s because they do not want to play a game which has very little to do with the pre-IPG game. If anything is an atrocity here, it’s what the IPG has turned to the game into.

- About banning the IPG. No, the IPG should not be banned because players didn’t know about it. It should be banned in HoF (imo) because the gameplay has changed dramatically with this glitch.

- Platform code. Obviously I’m aware it’s listed automatically. Further information in HoF will have to be done manually.

- Method information. The information about the method used in HoF is not a branding. It is an attempt to reach a solution so everyone can use the HoF. It’s not a tree that has grown in my garden. My personal view is still that the non-IPG R3 and the IPG R3 have become very different games and thus they don’t belong in the same HoF.

It seems to me the con-IPG group have been trying to compromise while pro-IPG group have not moved an inch and by the recent posts, it seems to be clear they do not intend to do so in the future.

Rayman 3 scores

Administrator