Rayman 3 scores

[sfn42]

Sfn: I think you confuse yourself with your endless definitions of objectivity/subjectivity, being emotional/rational etc.

On the very first day you entered the current discussions you called me “pathetic” (verbatim quote) without me having addressed you or commented on your post at all. That was the first in a long line of personal attacks on me and subsequently other players who opposed the IPG.

Your posts have been very aggressive; someone called them “militant”, in form and content. You have gone for the jugular on everyone you disagree with you. That, in my book, is a very emotional and subjective reaction, very far from the rational and objective side you place yourself on. When you post after post come out self-righteous, self-promoting, arrogant and condescending you invite strong reactions like the ones from Adsolution and me.

I’m not trying to make everyone follow my rules, as you say. We are trying to deal with the first glitch ever that can change the landscape, so to speak, in certain parts of the game. It has a huge impact on the gameplay and the scoring options. There is no automatism in allowing all pre-existent glitches in HoF, which I think everyone can agree on.

I love how you either ignore or deliberately misunderstand all the points in my previous post. I invite everyone to read through MandM's post (his first real comment to the IPG) before the pathetic-quote again and then my previous post. It should make things a little clearer. That's all I have to say for now. I can just hope that other users are able to see through your schemes (and I am sure that they can, since these schemes are becoming pretty obvious).

If you want to add that to the vote as a third option, we can but I do not think this is a good solution at all, because, as you said, it is terribly inconsistent. There are no objective reasons why the IPG should be allowed in one level and not in another. We would have no legitimate way to defend such a solution. Look at it from the perspective of a newcomer who enters the scoring community and then finds out that a glitch is arbitrarily allowed in some levels, but not in others because some members are uncomfortable with it. I think this solution could leave a really bad impression immediately and could cause interested players to turn away from the community. But again, that's my opinion. If you feel this is the solution you want to get behind, I see no problem with adding it to the vote as a third option.

Think of it less as an official ruling and more as a vote kick style policy within this forum.

Sooner or later, you guys are going to have to realise that we're going to be dealing with more glitches of this nature in the future, and that we will have to make subjective group decisions to banish or restrict certain glitches in the game. As soon as you guys realise this, you'll see how irrelevant the 'all glitches or no glitches' argument really is.

R3 has changed. It's no longer a simple score system and we must therefore take greater control of the HOF.

@ Members of TSF: I notice you strategically ignored my post about CF! I'm a little worried it's because you used another controversial glitch to collect the points, such as the superglide glitch MandM referred to a few posts ago

All this does is set a horrible precedent and open a pandora's box. Taking control of the HoF is a power-move that invites the possibility for more power-moves in the future. Imagine that the community transforms and a group emerges that opposes the Razoff-glitch, or the launching glitch or really any other technique in the game and they start a movement to ban/restrict it. By restricting/ostracizing the IPG, all you do, is provide them with a precedent, with a foundation for their movement. The game has to determine what is and what isn't allowed, because the moment the community does, we are introducing a power element into the competition that could have disastrous consequences, as any powerful group, any majority could model the game and the competition in whatever way they like.

What makes you say that there are going to be more glitches like the IPG in the future? There is no indication that there are any such glitches. Assuming them to be in the game, is, at this stage, just conjecture and has no base in the reality of the game. With the way the game is right now and with the way we understand it right now, the notion of pre-existent glitches is still perfectly valid. Imagining horror-scenarios with a plethora of glitches that do not exist, is just pointless and should have no bearing on this discussion or the competition as a whole.

With regards to CF, CC explained that already but I can reiterate that we didn't have bad intentions about it. I honestly just glossed over it and forgot to answer because I was so focussed on the matter at hand, the discussion about the IPG. I agree with CC, though, let's discuss stuff like that after we have come to a conclusion regarding the IPG.

[Cut]

As this discussion appears like a Möbius strip, we all should finally make a decision to find the solution - that means: we vote about what to do now with the IPG. For this voting, we have 3 positions equal to 3 approaches related to the IPG.

We have DTUCC:

so what's in the spirit of the game? in my opinion, that is every glitch that still requires skill, effort and routing to make improvements.
these criteria are the essential ones, think about it - those are the rules by which we worked for 10 years, even though nobody ever expressed them. these are the rules by which we judged cheat engines and MG's discovery (since you keep bringing them up) - those require neither skill, nor routing. for cheat engine, my point should be clear.
[...]
it's not that gamebreaking of a glitch for the reasons i stated above. of course, infinite supercoper is an amazing asset, but it just allows for more diverse routing, and possibilities we didn't even think of so far. most levels in which we have acces to a powersuit, we take about 90% of the gems with the x2 multiplier anyway, don't we?

Accept the IPG how it is. See it as a glitch like any other glitch too.

Then MandM81:

There is no reason why the old R3 and the IPG R3 can’t share the same HoF. 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.

See the IPG as a special glitch which has to be treated specially. Add a column to the HoF which tells whether the player used the IPG or not.

And finally Xenon:

So I'd like to submit a third suggestion, one that I've been considering lately that is a little more middle-ground: to accept the use of the IPG into the game, with the limitations that we know of at the moment, but to reject any FURTHER level score improvements, should they materialise as a result of the use of this glitch. This would remove the incentive to go witch hunting for other IPG-friendly locations.
[...]
It would also mean we'd require impartial validation (not directly linked to the HOF, obviously), but that wouldn't be too problematic to arrange.
[...]
Think of it less as an official ruling and more as a vote kick style policy within this forum.
Sooner or later, you guys are going to have to realise that we're going to be dealing with more glitches of this nature in the future, and that we will have to make subjective group decisions to banish or restrict certain glitches in the game. As soon as you guys realise this, you'll see how irrelevant the 'all glitches or no glitches' argument really is.
R3 has changed. It's no longer a simple score system and we must therefore take greater control of the HOF.

Prohibit the IPG as a tool to extend the maximum scores of a level. Let the community decide in individual cases.

Quotations are cut and summarized from multiple posts!

So these are the three positions and three options we have. Everybody should make a decision on his own how to deal with the situation and then deliver his vote in this thread.

The position which achieves the majority of the community has to be accepted unconditionally. The positions comprise only the handling of the IPG, any further suggestions like the publication of all glitches or a RayWiki-Article are NOT PART OF THIS VOTING. I suggest that only accounts older than January 20th, 2014 with an entry in the HoF as a validation of having completed the game are entitled to vote due to the required expertise to make a decision about this issue. If someone is convicted of using double-accounts to vote, he is suspended from the voting that means both his votes are invalid and such behavior will be treated from the community as cheating in the game. Also I would suggest a deadline of 7 days after the voting is opened. Someone can vote by posting the sentence "I vote for DTUCC/MandM/Xenon's suggestion" in a single post or obviosly marked in a discussion-post. After the deadline the votes are counted by summarizing all vote-quotes in an overview-post.

If everyone is fine with this voting and the frame conditions, we voting could start right now. If not, then please tell me


Maybe when this burlesque finally came to an end, we also can take care about rolesfamily's and sfn's suggestions which could be further steps to a fair competition and a united community.

I'd also like to make a little addition to it: Write a Raywiki article about glitches in Rayman 3, including explanations and videos. This article and the existing article about the scoring system (workings of the combo-mode etc.) can then be linked on top of the HoF, so that beginners can find this information more easily.

How about this: When someone uses a score glitch they have to announce it when they submit their score.
So it'd be like
hey guys I just beat your top score in TLOTLD (for example), BUT I used glitch XYZ
Then that's fair. It's when people don't declare it.
And surely glitches only matter when someone beats a known limit for a level. If someone glitches their way to 500k it doesn't matter.

Especially rolesfamily's suggestion would be great if it becomes reality. Maybe this is something we can aim for when we finally found the solution how to deal with the IPG.

[MandM81]

@ Members of TSF: I notice you strategically ignored my post about CF! I'm a little worried it's because you used another controversial glitch to collect the points, such as the superglide glitch MandM referred to a few posts ago

without taking into account the defensive statement he is inevitably going to make before you even read this, i'd like to hear how you explain MandM "strategically ignoring" about 2/3 of our posts on the previous 10 pages. not to mention he has "strategically ignored" our attempt to set up a public vote, which we almost had agreed on already. you didn't hear us complain about that, though, we just tried to put up with it.

It's not for Xenon to speculate. I didn't strategically ignore your public vote suggestion. The fact is, I have no opinion on the matter. I'm neutral. Maybe I should have said that, but would that have made any difference to you? I don't make the call on such a vote anyway.

It seems to me we need to solve the problem with the speedrunner glitches so we can move on. I suggest we make a map, so to speak, where these glitches occur and where they have been used to boost the score. That way each player can check out whether a particular glitch can be triggered on his or her platform. If anyone has any problems in that regard, they should be solved so players can focus on the gameplay and not some random glitches in the game.

So I'll ask the ones who have the knowledge

1. TOTL part 1. Which speedrunner glitches were used, and where were they used?
2. CF part 1, 2 and 3. The same question.

[Adsolution]

your schemes

It is amazing to me that you have yet to understand

in some attempt

pathetic

Stop literally insulting people or I'mma tell on you because they hurt and stuff.

[Xenon]

So we only allow people in HoF we want to be there, doesn't matter whether they used glitches or cheats? Well, I can't imagine of wanting to be part of such a self-righteous community but well, democracy is democracy...

It's an agreement, not dissimilar to CC's suggestion of revealing all future glitches used.

We have the IPG in two parts of the game and one of them is completely obsolete. CF (either part 1 or part 3) would be the only level an IPG would be useful in, where are you seeing these future controversial glitches?

The IPG is not just useful for people who rank in the top ten who are looking to maximise levels. Everybody can now benefit from a new way of playing R3; a way that inherently removes a large element of challenge. Just look at the way it has transformed TLOTLD.

Seriously, who was the first coming up with this stupid controversal-glitch-shit? (sorry for rage). We had so many things in the game worth a serious discussion whether they should be banned or allowed but none of you gave a single fuck about them because you didn't even realize that these things are there. What about the DOTK or HH-Maximum? They are achieved by a glitch which is not available on PC, do you think this is fair? Platform-differences were one of the huge problems this game has since it's beginnings, why don't the ban maximum-combos including a lums-glitch (and please MandM, don't come with the higher PC-Maximum in DOTK in the past, when I achieved it, the console-maximum already was 109.829 and even today I would plead for an agreement that we ban every DOTK-score higher than the no-lums-maximum)? It's not that I want to ban them because I arranged with the situation already but you can imagine that I'm not fine with it. Or the missing vortex in FC. When you Xenon think, we are such a beautiful community which is able to make own decisions about the rules of R3, why we never did an agreement that EVERYBODY uses the vortex in FC part 4 after the 2nd crabby is killed like it is on GC? It's not about the abilitiy to proof, it's about trust, credibility, fairness loyalty but well, better showing CC the middle finger and blocking every discussion about changes in the HoF because of existing platform-differences - because that was what you (plural, not you Xenon alone) did when he came up with this in the past. Wonder what has changed in your mind that we now are actually able to make these changes?

These points have all been discussed to death. It's not an issue of fairness (at least not for me) because platform differences have made the game naturally unfair for years. As I said at the beginning of this debate, I would ideally like to play in a glitch-free game with totally fair competition, but that really isn't a practical goal because of the reasons discussed earlier in the debate.

Basically, we cannot control the use of glitches in the game, but we can control the way we manage them, and that's what this is about.

I can applease you, the glitch we found is almost impossible to find if you would look for it on your own but it's rather simple but effective and nothing controversial (I think CC already said that we would share it with you if we would come to rolesfamily's agreement), if you understand what happens there, you won't have a problem with it.

Okay, thank you for the information.

we did find one thing that's worth mentioning after this debate is over. it's not really a glitch, but you won't really find it without extreme luck, which is why i suggested the rule of immediately releasing such findings in the future.
why did i hold back on it as of now? look at how we got completely sidetracked in that CF-discussion that came up in the past. we stated multiple times there is no ipg in CF as of now, yet people kept pressuring us for our findings in CF. i'd like to talk about CF after the whole IPG-issue has been resolved.

Okay, you've got a deal. I won't mention CF again until we draw a conclusion to this debate.

All this does is set a horrible precedent and open a pandora's box. Taking control of the HoF is a power-move that invites the possibility for more power-moves in the future. Imagine that the community transforms and a group emerges that opposes the Razoff-glitch, or the launching glitch or really any other technique in the game and they start a movement to ban/restrict it. By restricting/ostracizing the IPG, all you do, is provide them with a precedent, with a foundation for their movement. The game has to determine what is and what isn't allowed, because the moment the community does, we are introducing a power element into the competition that could have disastrous consequences, as any powerful group, any majority could model the game and the competition in whatever way they like.

What about the option to use gliding glitches in the game? If someone came along and boasted an outrageous score through the effortless use of this glitch, would you not want to challenge them? I personally don't see the restriction of this glitch to be a particularly power-hungry move. I consider it a move that preserves the important elements of challenge and competition, a move that shares the same characteristics as your (agreeable) decisions to not use superglides, or indeed MG's discovery in the game.

If an anti-Razoff glitch group emerged (which I'm sure they won't) and voted overwhelmingly in favour of banishing it, I would reluctantly replay BOM without the Razoff glitch. That's the point of democracy because ultimately, the members who play the game, and the community that is responsible for the HOF, can influence the governing of the game in whatever way they choose.

What makes you say that there are going to be more glitches like the IPG in the future? There is no indication that there are any such glitches. Assuming them to be in the game, is, at this stage, just conjecture and has no base in the reality of the game. With the way the game is right now and with the way we understand it right now, the notion of pre-existent glitches is still perfectly valid. Imagining horror-scenarios with a plethora of glitches that do not exist, is just pointless and should have no bearing on this discussion or the competition as a whole.

Point taken. I was just trying to shine a light on the argument from a non-IPG-specific perspective.

[Cut]

http://youtu.be/K-o6GlaO3hA

just a little trick

EDIT: http://youtu.be/SR4pryv1gjU
aaaaaand another one...

EDIT2: http://youtu.be/kJI6RFhCjCQ
finally

[Mountain Goat]

It seems to me we need to solve the problem with the speedrunner glitches so we can move on. I suggest we make a map, so to speak, where these glitches occur and where they have been used to boost the score. That way each player can check out whether a particular glitch can be triggered on his or her platform. If anyone has any problems in that regard, they should be solved so players can focus on the gameplay and not some random glitches in the game.

well, glitches are almost always an inevitable part of the gameplay (obviously, it also depends on ones preferred playing style), and a higher score often goes along with a frequent usage of glitches (at least this tendency is clearly recognizable within the hof), hence it's impossible to lay the focus off them entirely. razoff serves as a good example why this shouldn't be the case, as the glitches in part 5 and 6 are the key to obtaining a great score in bom. especially since achieving such scores with the help of these techniques demands much skill and the ability to think strategically.

anyway, nice to see you're also fond of providing a list of glitches including their habitation for the sake of establishing a higher degree of transparency. our stances pertaining to handling the issue revolving around the ipb might be different, but i'm glad we're all on the same page regarding this very aspect.

So I'll ask the ones who have the knowledge

1. TOTL part 1. Which speedrunner glitches were used, and where were they used?
2. CF part 1, 2 and 3. The same question.

first of all, enlightenment on your definition of "speedrunner glitches" is required. i presume you're speaking of the ipb, superjump/superswim and glidewalk (keep in mind that the notion of renouncing the glidewalk has been met with unanimous assent on our part)

now that this query is probably history, i can come back to your question: none.
one can't emphasise often enough how our accomplishments in said parts solely derive from making use of "intended" in game-mechanisms, that is, investigating the area and combining the objects in the most lucrative way imaginable (apart from the one thing dtucc already mentioned, although its nature barely warrants calling that a "glitch"). you will see about this soon, since we intend to stick to our promises, it will see the light of day immediately after the poll has been closed.

in order to achieve this, i'm with xenon about not feeling the need to keep on beating dead horses and initiating the voting instead.
cut has already dropped plausible remarks, are there any objections?

So these are the three positions and three options we have. Everybody should make a decision on his own how to deal with the situation and then deliver his vote in this thread.

The position which achieves the majority of the community has to be accepted unconditionally. The positions comprise only the handling of the IPG, any further suggestions like the publication of all glitches or a RayWiki-Article are NOT PART OF THIS VOTING. I suggest that only accounts older than January 20th, 2014 with an entry in the HoF as a validation of having completed the game are entitled to vote due to the required expertise to make a decision about this issue. If someone is convicted of using double-accounts to vote, he is suspended from the voting that means both his votes are invalid and such behavior will be treated from the community as cheating in the game. Also I would suggest a deadline of 7 days after the voting is opened. Someone can vote by posting the sentence "I vote for DTUCC/MandM/Xenon's suggestion" in a single post or obviosly marked in a discussion-post. After the deadline the votes are counted by summarizing all vote-quotes in an overview-post.

If everyone is fine with this voting and the frame conditions, we voting could start right now. If not, then please tell me

[Sajiki]

yeah, whatever.
i vote for DTUCCs suggestion.

also i have surpassed the 700k mark. not that this thread would be about scoring or something.

and of course, sorry to adsolution. we must have hit a soft spot there.


edit: i probably didnt express myself clear enough: i find this thread has become incredibly boring with people repeating the same things over and over again and of course adsolution who has exactly nothing to say and is apparently only here to occasionally disturb. i dont have any motivation anymore to clarify my vote because obviously nobody cares (- mandm) or my arguments are all unworthy (- xenon, though i have to say you do at least put a reasoning behind your opinion).. to be honest i dont care anymore. i just wanna move on and play the game. i just have the feeling that this wont be possible even after all of this nonsense is over.

[sfn42]

What about the option to use gliding glitches in the game? If someone came along and boasted an outrageous score through the effortless use of this glitch, would you not want to challenge them? I personally don't see the restriction of this glitch to be a particularly power-hungry move. I consider it a move that preserves the important elements of challenge and competition, a move that shares the same characteristics as your (agreeable) decisions to not use superglides, or indeed MG's discovery in the game.

In my opinion, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the glidewalk. It's actually a very limited glitch for a number of reasons (I have touched upon them previously) and it really isn't that different from a launching glitch, mainly because you just don't have the time to trigger it within a combo. The reason we decided not to use it, is because it doesn't work on PC and, thus, would create even further platform inequality than we already have, but again, if we look closely at the glitch itself (leaving the platform differences aside), there are no objective reasons to ban it, similar to the IPG. If a player used the glidewalk, I would have no problem with it. I wouldn't try to ban him or her or challenge the score but I would accept his/her decision to play the game his/her way. I mean, I would welcome a competition without version differences, but that ship has sailed long ago. Therefore, there are few reasons to just generally ban the glidewalk. MG's discovery is on another level altogether, as CC has shown previously, I think it's not fair and not very reasonable to compare it to the IPG, glidewalk or anything else, really.

If an anti-Razoff glitch group emerged (which I'm sure they won't) and voted overwhelmingly in favour of banishing it, I would reluctantly replay BOM without the Razoff glitch. That's the point of democracy because ultimately, the members who play the game, and the community that is responsible for the HOF, can influence the governing of the game in whatever way they choose.

I guess we have different opinions regarding this issue, then. I see banning a glitch (unless based on objective criteria) as a restriction of individual freedom and, in my opinion, democracy cannot legitimize restrictions of individual freedom.

@Adsolution: Please try to contribute something meaningful or leave. It seems we're finally getting closer to a decision and posts like your previous one distract from that again.

[Xenon]

In my opinion, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the glidewalk. It's actually a very limited glitch for a number of reasons (I have touched upon them previously) and it really isn't that different from a launching glitch, mainly because you just don't have the time to trigger it within a combo. The reason we decided not to use it, is because it doesn't work on PC and, thus, would create even further platform inequality than we already have, but again, if we look closely at the glitch itself (leaving the platform differences aside), there are no objective reasons to ban it, similar to the IPG. If a player used the glidewalk, I would have no problem with it. I wouldn't try to ban him or her or challenge the score but I would accept his/her decision to play the game his/her way. I mean, I would welcome a competition without version differences, but that ship has sailed long ago. Therefore, there are few reasons to just generally ban the glidewalk. MG's discovery is on another level altogether, as CC has shown previously, I think it's not fair and not very reasonable to compare it to the IPG, glidewalk or anything else, really.

While your views abolut banning glitches are all but stupid, sometimes there are limitations to how liberal one can be when it comes to this game, in my opinion. I'm just curious as to whether your views would change if a player was able to exploit glitches like this to dominate the HOF and marginalise everybody else who plays the game in a fair way.

I guess we have different opinions regarding this issue, then. I see banning a glitch (unless based on objective criteria) as a restriction of individual freedom and, in my opinion, democracy cannot legitimize restrictions of individual freedom.

Well, you're right that it's a restriction of individual freedom, but so are many things. And it's a small price to pay, frankly. I don't want to switch on my console to play a level that I once spent months trying to master, only to find that my efforts were futile and the whole level can be achieved within an hour by using a magic glitch..

[sfn42]

While your views abolut banning glitches are all but stupid, sometimes there are limitations to how liberal one can be when it comes to this game, in my opinion. I'm just curious as to whether your views would change if a player was able to exploit glitches like this to dominate the HOF and marginalise everybody else who plays the game in a fair way.

As long as there is skill involved and the glitch is replicable by other players on all platforms, I don't see it as an unfair situation. Players have always and will always find new techniques that will marginalize older ones. I remember doing the snowboard trick for hours in 2004, until I could barely feel my thumb, in order to get 100k in SBTC. It later turned out to be obsolete and I really could have saved myself the pain and abuse to my thumb, but that's what has always happened. All of us (at least the veterans who have played this game for a long time), at some point, have spent hours trying to master a technique (be it a combo or something like what I described) which later turned out to be obsolete. That's just part of the game and, in my opinion, one of the most exciting aspects of R3, that even after so many years the game still offers room for development. It's just a matter of players developing together with the game or not and that is every player's individual decision.

I agree with you, though, that if a technique is found that makes scoring obsolete (taking away all the skill, depending only on luck, huge platform differences etc.), we have to think about taking steps to stop it, but so far, the only technique that qualifies is the MG-trick and, fortunately, we have objective criteria (outlined by CC and me) to ban it, making this essentially a non-issue. With regards to the IPG (or glidewalk, for that matter), it doesn't make scoring obsolete at all. It requires a lot of skill, essentially zero luck and can be triggered on all platforms. Yes, it does make some old techniques obsolete, but so have many other innovations in the past, and, more importantly, it introduces new and difficult techniques to the game.

Well, you're right that it's a restriction of individual freedom, but so are many things. And it's a small price to pay, frankly. I don't want to switch on my console to play a level that I once spent months trying to master, only to find that my efforts were futile and the whole level can be achieved within an hour by using a magic glitch..

I can't see restricting freedom as a small price to pay, ever.

[Adsolution]

and of course adsolution who has exactly nothing to say and is apparently only here to occasionally disturb.

@Adsolution: Please try to contribute something meaningful or leave. It seems we're finally getting closer to a decision and posts like your previous one distract from that again.

Playing the 'keep it business' card to excuse any and all asseries, are we? I apologise if I'm somehow disturbing your ability to process thought and reach a viable conclusion - while it is true that I have nothing to add to the most relevant conversation given that I'm not interested in signing up for the military, nobody likes innately nasty businessmens.

[Cut]

As this discussion appears like a Möbius strip, we all should finally make a decision to find the solution - that means: we vote about what to do now with the IPG. For this voting, we have 3 positions equal to 3 approaches related to the IPG.

We have DTUCC:

so what's in the spirit of the game? in my opinion, that is every glitch that still requires skill, effort and routing to make improvements.
these criteria are the essential ones, think about it - those are the rules by which we worked for 10 years, even though nobody ever expressed them. these are the rules by which we judged cheat engines and MG's discovery (since you keep bringing them up) - those require neither skill, nor routing. for cheat engine, my point should be clear.
[...]
it's not that gamebreaking of a glitch for the reasons i stated above. of course, infinite supercoper is an amazing asset, but it just allows for more diverse routing, and possibilities we didn't even think of so far. most levels in which we have acces to a powersuit, we take about 90% of the gems with the x2 multiplier anyway, don't we?

Accept the IPG how it is. See it as a glitch like any other glitch too.

Then MandM81:

There is no reason why the old R3 and the IPG R3 can’t share the same HoF. 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.

See the IPG as a special glitch which has to be treated specially. Add a column to the HoF which tells whether the player used the IPG or not.

And finally Xenon:

So I'd like to submit a third suggestion, one that I've been considering lately that is a little more middle-ground: to accept the use of the IPG into the game, with the limitations that we know of at the moment, but to reject any FURTHER level score improvements, should they materialise as a result of the use of this glitch. This would remove the incentive to go witch hunting for other IPG-friendly locations.
[...]
It would also mean we'd require impartial validation (not directly linked to the HOF, obviously), but that wouldn't be too problematic to arrange.
[...]
Think of it less as an official ruling and more as a vote kick style policy within this forum.
Sooner or later, you guys are going to have to realise that we're going to be dealing with more glitches of this nature in the future, and that we will have to make subjective group decisions to banish or restrict certain glitches in the game. As soon as you guys realise this, you'll see how irrelevant the 'all glitches or no glitches' argument really is.
R3 has changed. It's no longer a simple score system and we must therefore take greater control of the HOF.

Prohibit the IPG as a tool to extend the maximum scores of a level. Let the community decide in individual cases.

Quotations are cut and summarized from multiple posts!

So these are the three positions and three options we have. Everybody should make a decision on his own how to deal with the situation and then deliver his vote in this thread.

The position which achieves the majority of the community has to be accepted unconditionally. The positions comprise only the handling of the IPG, any further suggestions like the publication of all glitches or a RayWiki-Article are NOT PART OF THIS VOTING. I suggest that only accounts older than January 20th, 2014 with an entry in the HoF as a validation of having completed the game are entitled to vote due to the required expertise to make a decision about this issue. If someone is convicted of using double-accounts to vote, he is suspended from the voting that means both his votes are invalid and such behavior will be treated from the community as cheating in the game. Also I would suggest a deadline of 7 days after the voting is opened. Someone can vote by posting the sentence "I vote for DTUCC/MandM/Xenon's suggestion" in a single post or obviosly marked in a discussion-post. After the deadline the votes are counted by summarizing all vote-quotes in an overview-post.

If everyone is fine with this voting and the frame conditions, we voting could start right now. If not, then please tell me


Maybe when this burlesque finally came to an end, we also can take care about rolesfamily's and sfn's suggestions which could be further steps to a fair competition and a united community.

I'd also like to make a little addition to it: Write a Raywiki article about glitches in Rayman 3, including explanations and videos. This article and the existing article about the scoring system (workings of the combo-mode etc.) can then be linked on top of the HoF, so that beginners can find this information more easily.

How about this: When someone uses a score glitch they have to announce it when they submit their score.
So it'd be like
hey guys I just beat your top score in TLOTLD (for example), BUT I used glitch XYZ
Then that's fair. It's when people don't declare it.
And surely glitches only matter when someone beats a known limit for a level. If someone glitches their way to 500k it doesn't matter.

Especially rolesfamily's suggestion would be great if it becomes reality. Maybe this is something we can aim for when we finally found the solution how to deal with the IPG.

As my appeal for a voting is now one week ago and I heard no voices against this procedure, I assume everyone to be fine with it, also I interpret MandM's neutrality about the voting-options as a neutrality about the voting itself. If I'm wrong, then please correct me.

As the deadline was meant to be seven days long, all votes can be delivered until Sunday, 9th February 2014, 11:59pm GMT (Monday, 10th February 2014, 0:59am CET).

I vote for DTUCC's suggestion.

[sfn42]

I vote for DTUCC's suggestion, too.

Also, I'd like to ask everyone who is interested in voting to really take the time to think about the issue and the arguments provided by the different sides and also to try the IPG out yourself before you cast your vote.

[RibShark]

I vote for DTUCC's Suggestion

(though it would be nice for glitches to be revealed if it is impossible to find without luck)

[Cut]

enjoy!

please tell me about bugs or suggestions you have about it

[MandM81]

I love how you either ignore or deliberately misunderstand all the points in my previous post. I invite everyone to read through MandM's post (his first real comment to the IPG) before the pathetic-quote again and then my previous post. It should make things a little clearer. That's all I have to say for now. I can just hope that other users are able to see through your schemes (and I am sure that they can, since these schemes are becoming pretty obvious.

There you go again! You don’t seem to be able to handle opposite views without sorting to personal attacks.

I’ll scheme a little bit further…

When are we going to see all these glitches you talk about? And why are you (the TFG group) collectively doing your utmost to conceal the use of glitches in your games?

When CC first entered his new score in HoF he stated “I have made changes in all combos in TOTL”, thus letting it be understood his improvements came solely from making better combos. There was no mention of any glitches at all.

The TSF itself was password protected. “It was for competitive reasons” was the response to that. But since I or anyone else never had any need for combos from the TSF group, I can only conclude the password protection was to hide the fact they had incorporated the speedrunner glitches into their game.

When Cut was asked if he had used any glitches in CF, his answer was nothing but infantile babblings. CC added that “the original combos were sub-optimal”, again letting it be understood the score came from improving combos alone and thus once again attempting to conceal the use of glitches.

Only when hard pressed did Cut admit to using a glitch, or whatever he will chose to call it.

Why does Cut spend time releasing videos of combos we have known and played for many years in RPC instead of making videos of the glitches used in CF?

And why does CC resist answering questions about glitches truthfully instead of obfuscating?

I will ask again, what glitches were used in TOTL part 1 and in CF?

[Cut]

When CC first entered his new score in HoF he stated “I have made changes in all combos in TOTL”, thus letting it be understood his improvements came from making better combos. There was no mention of any glitches at all.

I can't see the contradiciton.

The TSF itself was password protected to prevent anyone else from finding out about the use of these glitches. “It was for competitive reasons” was the response to that. But since I or anyone else never had any need for combos from the TSF group, I can only conclude the password protection was to hide the fact they had incorporated the speedrunner glitches into their game.

It's time to accept that you're no longer the one making the rules (or better to say the combos). Imagine the TSF is the equivalent of your brain containing the FC-combos or containing the way how to get up to the Hoodlums in DOTK part 8 what DTUCC hat to reveal for the community since your video about it was mock and fleer to the community and a complete infamy.

When Cut was asked if he had used any glitches in CF, his answer was nothing but infant babbling. CC added that “the original combos were sub-optimal”, again letting it be understood the score came from improving combos and thus once again attempting to conceal the use of glitches

Dude, I know that you never saw and never will see that finding gltiches is actually a SKILL. The game mechanics are confusing, contradictory, partly absurd but still based on complete LOGIC. Every bug has a logic explanation behind and by knowing the game-mechanics or maybe just intuition, you are even able to find the glitches you need for something you're looking forward to do. The game delivered enough examples for this (and you won't like it but DTUCC is an absolute specialist in this business).

infant babbling

what goes around...

Only when hard pressed did Cut admit to using a glitch, or whatever he will chose to call it.

"hard pressure" lol

Why does Cut spend time releasing videos of combos we have known and played for many years in RPC instead of making videos of the glitches used in CF?

This whole discussion was about the IPG, the IPG was the initiator and the issue of the discussion. Can we come back to this please and finally make a solution? Maybe then we can talk about the other glitches we found which are not in the slightest controversial if I take the benchmark you held about the IPG. I think if someone wants to compete for the first or even my third rank, he should come up with his own ideas. BTW, what do you think we did in the clearleaf forest when you're only talking of glitches related to our CF-improvement? How about creativity and excellent combo-planning, I'm certain that you will bring it far with these in CF.

I will ask again, what glitches were used in TOTL part 1 and in CF?

We used the glitch which made us able to just play the game without leading nerve-racking discussions. This must be a glitch in any case since we are the only ones who were able to do this in TOTL and CF either.

[Mountain Goat]

after weighing all the pros and cons meticulously i can safely conclude that DTUCCS suggestion managed to win my heart

[MandM81]

Cut: I raised the question about glitches for several reasons and I asked about it very directly in the hope to provoke some answers. Some of these reasons were:

1. Many players in RPC have asked about the glitches and they are eager to see if they can trigger these glitches. You blatantly ignore their requests.
2. You want this forum to be open towards accepting glitches (the IPG and subsequently others) into the HoF, and yet you seem reluctant to show exactly what you want the members to accept.
3. I wanted to know if it is TSF policy that glitches in the R3 game are meant to be kept secret from other members.

1. What I can read from your post is, you still plan to ignore requests from members, while letting on that perhaps sometime in the future you will reveal some glitches. And I'm sure that depends on the outcome of the current discussions.

2. I still find it amazing you ask members to accept glitches you won't even show.

3. I don't know if you talk on behalf of the whole TSF, but I guess a whole new level of secrecy has been created if that is the case.

As for using skill to find glitches, well, if you mean it requires skill to lift glitches from a speedrunner video on YouTube, then I guess yes. And I can understand why you kept it a secret with password protection, hoping no-one outside TSF watches speedrunner videos.

And as for CF, you know why I ask about it, don't you?