Rayman 3 scores
- Thread starter Xenon
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,074
- Tings
- 52,344
CC: Good idea to eliminate irrelevant tricks and glitches. We did include some tricks into the lists since it is hard to draw a line between tricks and glitches. Returning with the hands in FC part 2 should probably be categorized as a trick rather than a glitch. And perhaps the same goes for the Glass Frame in the next part.
I’m not sure if the Razoff Dungeon Glitch is a glitch or a trick, but that’s merely an academic distinction.
I’ll write down CC’s revised list and add a few details.
FC.
Part 2. The Hands/Turtle trick.
Part 3. The Glass Frame trick.
Part 4. SJs in the first and perhaps second room.
CF.
Part 1. Two SJs and TPT (Teleport trick)
Part 2. Two SJs in the first area.
Part 3. Jona’s Mushroom trick, Cutscene Skip (CS), Roket’s Glitch (RG).
BOM.
Part 5. The Razoff Glitch.
Part 6. The Razoff Dungeon Glitch/Trick, Roket’s Glitch (RG).
LOTLD.
Part 2. SD and IPG.
Part 5. Roket’s Glitch (RG).
DOTK.
Part 1. Knaaren Glitch with non-glitch alternative.
Part 7. SJ in the first area, Hoodlock Shield Glitch/Trick near exit.
Part 8. SJ to reach Hoodblaster level.
SBTC.
Part 1. SJ near the secret room.
Part 2. TPT in Circular Arena Combo.
Part 3. The Launching Glitch and several minor launchings.
HH.
Part 1. Potential IPG.
Part 4. The Horrible Machine Glitch.
TOTL.
Part 1. SJ in the first area.
part 2. Launching Glitch on Pig, IPG, Roket’s Glitch (RG).
Sfn’s categories are fine, but the list could be condensed. As mentioned earlier one can choose to categorize glitches according to the time frame the mode is active. The short mode glitches or a better name would probably be instant mode glitches (IMG) would include launching glitches (LG), SJs, Lums glitches, Razoff glitches, TPT, Roket’s Glitch (RG). The long mode glitches (LMG) would include glitches that are playable while in an active mode. This category would include SDs, IPGs, PMCs and GWs. In short form the categories are (excluding PMCs and GWs):
IMG: SJs, LGs, RG, TPTs, CSs, Razoff Glitches, Jona’s Mushroom Trick and Lums Glitches.
LMG: SDs and IPGs.
We have to decide the following:
1. Which of the above mentioned glitches should be allowed into HoF?
2. How should the categories be presented in the HoF?
3. Seek an agreement that all new and future glitches in each category should be announced before a score is entered in the HoF.
My own position in this matter:
1. All IMGs are allowed in the HoF. I could make a compromise about the IPG and thus the LMGs.
2. Two columns, IMG and LMG, are added to the HoF.
3. Agree.
I’m still struggling with the fact that we could allow an IPG triggered in one way and disallow an IGN (PCM) triggered in another way. It would be like differentiating between SJs and other launching glitches for being triggered differently. It’s the effect of these launches or jumps we are interested in in the same way we are interested in the effect of the IPG and PCM, namely the ability to play with infinite Powerup.
But as I mentioned, I could compromise along the way. I’m interested in hearing arguments either way on this matter before I am able to make my final decision.
I’m not sure if the Razoff Dungeon Glitch is a glitch or a trick, but that’s merely an academic distinction.
I’ll write down CC’s revised list and add a few details.
FC.
Part 2. The Hands/Turtle trick.
Part 3. The Glass Frame trick.
Part 4. SJs in the first and perhaps second room.
CF.
Part 1. Two SJs and TPT (Teleport trick)
Part 2. Two SJs in the first area.
Part 3. Jona’s Mushroom trick, Cutscene Skip (CS), Roket’s Glitch (RG).
BOM.
Part 5. The Razoff Glitch.
Part 6. The Razoff Dungeon Glitch/Trick, Roket’s Glitch (RG).
LOTLD.
Part 2. SD and IPG.
Part 5. Roket’s Glitch (RG).
DOTK.
Part 1. Knaaren Glitch with non-glitch alternative.
Part 7. SJ in the first area, Hoodlock Shield Glitch/Trick near exit.
Part 8. SJ to reach Hoodblaster level.
SBTC.
Part 1. SJ near the secret room.
Part 2. TPT in Circular Arena Combo.
Part 3. The Launching Glitch and several minor launchings.
HH.
Part 1. Potential IPG.
Part 4. The Horrible Machine Glitch.
TOTL.
Part 1. SJ in the first area.
part 2. Launching Glitch on Pig, IPG, Roket’s Glitch (RG).
Sfn’s categories are fine, but the list could be condensed. As mentioned earlier one can choose to categorize glitches according to the time frame the mode is active. The short mode glitches or a better name would probably be instant mode glitches (IMG) would include launching glitches (LG), SJs, Lums glitches, Razoff glitches, TPT, Roket’s Glitch (RG). The long mode glitches (LMG) would include glitches that are playable while in an active mode. This category would include SDs, IPGs, PMCs and GWs. In short form the categories are (excluding PMCs and GWs):
IMG: SJs, LGs, RG, TPTs, CSs, Razoff Glitches, Jona’s Mushroom Trick and Lums Glitches.
LMG: SDs and IPGs.
We have to decide the following:
1. Which of the above mentioned glitches should be allowed into HoF?
2. How should the categories be presented in the HoF?
3. Seek an agreement that all new and future glitches in each category should be announced before a score is entered in the HoF.
My own position in this matter:
1. All IMGs are allowed in the HoF. I could make a compromise about the IPG and thus the LMGs.
2. Two columns, IMG and LMG, are added to the HoF.
3. Agree.
I’m still struggling with the fact that we could allow an IPG triggered in one way and disallow an IGN (PCM) triggered in another way. It would be like differentiating between SJs and other launching glitches for being triggered differently. It’s the effect of these launches or jumps we are interested in in the same way we are interested in the effect of the IPG and PCM, namely the ability to play with infinite Powerup.
But as I mentioned, I could compromise along the way. I’m interested in hearing arguments either way on this matter before I am able to make my final decision.
- Messages
- 635
- Tings
- 19,762
I totally agree on the final glitch list. The distinction between IMGs and LMGs is an interesting categorization to keep the HoF slim. The LMG-category seems to work very well as the Superdive is directly connected to an IPG and the other ones are platform-bound and (potentially) out of discussion. So everyone who would like to play the "classic way" can just ignore the LMGs and should be satisfied, technically this may be the perfect compromise.
The big big difference between PCM and IPG is the availability. The IPG has a tight corset of conditions which has to be fulfilled for the theroetical chance of triggering it, and although I thought to have understood the IPG-mechanism, these conditions seem to be more complicated as HH1 and CF3 show (CF3 with it's many cutscenes should be a paradise for a potential IPG, but until today every of our experiments failed). The IPG is strictly limited to a few places in the game and additionally there are only few places in the game where we could benefit from an IPG (as LOTLD2 shows, the IPG is completely useless). The PCM would take both arguments ad absurdum. Another point is the playability of these glitches. Xenon often mentioned that the IPG changes R3 into a game with completely new rules. This may be correct in a certain view but if the consider this glitch from a neutral position, the basic gameplay-mechanics are almost conserverd, there is only an additional (but extremly powerful) ability added. The first-person-camera is broken, that's important to mention but maybe we could see it as a handicap for the extreme advantage of unlimited powerup. You're able to "fix" this malfunction but it's too slow to be able to combo matuvus with gems so your beloved FC would be completely safe from an IPG. And also in many other parts this could have some serious influence on the combos and routing as the Matuvu-Tribelle-Combo in LOTLD2 demonstrates (don't know if you ever tried it). But on the other hand the PCM is completely unpracticable having regard to playing real combos while having this glitch active. That's the huge difference (apart from it's platform-binding). The first-person-camera is completely unavailable, jumping is heavily impaired and curved shots are impossible. Although there could be benefits in scoring with PCM, I don't want to play with a glitch which makes the game almost unplayable. The IPG has some big influence on the game-mechanics but the game stays a game while the PCM is a potentially powerful mechanism, but it's not really more than a mechanism. It's stressful to move around in a level, the difficulty and challenges on the game should not be put down on these simple actions/mechanisms. So yes to the IPG, no to the PCM.
The big big difference between PCM and IPG is the availability. The IPG has a tight corset of conditions which has to be fulfilled for the theroetical chance of triggering it, and although I thought to have understood the IPG-mechanism, these conditions seem to be more complicated as HH1 and CF3 show (CF3 with it's many cutscenes should be a paradise for a potential IPG, but until today every of our experiments failed). The IPG is strictly limited to a few places in the game and additionally there are only few places in the game where we could benefit from an IPG (as LOTLD2 shows, the IPG is completely useless). The PCM would take both arguments ad absurdum. Another point is the playability of these glitches. Xenon often mentioned that the IPG changes R3 into a game with completely new rules. This may be correct in a certain view but if the consider this glitch from a neutral position, the basic gameplay-mechanics are almost conserverd, there is only an additional (but extremly powerful) ability added. The first-person-camera is broken, that's important to mention but maybe we could see it as a handicap for the extreme advantage of unlimited powerup. You're able to "fix" this malfunction but it's too slow to be able to combo matuvus with gems so your beloved FC would be completely safe from an IPG. And also in many other parts this could have some serious influence on the combos and routing as the Matuvu-Tribelle-Combo in LOTLD2 demonstrates (don't know if you ever tried it). But on the other hand the PCM is completely unpracticable having regard to playing real combos while having this glitch active. That's the huge difference (apart from it's platform-binding). The first-person-camera is completely unavailable, jumping is heavily impaired and curved shots are impossible. Although there could be benefits in scoring with PCM, I don't want to play with a glitch which makes the game almost unplayable. The IPG has some big influence on the game-mechanics but the game stays a game while the PCM is a potentially powerful mechanism, but it's not really more than a mechanism. It's stressful to move around in a level, the difficulty and challenges on the game should not be put down on these simple actions/mechanisms. So yes to the IPG, no to the PCM.
- Messages
- 721
- Tings
- 29,203
The categorization into instant mode and long mode glitches is fine by me. It's probably a more elegant solution with regards to the HoF than the categories I assumed (especially since it rids us of that miscallaneous category).
There are some things I wouldn't really refer to as a glitch, like the Roket-trick, but as you said, that doesn't really matter at this point.
With regards to the IPG vs. PCM distinction, here is my position: They are two different glitches and thus we have to treat them differently. The reasons are as follows:
- They are triggered differently. One (the PCM) is actually triggered outside the actual game, on the loading screen.
- They play differently. Cut has discussed the jumping problems, but PCM also disables the look mode.
- The IPG works on all platforms, the PCM most likely not. CC experimented with it for a while and couldn't get it to work at all. I'm sure he can tell you more about his attempts.
- PCM can be triggered in all parts, IPG only in very specific contexts
In general, the never ending powerups are sideeffects of triggering two different glitches. PCM transports you into a mixed state between camera mode and in-game and IPG in a mixed state between in-game and cutscene. In both cases, you are not directly triggering a glitch that never lets the powerup run out, but rather you change the game into a different state which has, in both cases, the sideeffect of the powerup never running out. The term "infinite powerup glitch" is thus a really bad term because it doesn't tell us anything about what the glitch actually is. Also, if you actually defined IPG = PCM and thought it through logically, you would arrive at the conclusion that the camera mode and a cutscene are the same, which just cannot be right. Therefore, they have to be treated as different glitches.
With regards to those three points, here are my views:
1. All IMGs and the IPG and SD. PCM is not allowed.
2. I agree about IMG and LMG both being represented. I'm okay with two columns but I am pretty much indifferent towards the exact representation (could be two columns or the tooltips we discussed earlier or something different, as long as both are represented equally).
3. I think we have to differentiate more with regards to that. I agree that the method you suggested is the best for a new glitch type. However, I don't think it's a good method for a discovery of new instance of a known glitch (like a new launching glitch). You describe it, as if every new instance of a glitch would require validation from the community. I fully disagree with that. If a glitch type is allowed in the HoF in one instance, it has to be allowed in all instances. That means, a player should be allowed to enter into the HoF without such validation. I have no problem with an agreement that we post all new instances of known glitches, shortly after they are found, but this shouldn't be tied to the HoF. Also, all of that only applies to glitches that can be relevant for scoring. I really don't want this thread to be swarmed with videos documenting every single useless superjump (and there are tonnes of those, just look at the speedrunner-videos).
There are some things I wouldn't really refer to as a glitch, like the Roket-trick, but as you said, that doesn't really matter at this point.
With regards to the IPG vs. PCM distinction, here is my position: They are two different glitches and thus we have to treat them differently. The reasons are as follows:
- They are triggered differently. One (the PCM) is actually triggered outside the actual game, on the loading screen.
- They play differently. Cut has discussed the jumping problems, but PCM also disables the look mode.
- The IPG works on all platforms, the PCM most likely not. CC experimented with it for a while and couldn't get it to work at all. I'm sure he can tell you more about his attempts.
- PCM can be triggered in all parts, IPG only in very specific contexts
In general, the never ending powerups are sideeffects of triggering two different glitches. PCM transports you into a mixed state between camera mode and in-game and IPG in a mixed state between in-game and cutscene. In both cases, you are not directly triggering a glitch that never lets the powerup run out, but rather you change the game into a different state which has, in both cases, the sideeffect of the powerup never running out. The term "infinite powerup glitch" is thus a really bad term because it doesn't tell us anything about what the glitch actually is. Also, if you actually defined IPG = PCM and thought it through logically, you would arrive at the conclusion that the camera mode and a cutscene are the same, which just cannot be right. Therefore, they have to be treated as different glitches.
With regards to those three points, here are my views:
1. All IMGs and the IPG and SD. PCM is not allowed.
2. I agree about IMG and LMG both being represented. I'm okay with two columns but I am pretty much indifferent towards the exact representation (could be two columns or the tooltips we discussed earlier or something different, as long as both are represented equally).
3. I think we have to differentiate more with regards to that. I agree that the method you suggested is the best for a new glitch type. However, I don't think it's a good method for a discovery of new instance of a known glitch (like a new launching glitch). You describe it, as if every new instance of a glitch would require validation from the community. I fully disagree with that. If a glitch type is allowed in the HoF in one instance, it has to be allowed in all instances. That means, a player should be allowed to enter into the HoF without such validation. I have no problem with an agreement that we post all new instances of known glitches, shortly after they are found, but this shouldn't be tied to the HoF. Also, all of that only applies to glitches that can be relevant for scoring. I really don't want this thread to be swarmed with videos documenting every single useless superjump (and there are tonnes of those, just look at the speedrunner-videos).
- Messages
- 1,074
- Tings
- 52,344
Point 3 was included to avoid future battles. I do agree with your take on it. I don't see it's necessary to announce the use of a launching glitch or a SJ in connection with the HoF. I'm also fine with an agreement on posting new instances of known glitches.sfn42 said:
One thing though, and that's my compromise, I'm willing to accept the IPG (and the SD) in TOTL and LOTLD into the HoF, and I'm willing to differentiate between the PCM and the IPG on the condition that each new discovery of IPGs is presented to the forum and vetted before entering it into the HoF. If we can agree on this, then we agree on all three points.
My beloved FC!? Cute, I like thatCut said:
- Messages
- 1,074
- Tings
- 52,344
The players on the forum will have a say on allowing the glitch into the HoF. If it ruins the gameplay by making scoring ridiculously easy, then this could talk against allowing it into the HoF. But if it, like the IPG in TOTL, doesn't make scoring noticeably easier, then I see no reason for not allowing it into the HoF. There's nothing dramatic to this point.DTUCC said:
Thanks for the update on HoF. I haven't been there for a while. I'll delete the delinquent from the list.
Where's Cut and Mountain Goat?
- Messages
- 635
- Tings
- 19,762
You'll find Mountain Goat if you take a better look at it 
I will reentry my score when this discussion is over.
"Making scoring ridicously easy" is a legit criterion but in my opinion it's too subjective and I honestly don't want another never-ending discussions about every new IPG. Maybe we could agree on this: if an IPG has the potential to increase the maximum score of a level, it's allowed (that would require intensive investigations to prove/disprove this potential). If the maximum stays the same and the IPG is pointless (exactly the situation of LOTLD2), it's not. If an IPG is able to increase the maximum-score of a level, the difficulty can't really decrease because you need a new maximum-combo (higher than the old one) too, it's too complicated to become ridicously easy. The problem is, that you can't find out about the use of a "pointless" IPG because it won't be reflected in score. And "making scoring ridicously easy" is a medal with two sides. Yes, the maximum-score in LOTLD became ridicously easy but playing part 2 perfectly with IPG will probably make it the hardest part of LOTLD. I wouldn't have a problem with permitting the LOTLD-IPG, but you can never be sure whether it was used or not. We would have to do a gentlemen's agreement.
I will reentry my score when this discussion is over.
"Making scoring ridicously easy" is a legit criterion but in my opinion it's too subjective and I honestly don't want another never-ending discussions about every new IPG. Maybe we could agree on this: if an IPG has the potential to increase the maximum score of a level, it's allowed (that would require intensive investigations to prove/disprove this potential). If the maximum stays the same and the IPG is pointless (exactly the situation of LOTLD2), it's not. If an IPG is able to increase the maximum-score of a level, the difficulty can't really decrease because you need a new maximum-combo (higher than the old one) too, it's too complicated to become ridicously easy. The problem is, that you can't find out about the use of a "pointless" IPG because it won't be reflected in score. And "making scoring ridicously easy" is a medal with two sides. Yes, the maximum-score in LOTLD became ridicously easy but playing part 2 perfectly with IPG will probably make it the hardest part of LOTLD. I wouldn't have a problem with permitting the LOTLD-IPG, but you can never be sure whether it was used or not. We would have to do a gentlemen's agreement.
- Messages
- 721
- Tings
- 29,203
I was initially confused by that wording as well. I'm okay with that, as long as the discovery of a new IPG is viewed with an open mind and that a ban is dependent on there being good reasons for banning it, such as platform differences or a complete breakdown of gameplay (like with PCM). Giving players a say cannot be about personal gameplay preferences and I don't want to have another discussion like with the TOTL IPG, where people demonize a glitch without even having tried it. I think such a solution could really have the advantage of allowing us to determine platform differences early, though, as everyone can test it and determine if it works on their platform.MandM81 said:
MG is in 6th place. He experimented with a run where he tried to get as many points as possible while getting only a very low number of cages. He entered the score from that run instead of his actual high score.
- Messages
- 1,074
- Tings
- 52,344
I agree with your points, and the problem I have with the IPG may never arise. It's a controversial glitch for some players and I'd like everyone to have a say about letting new IPG discoveries into the game. I don't think we will have discussions in the future like the ones we have been through. We have come a long way since the IPG came to our attention. As for the IPG in LOTLD, I'm ok with it. And finally, if an IPG has the potential of increasing the maximum score, I guess it will be comparable to the IPG in TOTL, which at least I can live with. I see no unsurmountable trouble ahead with regard to the IPG question.Cut said:
- Messages
- 278
- Tings
- 18,097
sounds all good to me
i do indeed agree that new launching glitches should not require some sort of validation but i believe that never was your intention anyway. this does seem like a fair compromise to me indeed, so i can agree on that. how about Mountain Goat and Xenon? would be nice to read their opinions on the matter.
when it comes to the different between IPG and PCM, fromn a scoring perspective there's obviously not a big difference, but from a gameplay perspective there is. PCM completely breaks the gameplay since you have to constantly move around in a way so you don't accidentaly turn it of. lookmode isn't available as well. the glitches are triggered in different ways and thus, there are indeed platform differences. i played around with it on GC a few days ago and wasn't able to trigger it at all in the span of 1 1/2 hours. i'm pretty decent at mashing buttons, might i add.
1. I think it's a fair compromise to have a talk about every new glitch that's going to be discovered in the future. Technically, the PC-Glitch feels like an IMG to me, yet no one would ever think to allow that here. This is Rayman 3 we're talking about, a game that's been surprising us over and over again for the past 10 years. You never know what's going to be discovered next so it would be a big mistake imo to outright allow every IMG occuring in the future.
2. A column for the IMGs and LMGs is fine to me, as long as there's a link to a wiki article in the HoF where said glitches are explained.
3. Seems fine to me.
i do indeed agree that new launching glitches should not require some sort of validation but i believe that never was your intention anyway. this does seem like a fair compromise to me indeed, so i can agree on that. how about Mountain Goat and Xenon? would be nice to read their opinions on the matter.
when it comes to the different between IPG and PCM, fromn a scoring perspective there's obviously not a big difference, but from a gameplay perspective there is. PCM completely breaks the gameplay since you have to constantly move around in a way so you don't accidentaly turn it of. lookmode isn't available as well. the glitches are triggered in different ways and thus, there are indeed platform differences. i played around with it on GC a few days ago and wasn't able to trigger it at all in the span of 1 1/2 hours. i'm pretty decent at mashing buttons, might i add.
1. I think it's a fair compromise to have a talk about every new glitch that's going to be discovered in the future. Technically, the PC-Glitch feels like an IMG to me, yet no one would ever think to allow that here. This is Rayman 3 we're talking about, a game that's been surprising us over and over again for the past 10 years. You never know what's going to be discovered next so it would be a big mistake imo to outright allow every IMG occuring in the future.
2. A column for the IMGs and LMGs is fine to me, as long as there's a link to a wiki article in the HoF where said glitches are explained.
3. Seems fine to me.
- Messages
- 38,007
- Tings
- 98,896
You guys have my full support too. It's great that we're now pretty much settled on a compromise, too
I haven't really had time to write a long response, and nor do I want to at the moment. I'm quite happy taking a back seat role for the time being.
One thing I would say though is that it may be an idea to, in composing the final list, only include glitches that require some manual work to trigger. In other words, 'natural glitches', such as the Hoodblaster survival in TBOm, or the rock falling on the Crab early in TFC p4 should not, and need not be included.
I haven't really had time to write a long response, and nor do I want to at the moment. I'm quite happy taking a back seat role for the time being.
One thing I would say though is that it may be an idea to, in composing the final list, only include glitches that require some manual work to trigger. In other words, 'natural glitches', such as the Hoodblaster survival in TBOm, or the rock falling on the Crab early in TFC p4 should not, and need not be included.
- Messages
- 1,946
- Tings
- 14,980
Xenon said:You guys have my full support too. It's great that we're now pretty much settled on a compromise, too
I haven't really had time to write a long response, and nor do I want to at the moment. I'm quite happy taking a back seat role for the time being.
wonderful post. my support is ensured as well
- Messages
- 12,343
- Tings
- 52,095
After many tries of trying to attempt the Razoff Glitch, I did half of it, I was able to hit him two times in succession which is the first time I have EVER done that and I was able to get almost 9000 more points on the The Bog Of Murk and almost 2000 more points on TDOTK to get 721289 which brings me back into 20th place on the Hall Of Fame. Now, I need the experts to show me which of these worlds I need to work on to get to 750k which is my goal.
Fairy Council: 36090
Clearleaf Forest: 99320
The Bog Of Murk: 79460
The Land of the Livid Dead: 108602
The Desert of the Knaaren: 93353
The Longest Shortcut: 41270
The Summit Beyond the Clouds: 76761
Hoodlum Headquarters: 97418
The Tower of the Leptys: 89015
Fairy Council: 36090
Clearleaf Forest: 99320
The Bog Of Murk: 79460
The Land of the Livid Dead: 108602
The Desert of the Knaaren: 93353
The Longest Shortcut: 41270
The Summit Beyond the Clouds: 76761
Hoodlum Headquarters: 97418
The Tower of the Leptys: 89015
- Messages
- 721
- Tings
- 29,203
You can improve a lot in almost all levels, more than 10k in every level except TLS. The best tip I can give you is to always play the level you want to play the most. As long as you don't have maximum scores in multiple levels, you'll be most successful that way. Though, you can probably make the easiest improvements in DOTK, TOTL and maybe SBTC right now. Getting 100k in DOTK shouldn't be too hard, if you can get past the Knaaren in part 1 and do the double-green-gem-combo in part 7 and neither of those things is very difficult. In TOTL, you could use IPG in part 2 to bolster your score, but even if you don't, you can get 100k+, as long as you get more than 50k after part 1, which is also doable, as long as you play the big combo in the first room reasonably well.
- Messages
- 10,232
- Tings
- 74,925
I've found a glitch where you're on the trippy surf-board thing, if you keep falling off sometimes and when you get re-set, there are gems that respawn that you've already collected! It's worth the minus one just to get the score! After you've collected the same one a good few times they sadly do vanish 