Forgot password?
login to RetroAchievements:
User: 
Pass: 

Discussion about Fast Forward

Page: < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >
AuthorMessage

Hotscrock
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 15:15
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 15:16
We have a point cap at the moment therefore the argument is valid.

We can discuss later if point cap is removed and even make another poll, but I see no reason to continue with this discussion at the current situation

Zyndeyqualarrin
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 15:17
You're seriously comparing FF with savestates? WHAT? Savestates would break hardcore mode and make everything piss easy. Imagine if you could save every minute into a boss battle where you're not allowed to take damage. This is NOT even close to anything what FF gives you as an advantage. FF only saves you time, you still do the exact same thing you'd do without FF, this is not the case with savestates. Savestates alow you to continue something from any point you want. Your arguments don't make sense. Like, at all

Euclide
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 15:20
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 15:28
There's no reason to defer discussion, considering the point cap removal was already decided. I also edited my post to communicate why I don't think this information is enough to pass judgement. Jamiras listed the longest titles, but that does not mean games that benefit heavily from fast forward are not among the shortest ones.

Polling again is pointless. After cultivating a culture where people think fast forward is the normal way to play games, the outcome would be obvious. I don't expect it to change either, I just want to highlight the hypocrisy of blocking certain anti-competitive behaviors and not others in a way that is more arbitrary than rational.

Hotscrock
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 15:34
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 15:38
How we can define what is normal? Fast forward still forces you to follow the normal gameplay, save states and passwords skips/breaks the normal flow of the game.
Emulation itself is not the "normal" way to play games. I think this matter is just subjective and we cant impose our opinions if nothing is concrete.
And if your computer is old and you can't play at 60fps that means you are cheating by slow down?

Euclide
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 15:48
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 15:57
I define "playing normally" as playing the game under its and its platform's rules. Passwords are a normal part of many games and using them is "playing normally", of course. Save states, cheats triggered with external devices, and slow-down/speed-up functions in emulators are all excluded from that definition.

"Emulation itself is not the "normal" way to play games. I think this matter is just subjective and we cant impose our opinions if nothing is concrete."
Obviously, it's not 100% the same thing as using real hardware, but most, if not all, emulators supported on the site right now have accurate timings, so there is no practical difference. It is arguing semantics to claim that a cycle-accurate emulator is not equivalent to real hardware.

"And if your computer is old and you can't play at 60fps that means you are cheating by slow down?"
Sure, it does. But it is harder to monitor performance continuously than to disable emulator features, so if you want to try to block users from running on low-end hardware, that will be another discussion.

Hotscrock
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 15:56
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 15:57
Playing normal for me is to use the original software and hardware. Emulation is the reproduction of a system on a platform different than the original. Using PC controllers for games not designed for PCs, using shaders, using a different audio playback rate are features offered by the emulator and I consider it allowed the same way I consider the fast forward.

Euclide
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 15:59
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 16:07
Saying that shaders are not authentic/"normal" is like saying that the authentic experience for a platform is to play on one specific hardware revision, audio system, and display model. Different displays (and different settings on the same display) will distort the image in different ways. So no, using shaders to distort the image is not the same thing as changing how fast a game runs outside of its internal settings.

Using different controllers can be a handicap or an advantage, but third-party controllers have existed nearly since the birth of home consoles, it is not a PC thing.

You might draw the line elsewhere, but there is a big difference between changing how the game runs and how the user interacts with it (input and output devices).

Hotscrock
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 16:08
I never said its the same thing. I only said I consider all examples above as tweaks offered by emulators that are not present on original console and personally I consider it as allowed.
I doubt everyone have a USB Famicon controller to play NES games on emulators, playing a NES game using a X-Box controller with 25+ inputs instead of the 10 default inputs from original Famicon is not normal, but still allowed (in my opinion).

monkeytoung
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 16:08
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 16:13
Why is it that people are ignoring that this does not just benifit rpgs. You know how many fighting games can speed up the game using this. Those mario educational games on snes, Thomas the tank engin on snes,monopoly on snes, Visual novels on the gba this isnt a thing exclusive to rpgs to help save time. Most of these games are just as easy without speed up but again your reducing the time to get all achievements by half or more.

In terms of RPGS is does make the game easier and you wont have the same experiance because you are overleveling for parts of the game. Regardless of having to play the game fully or not at least in rpgs it is making the game much easier. Your patients and time plays a huge factor is how easy or hard an rpgs can be someone can make the game just as easy without fast forwards but would overall spend far longer grinding levels then oh iv speed up the game saving me huge amounts of time. Also it does not force you to follow the normal gameplay becuase at some point you could easily get frustrated and try at a lower level that would make said part harder then being at a higher level.Ultimately its speeding up the game to make it easier to by pass the time synce and grind and could overal help you get the achievements at a faster then someone who chooses not to use the feature.

Hotscrock
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 16:16
Why you was untracked? I bet it wasn't because the fast forward.

Jamiras
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 16:33
> How long is the average time to master games like DQ or early Pokemon games (not hacks)?

Sorted by average time to master, minimum 5 masteries, 400 point sets. 771 results found.

184. LEGO Star Wars (12h11m)
185. Dragon Warrior (12h09m)

195. Final Fantasy (11h57m)
196. Mega Man 2 (11h55m)

280. Pokemon Red (9h18m)
281. Street Fighter II (9h14m)
285. Pokemon Blue (9h02m)

Dragon Warrior (with fast forward) takes roughly the same amount of time to master as LEGO Star Wars. Final Fantasy takes roughly the same amount of time as Mega Man 2. The two first-gen Pokemon games are comparable to Street Fighter II.

Given that you feel these are the "easiest" of the RPGs, what are your opinions on the 64% of games on the list that take less time than them to earn 400 points?

With 771 entries, 385 is the middle of the list. Entry 385 is Mega Man 5 at 6h27m. That means that more 400 point games can be mastered in under 6 1/2 hours (at rank 381) than over.

Here's some quick popular sets (with more than 25 masteries each):
402. Mortal Kombat (6h06m)
436. Metroid (5h34m)
461. Sonic the Hedgehog (5h03m)
521. Super Punch-Out!! (4h24m)
612. Final Fight 2 (3h14m)
649. Tetris (2h42m)
671. Double Dragon (2h35m)
696. Comix Zone (2h24m)
727. Marble Madness (2h00m)

FYI, there are 44 titles that take less than two hours with the above criteria.

Euclide
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 16:36
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 17:04
No, I don't feel that DQ and Pokemon are the "easiest" RPGs (at least not in terms of how easy/short their sets are to master). I'd like you to provide that information since you have it, but I named two for which fast forwarding is a particularly massive time saver. That said, these mean times are easily 2 to 4 times lower than what I would estimate is a legitimate completion time at 100% speed, which will definitely cause balancing issues in the global leaderboard when the point cap is lifted and sets rebalanced. I bet there would be some interesting observations to make with the full list.

"I consider all examples above as tweaks offered by emulators that are not present on original console and personally I consider it as allowed"
You miss the point. Changing the display, sound quality and input method is a thing on original hardware too. You can't call any one configuration more authentic than the other, and what you experience is still limited by how the software runs internally on the given platform. Changing the speed at which the system runs is something that cannot be done with real hardware, and breaks conscious design decisions. It's not the way the software runs by default, and imparts an important advantage in many games that are otherwise balanced around the player's patience or penalize excessive risk-taking with time losses, for example. Any advantage or disadvantage provided by changing I/O devices is either reproducible with real hardware, or practically impossible to track anyway.

I would also argue for disabling turbo features in emulators for Hardcore mode too if that is not done already.

monkeytoung
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 17:21
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 17:22
id agree with disabeing turbo as well its only giving you an advantage in some games and with slow done which is a feature of some emulators as well. Speeding up does give advantages to certian games while slowing down give advantage to certain games. Fast forward actualy makes things harder to some games just like save states don't benifit every game and ether does using passwords as a lot of games don't have passwords to begin with.

All these are doing the same general thing this is to hard/long how to i make it easier. Lets combine turbo and fast forward and see how much easier it can start making games not mentioned.

NickGoat1990
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 17:38
1) Just because you use FF doesn't mean you're going to overlevel. That's a BS argument. I could just play at regular speed and look around the net for underleveled strategies as well and I'm gonna have an advantage over someone using FF and playing blind. What are you gonna do then, an emulator that blocks browsers until you beat a game? You just can't know what someone's going to do. You can't assume how every player uses FF.

2) I'm sorry I used FF through Pokémon Red, a game I've beaten like 20 times including on an original GB. I'm especially sorry I FF'd feeding my pokes multiplied Rare Candies to get a team up to Lv 100. I just didn't have the skill to slowly press the A button 300 times in succession.

3) FF is useful in every game? Yeah right, go play a platformer or a shooter at x3 the speed and tell me how that worked for you.

4) The fundamental difference between savestating and savefile loading versus fast forwarding is that the former make way too many achievements trivial. FF only really affects how long will take you to achieve something, how to combat it? Ask devs to add cheevos like "Beat this guy under X level" or "Reach this part of the game when IGT is xx:xx"

monkeytoung
Posted: 16 Mar, 2019 17:56
Last Edit: 16 Mar, 2019 17:59
The abillity to change the speed can make some achivemnts trivial this goes more for slow down then speeding up. Beat boss no damage you can easily slow down the game to avoid the boss. Shotem up slow down the game to make it easier to avoid. The main argument for speed up making achievements trvial is its speed up the rate at which you earn them or its alows you to over level fast yes you can do it without speeding up the point is speeding up you can do much faster the average person is not gonna spend the amount of time they are gonna just get bored and want to move on because grinding is slow. You deal with the time it takes which could be un godly hours or you can speed it up and boom 30 minutes vs hours on hours. If someone wants to spend 10 hours grinding let them its there choice but they could as easily just avoid by using skill and stragety doing it at a lower level to make this go by faster. Say there is an rpgs where it says beat x boss without damage having speed up can make that trvial as to make it easier you would over level so x boss will do little to no damamge or you can easily kill the boss in a few hits. It is trivial because you are using the speed up feature to avoid the time sync of grinding to make it easier and not have to use skill and straget to ensure you beat x boss no damage.

Or do achivements at being unerder level they can just as easily skip it and do everything they can do while being able to speed up the game. They dont have to complete the game to still be high up on a leaderboard for doing everything they can do with speed up and moving on.
Page: < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >

login

login to RetroAchievements:
User: 
Pass: 
or create a new account