Pillars of Eternity - Beaten in 40 Minutes @ Kotaku

Couchpotato

Part-Time News-bot
Joined
October 1, 2010
Messages
36,183
Location
Spudlandia
Kotaku has the usual news with information a gamer has beaten Pillars of Eternity in under forty minutes. Of course he used an exploit to achieve this speed record.

Here is the video that will contain spoilers.



In this speedrun, which appears to be the current world record for Pillars of Eternity, Jiseed takes advantage of a few different game-breaking glitches to bypass chunks of the game that might otherwise take hours to complete.
More information.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,183
Location
Spudlandia
Kind of like skimming through a book and then reading the last page. Weeeee.... :p
 
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
5,521
Location
Seattle
Maylander read this and wondered why it took that guy so long.
I believe Maylander took longer than forty minutes based on the replies from the other forum thread. I would never speed run a game this fast it ruins all the fun.:)
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,183
Location
Spudlandia
Cool.
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2015
Messages
2,714
I could appreciate that if cheating was something to boast over :)

Wait.

I suddenly remember how many people are still watching Tour de France.

Ignore me, please :)

How the heck is taking steroids cheating?
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
3,381
I could appreciate that if cheating was something to boast over :)
Using exploits is not considered cheating in speedrun world, it is considered fair play.
Cheating is using any programs outside the game itself.
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2014
Messages
3,819
I'll never understand speedruns in singleplayer RPGs.
RPGs are not supposed to be finished in 2 minutes. Sidecontent in RPGs is not there to slow your progress, but exists to be explored, experienced and experimented upon!

Kotaku should change the site name into speedrun/cheats/exploits. They talk about that nonsense frequently and not just for RPGs.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
I suddenly remember how many people are still watching Tour de France.

Sports would be boring to watch without juiced up athletes.

I bike alot and theres an ex-pro that bikes with us that biked in Europe for a few years. He just smiled when the news broke and said that theres more than a little pressure to do good and no one cared what you did to get better. Basically the entire peloton did the same things the leaders were doing.
 
Sports would be boring to watch without juiced up athletes.

I bike alot and theres an ex-pro that bikes with us that biked in Europe for a few years. He just smiled when the news broke and said that theres more than a little pressure to do good and no one cared what you did to get better. Basically the entire peloton did the same things the leaders were doing.

I don't blame anyone for doing what they feel they have to do. My confusion is related to why you'd want to actually watch and care about a game that's so obviously rigged.

Even if every single participant uses doping, there's the question of the nature of doping - and the degree to which each participant is doped.

Unless it can be established that every participant is "playing" on as level a playing field as is possible when you're dealing with human beings and their physical/mental differences, I simply don't see the point.

That said, I'm not a sports fan - so I'm obviously not very important when it comes to changing anything about how things work.

But I should add that I actually once enjoyed watching Tour de France as "background" entertainment, though that was mostly for the scenery.

I stopped immediately as it became clear that no winner could really be said to have been better than the next in line.
 
It's not either/or, black and white. Those people who compete to do speedruns they have already played through the game once and usually several times, otherwise they could not know how to optimize the speedrun. Thus saying it 'destroys' their gaming experience is a redundant argument, really.

They can both enjoy the game as most do, and afterwards have fun competing/optimizing the speedrun. Fair enough that not all see the appeal in that (it's about competition, knowing a game's structure intimately and min/maxing), but the default dismissive/derogatory comment that many seem to have against this practice is uncalled for. It's almost like your enjoyment of a game, or way you play it, is threatened by speed-runs? ;) If not, and you don't see the appeal, then just ignore it?

I don't do speedruns myself, but I do see the appeal (after having enjoyed a game the 'usual' way first of course) and from a gamedesigner standpoint it's also interesting to see how the game system can be 'gamed'. The best speedrun I've ever seen was the Morrowind one, I almost laughed with glee the entire way, it was so fast and extreme how a giant game was bypassed that way, and the poor final boss didn't even finish his speech before he was dead ;) Good fun! Especially because there was no cheating or exploiting of a bug done, it was all made just doing what the game was intended to accomodate. In my view it says a lot about huge RPG's games where this is possible without cheating, they are true sandboxes, complex games that can be gone through in many ways. And I see that as positive.

Well, many words, hopefully it can nuance views about speedrunnings a little. Felt obliged to write it after seeing all the opposite (automatic and oft-uttered I suspect) opinions ;)

Edit:

Here's the Morrowind speedrun I was thinking of:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1IRxTN-_kU

It's been done 4 minutes faster than this, but that's by using glitches/exploits. This is done 'cleanly', it seems. And there's been a lot of competition over this. You might not see the point, and that's fair of course, but I kinda' like watching such things (after having completed the game in question myself first)
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
38
I see the point in speedruns done in a "legit" way, I just don't see the point in cheating and boasting about it.

Not that my understanding is a requisite. If it makes people happy to cheat and talk about what they've achieved through cheating, why not.
 
Last edited:
Someone explain the point of speedruns using exploits, please?
Was wondering that myself and read up on it a bit:

What is a Speedrun (in-depth article).

In short, it seems that the point of speedruns using exploits is the point of speedruns. As opposed to normal playing, that is. There's a section in the article that specifically target glitches.

Glitchless speedruns then basically form another category of speedruns, in this case one with additional constraints ("not using glitches").


Also, making use of glitches does not equal cheating. They are two different things. While that sounds strange from our "normal gamer's point of view", it makes sense when you follow the argumentation in the article. Here's an excerpt from the section about glitches:

One point of controversy that comes up again and again is the utilization of glitches in speedruns. Many viewers have an expectation that speedruns clear the game using only the tools intentionally given by the developers. This is an explicit constraint on the run brought on by an internal perception of the game. This by itself is not inherently wrong or incorrect, but it is based on an attachment to the game. Speedruns in the unconstrained case are separated from this in that the game itself is no longer regarded as a game, but is instead the medium. The "game" then becomes the optimization problem, while the medium is just a set of implicit constraints. In this sense, there is no such thing as a glitch, provided that nothing external to the medium impacts it.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
3,486
Was wondering that myself and read up on it a bit:

What is a Speedrun (in-depth article).

In short, it seems that the point of speedruns using exploits is the point of speedruns. As opposed to normal playing, that is. There's a section in the article that specifically target glitches.

Glitchless speedruns then basically form another category of speedruns, in this case one with additional constraints ("not using glitches").

Ah, ok - so it's actually a "thing"?

Didn't know that.

Strange thing, but ok :)

Still don't understand it, but whatever!
 
Back
Top Bottom