Eh, I'd be up for it, but not all major contests are gonna have subforums. Just because VLDC had its own, it doesn't mean CLDC will receive the same treatment.
Not to mention there's the possibility the host didn't think about it.
But I just saw everyone posts and it's just the BPS
Yes, but that's because no submitter worked with a partner yet (there are currently only 12 submitters). If you look into other contests where teaming up with a partner is allowed, you can easily see that what I wrote is the case.
I don't wanna quote this amazing post in its' full length because, well, it's long - but there are still so many things about the 5 minute rule I'd need to know to make sure my level won't violate it.
Would puzzle levels that take three hours to figure out but three minutes to beat not get a deduction?
Would giant, nonlinear, exploration-based maze-like levels not get any point deduction if the correct path, once known, is only four minutes long?
Does obtaining the secret exit factor into those five minutes?
Furthermore, what exactly is this "perfect playthrough" that the playtime is judged by? If I can provide a TAS replay file of my level being beaten in 4:59, does that mean I'm off the hook in regards to that penality? Otherwise, what's the standard that this playthrough time is measured by?
Either we've just been straightly ignored, which would be kinda rude, or the judges have no plans how to handle this questionable rule themselve, so no one was able to give a concrete answer.
However, I think XpheXI's compromise is a good idea. As long as no one / no rule strictly prohibits this, I'm going to submit a perfect playthrough video file / tas file in my entry's zip, proving how you can easily beat the level in less than 5 minutes. As long as no one objects to this, I define this as the solution of preventing any length-penalty.
Personally I'm not really afraid of this, since I've shortened my level a lot, but I want to define an unambiguous, objective solution for this rule.
And just to make it clear again: I'm no opponent to this rule and I can clearly understand why it was implemented (really good way to save judges' patience without forcing the participant to submit an unendited hud e.g. by forcing him to keep a time limit of xxx seconds). Yet I want to make clear, if you add such a rule which annihilates 5% of the total score instantly, it should be more precisely defined than in about 2 sentences. That's why I initially came up with the huge post linked in the beginning and why I am asking for an objective solution for this.
Since this has been brought up again, i wanted to add one thing.
Now that i'm at the point where i'm gonna time my (and my partner's) level to make sure it doesn't go over 5 minutes, i've been rereading the rules, and one sentence called my attention:
Originally posted by Rules thread
Your level should not exceed 5 minutes to beat in a perfect run (meaning without death from front to back). If we feel an entry is too long during judging, you may be penalized.
The "feel" in this sentence is what worries me... what does it mean exactly? If the rule states 5 minutes, it should be an objective time, right? That penalty is quite massive, and i wanna make sure i know in what circumnstances it's gonna be applied.
I've been thinking of the same solution as Sariel and XpheXI proposed, that is, recording a movie file using tool assistance to get a run without mistakes, and i wanted to know if that would be acceptable.
Like, if a level can be proven (humanly) beatable in less than 5 minutes, is it safe from the penalty?
Y'know, this whole too long thing is kind of silly.
If a level is way too long for its own sake, that automatically should mean a deduction in the level design score.
I know judges don't wanna be playing gigantic stages but come on, this is CLDC. There won't be that many levels to play anyway so this judging won't kill anyone
I think it would work better as a suggestion rather than a rule given how subjective it is.
tbh, i've kind of figured this "rule" was a suggestion the whole time? like, i can't see the judges whipping out a stopwatch and docking points for every second over 5 minutes your level goes - and if they actually did something that asinine, then i'd argue it like everyone else. i read this as nothing more than an attempt to filter out the vldc9 variety path-esque levels, where they just go on forever for no good reason. i can totally get behind that.
in that same vein, i agree with what koopster just posted - don't stick an arbitrary minute limit on it. hell, even if i didn't fully agree with vldc11's time limit rule, at least it referenced the in-game timer, which is some form of objectiveness. saying "5 minutes" in this state means different things to different players of different skill levels. just make the rule "don't submit a bullshit long level" and if it is deemed to be too lengthy, then dock points appropriately. i think the people judging this contest are competent enough themselves that they can ascertain that without pulling a minute limit out of a hat.
I should have something witty to put here (even if it's just to update dated info), shouldn't I?
For what it's worth, I personally don't have any plans on trying to enforcing that five minute rule. If a (section of) level feels like it just drags on and on and on... I'll just penalize it the usual way (read: the score takes a hit in the Design category). Just know when to wrap it up, basically.
For life farm/infinite lives for more challenging levels, I most likely won't penalize if one isn't provided, but having one for those types of levels wouldn't hurt.