Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
Interesting. I looked over things quickly, and I don't think there is much room for manipulation here.
SGB deosn't change the relative time between CPU and timer, so I don't think that will help.
As mentioned by Dwedit, double speed mode requires the game to turn it on.
I looked at where this is happening. It takes exactly 2304 (256 * 9) cycles between the time FF04 is read between those two addresses, and interrupts are not enabled at that time. So there really doesn't seem to be anything that would allow difference to be something other then 9.
Too bad, that would have been cool.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
It's actually the other way around, you turned 'arithmetic' into 'arithmetic (school) assignment', there is nothing inherently 'school assignment' about the 'arithmetic' in Math Blatster, or even the form of it. The same arithmetic can be used as a school assignment, but it's also just an everyday life skill.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
Arithmetic isn't just an assignment, heck I know people who haven't gone to school a day in their lives who do arithmetic of that exact form every day.
But it seems all this is un-necessary...
I wish you just said this 2 pages ago.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
That's not an answer.
I'm asking what you see as those specific elements that exist in stage 2 of 'math blaster' that don't exist in 'you have to burn the rope' that transform it into a 'serious' game.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
@Mothrayas: Except the only 'real points' here are precisely about appearence. What differentiates 'you have to burn the rope' from level 2 of 'math blaster'? Both are platforming mixed with educational elements, one reading and another addition. If anything the math blaster stage is more of a 'serious' game since at least you can fail.
EDIT: oops, bobo the king posted in between, edittted for clarity.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
I'm really not seeing the need for this definition of a 'serious' game.
Let's take an even simpler example. Why is [2891] DS You Have to Burn the Rope DS by NitroGenesis in 00:25.87 a serious game (where incidently you cannot fail) and not a cleverly disguised reading comprhension test?
The answer now would seem to be 'because it's not designed like one,' but maybe it's just a really clever disguise? :O
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
The carrot attacks are fixed, her movement is what is being manipulated. All bosses have behavior that varies mainly based on your position relative to them. In this case we want the pattern that brings her toward the roof in time to defeat her by throwing her into it.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
This is on my to-do list of things to fix in the SMS core.
The game is being played in GG mode (you can see in the movie header that IsGameGear is set to true) but it just isn't setting the system ID to Game Gear.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
For anyone interested, the solution appears to be located at $3082, $3084 in RAM. I haven't worked out what value goes to which person.
The solution appears to be calculated around frame 836 in the movie.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
Yeah, I just don't agree that there should be a blanket ban on games with those design asthetics. I don't see a need for it and don't see it as desirable.
The existing rules regarding non-games seem sufficient to me to cover non-game educational content.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
Carmen Sandiego is basically an aggrevated multiple choice test about reading comprehension, hard to get more school house education then that. Education isn't just math.
Actually, many games require you to be able to read in order to understand and play. Reading and reading skills are certainly school subjects. As a current example, take [3590] SMS King's Quest: Quest for the Crown by BZero & Challenger in 03:07.46 . Played casually, this is basically little more then a big reading comprehension test. The only reason it's not classified as an educational game is because nobody called it that. If an edutainment company had published the exact same game and called it educational, would it suddenly become unpublishable?
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
Actually I think Math Blaster is a good and fun game (I remember playing it when I was little.)
I was more referring to the rule itself, in that I don't think it makes sense.
If I had created an otherwise identical game called 'Waldo Blaster' where instead of doing addition you just have to identify and shoot Waldo (and do equivalent things in the other stages) and I had published that in the 1980s instead of Math Blaster, that game would publishable here, since it's a game with clear gameplay and a goal.
My point is I don't think the fact you have to do math instead should be what stops it from being published.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
I think this rule should be changed to allow this run to be published.
I can't think of a good reason why 'do basic math' should not be publishable.
We already have 'click a predetermined spot on the screen' [2792] NES The Great Waldo Search by MESHUGGAH in 00:51.83 and this is a better game then that.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
Lot's of cool new features there! Those omni-directional goombas were funny. XD The fire flower looked cool!
I did find the slight perspective changes when Mario changes directions pretty jarring though. Also the segmented flagpole looks kind of wrong.
Other then that, awesome stuff!
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
Cool! This is a much needed topic, thanks for making it.
I have a question regarding this rule:
My question is, what can be done about runs that accepted and published, yet break this rule by being emulated quite poorly, if they cannot be improved in gameplay? I have in mind several A2600 runs:
[2228] A2600 Bobby is Going Home by Lollorcaust in 01:16.13[2585] A2600 Dodge 'Em by yep2yel & morningpee in 00:52.93[2226] A2600 Superman "pause glitch" by jlun2 in 00:11.42
There is very likely no way to improve gameplay in these (certainly not Superman or Bobbie is going home, Dodge'em might have a chance.) Yet, it seems there should be a means to replace them with runs that are accurate given how obviously poor the emulation is just by watching the encodes, even if they are the same length (or possibly longer.)
So, assuming that no further improvements are possible: Is it acceptable to submit a new run that is identical in gameplay to an existing run where the only improvement is accurate emulation?
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
http://tasvideos.org/userfiles/info/43978832652265684
Here is an improvement of about 10 frames due to evading traffic as fast as possible. I didn't include whatever the one frame improvement was that ReadySteadyYeti found, so I guess that will have to be put into this one for a final submission.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
At some point we really should formally deprecate old BizHawk versions. Pretty much every core, both ported and in house, has been substanitally improved since 1.11.6.
Specifically for 1.11.6 for A2600, that verion of the core is very seriously buggy.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
This is a two minute improvement over the predecessor movie linked there.
It is a 10 second improvement over cheesestringxx's previous rejected submission (in gameplay.)
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
Awesome! Good Luck with that ambitious undertaking.
Yeah I don't know. I was not able to sync kumquat's run at all in BizHawk, despite the overall time it takes to do stuff seeming to be correct. This tells me that lag is way different between the two. Even just changing some minor things in BizHawk does have seeming random impact on lag (although the net result is usually the exact same number of lag frames, just in different locations.) My approach so far is just to take the minimum number of actions possible which makes lag easier to track.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
Cool, are you still working on Wonder Boy at all?
Are you going to be working on it zoboner? Or doing research?
______
Tails' Sky Patrol was quite well optimized. But, so far I managed to save 3 frames in each of the first 2 levels, so I'm at least making progress. There's a slim chance I'll have it and a revamped version of George Foreman back on the workbench by year end.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(3602)
Joined: 11/30/2014
Posts: 2749
Location: US
@zoboner thanks for the LUA work . I see this is accepted now and I probably won’t be trying to improve it right away, but I would encourage you to try yourself. Since you seemed to work out RNG pretty easily I’m sure you’ll find improving this pretty easy.
EDIT: Actually, nevermind, I found a better manipulation on the first opponenet, so I'll just cancel this one and submit a clean, improved version when it's ready.