Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
xxNKxx wrote:
I just want make some records for SF series :D
If you want to make a record for an NES based Capcom style fighting game, can I recommend TASing Joy Mecha Fight? It's an officially licensed game, in fact, it's made by Nintendo itself after it saw the popularity of Street Fighter 2. It also rips off Mega Man in some ways.
Edit:
Regarding this particular run, I'm not entirely sure what to vote. It was repetitive and on the bland side. On the other hand, for sub-three minutes, the repetitiveness isn't too bad. I did enjoy the strategies used, and it fully held my interest over the course of a fight.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Radiant wrote:
add an option to an emulator to start with randomized initial RAM
That would be an utterly invalid starting state with most systems. A central point most seem to be missing is that memory is NOT random. Memory is filled with data from other sources, and these other sources are what can be random. Which means blocks of memory will contain some kind of pattern, which may or may not be discernible.
Please see this page to get a better idea how memory is filled: Wiki: Nach/MemoryInit.
As proven on that page, the amount of impossible cases greatly outnumber the amount of possible cases. RAM should NOT be filled randomly, as that will in most cases result in a starting state not possible with the hardware.
The way I see almost everyone talking about here is a case where there are no relationships between bits of memory, however I haven't seen any mass produced computer system where that is ever the case.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Warp wrote:
In principle a TAS is a demonstration of what would it look like if a theoretically superhuman being would play a video game on an actual console/computer. This means that this hypothetical being ought be able to somehow affect the initial RAM state of the console as the game starts. Is this even physically possible?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
natt wrote:
It's most likely true that the NES can assume any value for any single bit in RAM on powerup. It's also most likely true that the probabilities for each bit are not a simple 50% and not even independent (as a lot of '1' or '0' bits in a single row will change the overall electrical situation of that row).
You're not taking into account propagation.
Post #357625
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I personally reject the notion of a TAS being able to start from any arbitrary RAM state. The RAM state must be one of the possible RAM start up states possible, not some arbitrary combination which would be impossible given the circuitry's details.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Duderson wrote:
Nach wrote:
Be sure to rate your movies on the movie pages.
Okay, sorry.
No need to be sorry!
But this way, you can influence the ranking of different movies (and their authors), and let authors know if you like or dislike something.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Or maybe someone can provide a transcript.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
xnamkcor wrote:
would you plan on doing a "100%" glitch run
Such a run would most likely be rejected.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Radiant wrote:
Could someone please explain why there is a rule that "a board game, sports game, or game show game" is not eligible for the vault?
Most board, sports, and game show games have a very different kind of gameplay style than more typical video games.
In most classic board games, the entire gameplay is nothing more than a series of moves, where you can find thousands of exciting move lists on web sites dedicated to the board game. Seeing some moves played back in a particular computerized version of it is not interesting to anyone familiar with the board game, nor is it of particular interest to the TAS community.
Most game show games are based around knowing the solution to some question. Even for regular players of the genre, once they know all the answers to the games' riddles, they don't care about it anymore. Sure you can input it fast, but so what? You want a real record, go onto one of these game shows and win there, that's what people want to see records in.
I wasn't directly involved in the process to add sports games to the ineligible for vault criteria, but it's easy to speculate along the same lines. The real records for sports games again are in the real world. Most of the games are yet another reimplementation no one cares about a few years after it came out, with a few dozen variations of teams which don't contribute much to TASing.
Now on the contrary to what I said above, it is possible to make TASs for board, sports, and game show games that people do want to see and care about. So if you got the votes and confidence in the workbench that people enjoyed the run, it can be accepted, and even extremely well received by the site.
The vault is strictly for runs where the video game itself is the game that people want to see records for. Not for when the video game is a poor substitute for something else which people would generally rather see.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I voted for 7 of these. We had some really excellent TASs this year. (At the same time I felt we had more awful TASs than ever, but the ones that excelled, did so exceptionally well this year.)
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
thatguy wrote:
My goodness this was close. If this had been a governmental election I think keylie would have had the right to request a recount.
I think Masterjun is the one who should ask for a recount.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
jlun2 wrote:
Flip wrote:
Not exist.
Same. My significant other is non-existent at this moment. :P
Murder?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Once you're at that point, there actually is no limit what you can program in. You can have controllers 1 and 2 playing through whatever you created, while the other 6 are adding more to it and modifying what's already there. You could cycle through game after game, or have additional levels for games being created as previous levels are being completed by the player(s).
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
The server did it. DMTM happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
minglw wrote:
The voting choices I see are "YES, YES, YES".
Be careful where you click then, since they aren't all yes. If in doubt, ask someone else to read it for you.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
I didn't claim that no similarity was noticed by the audience. I said that it was not enough for obsoletion. Because when it is, you have MOST of the posters mention it (as they do when a submission is not entertaining at all, or obviously suboptimal). 3 out of 116 is just nothing at all.
Raw numbers and an argument out of silence does not justify completely ignoring that the movies are identical.
How many of these voters have seen the previous movie? How many of them remember it? All they're voting on is whether it is entertaining - it is, that doesn't tell you if it's the same movie as before or not.
feos wrote:
Are you saying that I as a judge am unable to determine the solution without constantly imposing factors no one thought of? Did you miss the part where I use to post my possible solution before applying it? Do you indeed think that:
we must have every one who posted tell us how optimal it is to have a right to accept it.
? Am I shirking the open discussion? No. We here are figuring out the solution together. It's not Vault where it either is the fastest or isn't.
Your argumentation tactic is to ignore the obvious, and then somehow extend that to everyone saw both movies side-by-side, and consciously decided they're different. Your comparison makes no sense to me.
What I do know is that based on what people are saying in this thread, we are to ignore anything from the point of the payload onwards. At which point we're left with 97 out of 99 seconds which are identical. Those last two seconds are utterly boring and do nothing to add to the entertainment factor.
As a judge, if there are potential issues that no one has raised yet which need discussing, then it is your responsibility to raise them. You can thank me for raising these issues for you, so they can now be discussed at length.
feos wrote:
Now it looks like you are seriously insisting on this run obsoleting any%. Are you?
I'm not insisting anything. I'm asking you and others in the thread to give it some serious thought before deciding. I'm also offering the option that the other run already obsoletes this run, or to merge the two.
This run is amazing, no one is doubting that. But as responsible judges, we cannot just turn our brains off, and ignore the issues that are in front of us. A decision has to be more than a knee-jerk reaction to the best TAS ending ever, and focus on the merits of the TAS itself.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
Since no one seems to have commented on the differences between them, I don't know why you're saying "all these people" *feel* they are.
Oh God. When a movie is submitted and no one comes up with improvements, does it mean we should consider it optimal? By your logic, no. By your logic, we must have every one who posted tell us how optimal it is to have a right to accept it.
By my logic, if no one of the 115 voters noticed the similarity to the any% run, it kind of means that there is enough difference.
Besides me, others have brought this up:
Fishaman P wrote:
Honestly? Since I had already seen the SMW Glitched TAS, this TAS didn't really provide anything new for me. Sorry, but I was honestly bored.
Cyber_Kun wrote:
While I agree that this is a massively important run for the TAS community, the run itself does not bring or show much new.
Cyber_Kun wrote:
This is on top of this run being the same run as before. While the memory corruption run was quite impressive, just seeing it again with a different ending is not.
Cyber_Kun wrote:
The run is important, but I don't think it should considered better than it is because it is important.
Furthermore, your 115 votes is whether this run is entertaining. This run is indeed entertaining.
As the judge for this movie, you're responsible for determining whether to accept this movie at all (the votes help for that), and if so, how to accept this movie. Whether the current publication already obsoletes this run, or this run obsoletes the other is part of your responsibility.
If you want more feedback from people other than a fellow judge, ask for it, don't close your eyes claiming 115 votes allow you to shirk responsibility or not consider whether two movies are indeed identical or not, or ignore several posts which claim this is the same just because the payload is awesome.
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
the only thing we should be considering is the movie till the point of the payload
Where does it come from?
Tub wrote:
The goal of the run was met when the payload took over; if anything needs to be timed for obsoletion purposes, that's the point. Everything else is just showing off the outro, so to speak.
SmashManiac wrote:
- Obsoletion by faster payload? Yes.
Let's also keep reading what Tub had to say:
Tub wrote:
When the whole difference between two runs is a choice to end input slightly earlier, or to keep input running to show off something weird in the credits, or even just to press a button to speed up the credits, then I cannot remember those differences ever having mattered wrt obsoletion.
So by this criteria, these are the same movie. It makes no sense to publish the same movie twice, nor twice in two separate tiers.
Edit:
This movie could even be merged with the existing publication, as alternate ending taking more advantage of the glitch.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
How are they different enough?
I don't know how they are different enough for all these people, but they feel they are.
Since no one seems to have commented on the differences between them, I don't know why you're saying "all these people" *feel* they are.
feos wrote:
Something tells me obsoletion obsession is a disease that strikes every year or so. "Obsolete something just because we always used to!" There is a Moons tier. Movies that people consider different enough get published alongside. Movies that are considered similar obsolete one another.
Since it was already mentioned a few posts back that the only thing we should be considering is the movie till the point of the payload, how are these not similar? Or better yet, downright identical?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Is anyone even talking about it? Are you suggesting it?
I thought this point was obvious. Have you watched the two side by side? Having both would be rather redundant.
Obsoleting "fastest ending" branch by "showcase total control", that's redundant.
I have a hard time understanding your usage of the word redundant here.
feos wrote:
And in Moons and higher it works like this: "Are 2 runs considered similar by the audience, one of them being better?" I don't see a single post considering they are so similar one needs to be obsoleted. Guess why? Because they are different enough.
How are they different enough? The first 97 seconds or so are identical, with the that other movie being only ~99 seconds long. The only difference between them is the payload. That other movie enters the pointer to the ending and then jumps to the ending sequence, this movie enters some new code, enters a pointer to it, and jumps to that, and then demonstrates the two new games added before the new ultra brief Masterjun'd final ending screen.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Is anyone even talking about it? Are you suggesting it?
I thought this point was obvious. Have you watched the two side by side? Having both would be rather redundant.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
maxthegoof wrote:
Sometimes even in windows 7 the upload immediately reaches the 90%, as if it were resuming, even if the file was not on youtube, with an erroneous speed value. Am I doing something wrong?
It's possible there's a bug somewhere. Or perhaps an issue with your internet connection.
If you want to debug it, edit credentials.txt, and set the 5th line to true to enable debugging. Note, do not share an entire unredacted debug log publicly as it will contain some sensitive information.
maxthegoof wrote:
And would it be possible not to pass the description file parameter?
Since descriptions can be long and contain newlines, passing them directly as a parameter can be problematic. Instead place your description in a text file, and use < as shown in the instructions or command line help. If you're embedding YTU within another application, just use popen() or your language's equivalent.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Mothrayas wrote:
Also, if the TAS is judged on the play of the payload result, then the Pi movie would technically be improvable by crashing it as fast as possible. But that would remove the whole point of coding these 'games' in the first place, wouldn't it?
It'd be improvable speed wise. But that was clearly entertainment based, part of which was ensuring the run was exactly 3:14.15 seconds long, and getting many Pi related things onto the screen.
Here on the other hand, the payload is also entertainment based, but doesn't necessarily ensure the highest levels of entertainment possible.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
