Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Tompa wrote:
eternaljwh wrote:
Cancelled why?
Because he's going to improve it, as mentioned in the topic.
It would still be nice if the reason was stated at the bottom of the submission text, since that's where people will look, instead of searching a whole thread for the reason.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Satoryu wrote:
i agree with adolf's reasons for not doing the input stuff. it feels better as a one time thing, and would feel like stealing JXQ's work. i also think the input can actually be quite distracting from the gameplay.
about the run itself, which is what really matters here, superb.
I agree with all this.
Great improvement, voting yes!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Lord Tom wrote:
There's a lot I like about Baxter's idea, but share Bisqwit's reluctance to distill players down to a single 'score.'
My idea for player ranks is separately assign keywords for number and quality of movies made, and combine then to construct a rank.
Well, there is a reason why I wanted to put it into a single number. I am very much against the fact of using an average (or median) rating of all published movies, for a reason I stated before:
Baxter wrote:
No, it is important that it's NOT based on average rating. A movie with a low rating will get your average down, while it might just have a low rating since the game isn't popular. The movies quality might be perfectly good, and the fact that you made it should ADD to your score, not lower it. Of course, higher rated movies are appreciated more, and that's why X should probably be bigger than 1. But all the movies you made should add to your score, positively of course (since the movies are published, they are considered as good for the site, so it also should be good for your score).
You should understand that with your system someone with a single published movie that has an 8.1 would be a "Contributing Superstar". If he makes 2 more TASes, which might be of good quality, but of games that are less popular, and these two TASes both score a 4.0 then his new average would be about a 5.4... and his new rank would be a "Contributing Dilettante"... and like I said: since the movies are published, they are considered as good for the site, so it also should be good for your score.
For my suggestion, they would all count positive to your score. The value of X in my formula should be bigger than 1, since a single movie that has an 8 is probably more appreciated than two movies that have a 4.
I like it that stuff is being suggested, and being talked about though... I just don't think average values are the right choice.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
I'd also suggest that before submitting a next run, post it, or a wip on the forum first, so people can give you some pointers maybe. Most of the TASes at the site are made using frame advance (giving input one frame at a time) and lots of rerecords (in the order of 10000 and sometimes even a lot more).
So for the next time, learn to use these tools, and use them a lot. Discuss the run you are planning to do, and post wips.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
alden wrote:
Baxter wrote:
This should be taken into account if someone decides to make the run.
Bah, do it anyways!
Well, there are certain movies (especially clear improvements to existing runs) which you can be practially certain about that they will be published. A TAS of this obviously doesn't fall into this category. I do think however that lots of people will be interested in seeeing it, including myself, and yes, if no one tries, it's certain it won't be published, so yeah... I would wish for someone to TAS it, just like you do. I still think the TASer should take in into account and be prepared for the worst.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
I think quite a few will watch it, and quite a few will enjoy it too. There will however very likely also be quite a few who will vote no, so it's not really certain if the TAS will get published in the end. This should be taken into account if someone decides to make the run.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
System Error wrote:
Baxter wrote:
Yeah, this was a lot more enteraining, it gets my yes vote. Do note that it's open for competition, and a more entertaining playaround could obsolete it.
What if we take different characters into consideration? Yoshi provides a different form of entertainment that someone like Ness or Link. Or Captain Falcon.
Of course, 12 potential runs would be a bit of a stretch, but it is something to consider if any future playarounds are different enough.
I said "a more entertaining playaround". This could be a yoshi run doing the same, but more entertaining, but is (I think) more likely ultimately a couple of four player brawl matches with all secret characters unlocked. I don't see why we need more than one TAS to show off entertaining stuff at this game... what keeps a TASer from using more characters?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Yeah, this was a lot more enteraining, it gets my yes vote. Do note that it's open for competition, and a more entertaining playaround could obsolete it.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Satoryu wrote:
playing a free for all in Brawl offers no satisfying finishing point
Well, there is either a stock or a time limit... so there is a finishing point... but you are right in saying there are no clear goals besides 'trying to be entertaining'. While this might be the case, and even though I'm a big fan of having clear goals in a run, the most suitable TAS for this game clearly cannot have such clear goals.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
zugzwang wrote:
the sleeper NEVER follows me up the middle
Ah, well... this explains a lot, since this is the actual improvement. The first explanation and even the pics in this post didn't really point this out. I knew I could have gotten faster there, and I could have sworn I had already tested what you suggested, and sofar that lower leaper always went up the middle.
So I thought you were only suggesting how to get to the top faster, but I already knew that was possible. The essential part of the level was waiting for that second leaper, and going by your first post, I thought you didn't know this. This is why I was kinda annoyed by the fact that you had already claimed to know an improvement while it actually didn't seem like an improvement at all. Now that you mentioned that this influences the second leapers movement, I tested it and you are indeed correct! This should save about 19 frames roughly. I'm still puzzled as to why I never noticed it before though, as I'm somewhat certain I tested this before.
So nice find, and good job on finding it! I won't be doing the improvement anytime soon though, as more might be found. Good luck with your speedrun too.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Alden wrote:
Why should anyone bother to try to make it faster if it's going to be rejected outright or run the risk of being called imperfect without any solid evidence?
There are some points to be made here. The votes will probably be about the same if a new version only aims for speed, just like this versionThere are certain things everyone seems to agree on here, for instance completing the bonus stages... I also heard from nearly everyone who voted 'no' that they liked antdgar's youtube movies. I don't think people think the game is a poor choice for TASing, it's just that the specific goals of this TAS (even though they may sound the most natural) were a bad choice.
That being said, it would indeed be a bad idea to just improve this movie by an X amount of time, so I wouldn't suggest that. This of course means that there might not be any actual proof that this movie is not frame perfect... but since you said "
I guess what I really want to know is why it appears to be not perfect, since I can't see it at 100% like Baxter says. I'll try to point some of them out then:
0:45 kicks a red yoshi, but he doesn't fly off the screen, he later returns several seconds later.
1:40 why aren't mario and luigi thrown off the right side? They are already at the right, and the moving platform at the bottom moves to the left, creating extra distance too.
2:21 I think it's technically possible (though I have no proof for this) to let giant DK walk off the platform without even touching him.
3:26 It looks like lots of damage can be done right on the platform, and that samus flies off way harder than is needed. Looks like it can be optimized with a different strategy.
3:47 Metal mario walking off the cliff himself? I admit though, this battle looked pretty fast.
4:38 What's keeping yoshi from beating the polygon to the left of him?
4:54 One polygon fighter has been on screen way too long, just look at a few moments back, when they were all killed instantly... this should be possible the entire time.
5:06 Last polygon enemy... seriously you think this looks perfect? If so, why are almost all 29 enemies before it killed with another (faster) move?
5:30 Can't the hand be manipulated to do a move closer to the ground?
Another note, the rerecord count is very low, and although they don't say anything, they are a very, very good indication usually. I'll be perfectly honest with you... I think not a single stage in this TAS is frame perfect... the things I mentioned are only strategy changes, I think if it's looked at frame by frame, improvements at every stage can be found.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
It makes me kind of wonder... it seems like generally people who think a TAS of this game could be a lot more entertaining vote no, and people who would like to have a fastest possible completion vote yes... But (and forgive me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain) this run isn't really that fastest completion. It is faster than the previous submissions, but it's not perfect, which is even noticable at 100% speed. Shouldn't that also weight in decisions being made?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Well, you should actually TAS it in order to know for sure if it saves time. I've TASed that level many times, and I'm don't think 9-3 can be improved. Please make a movie (fcm) and time how many frames it takes you to complete, and compare it to my movie. I don't believe that level at my TAS can be improved.
If you just made the suggestion from looking at the level, or playing it yourself in realtime, then don't bother making an fcm... then I know for sure it's not an improvement.
Edit: Ok, I'll explain the level a bit. The waiting for the entire level is due to the second leaper turning right when reaching the rocks (when lolo stands in the sand). I can move through the sand a lot earlier, but then the leaper turns left, goes through the arrow tile and kills me. I continue walking through the sand the first place possible so that the leaper turns right and doesn't kill me. So yes, I could reach the sand probably faster (also note the extra tile I walk at the top right)... but there is a wait needed for the second leaper's movement anyway... so your suggestion is not an improvement (or I completely missed something, and feel free to make an fcm and prove me wrong if that is the case).
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Although there are things more entertaining, even this TAS is probably entertaining enough to be published imo. I do wonder quite a bit about the quality... is it perfect? The TAS looks to me (like most N64 TASes) like it's TASed till the wanted result was achieved, and that version was taken. It doesn't look like everything that could possibly the fastest was tested... and this also shows a bit in the rerecord count. Especially the team yoshi battle and the end of the polygon team battle made me wonder if I was watching perfection, or just a version that looked ok.
I still think it would be nice if an SSB TAS included tool assisted world records of all characters at break the targets and board the platforms.
And that link Raiscan posted showed that this TAS misses out on a lot of potentially very entertaining things this game offers... a 2 player or (dare I say) 4 player playaround would probably look awesome.
Hmm, this is a hard one, I do think there should be an SSB TAS, but I wonder if this is the one. I'll vote meh since I want to open up the site to SSB TASes, and wouldn't mind if this got published... but I think the run both lacks in entertainment and accuracy.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
CtrlAltDestroy wrote:
you'll find that controlling both characters asymmetrically becomes much easier.
Yeah, 2-player TASes look the coolest if it actually looks like 2 players playing, and not one with a controller that controls both. I myself (also not having an analog stick) find it easier by assigning the buttons to multiple keys, and also having keys with muliple buttons this way.
I imagine an optimized TAS not having any enemies getting off the ground.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Well, 12 levels might be just enough to not be repetitive... but it looping is generally an unsatisfying ending to a TAS. And it might be pretty hard to optimize it, which is a good thing. If you decide to do it, be sure to post wips, to see if people like it, and if they think it's played optimally.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
A TAS for this game doesn't require any planning, and that's generally a bad sign. I also think it isn't able to show something extraordinary that couldn't be shown in a non tool assisted run.
This TAS wouldn't require very much effort to make, and you can generally say that effort = entertainment.
There was btw a submission of this mode here, and it was rejected for being pointless.
There also was a topic about it here.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
Hmm, maybe I should just stop watching zapper TASes. I'm interested to see them but they just don't do it for me. Again, I don't think the TASer is at fault here, but the game. Going through the wall was somewhat nice.
The game however was WAY too slow, but this wasn't even the main problem. This TAS looks just like it's supposed to be played. Nothing really inventive or surprising (except maybe that wall thing), and it just looked like nothing special happened. I can see that the game is very hard to play for real, but it looks like that's just because of the way it's controlled. If tapping the A button made him jump, it might be possible to do something like this TAS in real time. I'm sorry, but I'll vote no.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1403)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
You probably chose the best goals for this run, and to made the TAS of this game as entertaining as it gets. Unfortunately, it still wasn't entertaining at all. I'll vote no.
Guess I killed 727 bad guys in my TAS.