Here's the thing about the concept of 'naming a number'.
If you have a number in mind - e.g. you could compute and write down all its digits if asked - then trivially it has a name. Even the most monstrously large finite number with no seeming method to compute it has a name - its decimal representation.
If you can't, then its 'name' is actually some algorithm that will compute it - and depending on what you're after (e.g. as stated earlier, busy beaver numbers) the algorithm for it may not be guaranteed to finish in finite time. Such a number is 'uncomputable', not because it can't be named, but because you can't figure out deterministically what all its digits are. But you can talk about it by name.
Oh, and by the way, I can't get any of the Monopoly luck-manipulation programs on here to work. I'm using Dev-C++ to compile. Can you give me another program that may work?
Hi, everyone! What would be good ideas for a Monopoly NES TAS (that would likely be published, of course)?
Sorry, but if you're not going to put in the effort to make a TAS that actually does something innovative, interesting and skillful, you should do something else.
These weird wire frames keep cropping up. The thing that worries me, is it seems like this is the sort of occurrence that might crash a console. Have these been demonstrated to actually work on a real GC?
The wireframes are a plugin or something for Dolphin. If you do this on console the screen just goes black except for a few shaders (like mirror shield/mirror shield light). There's nothing particularly glitchy about it, it's just an extension of what happens when you open a chest and something cool is inside.
Btw, some object never getting destroyed because of a cyclic dependency is not the only problem that can happen with reference counting. It's also possible for an object to be destroyed too soon (and then code accessing the destroyed object). Can you figure out how this could happen?
For alternatives to C, microsoft has 'Managed C' where you can declare objects to be within managed memory and a garbage collector will be freed later. Much of the mental work in making a C program work is in handling memory yourself, so this helps a LOT.
What happens if you go to furnace fun, escape a mini game, go to furnace fun, use the 'fly under the panels and backflip up into them' trick (or gameshark) and go straight to a minigame panel?
As for writing my own program, I’m thinking of maybe designing a simple pong/tetris game for starters. What else could I make that’s relatively simple but still more of a challenge than just outputting stuff on a console?
Multiplayer pong/tetris.
You'll have to learn about sockets, abstracting the state of the game (so you can send and receive and respond to changes in it asynchronously), writing a netcode... etc.
It wouldn't be a real TAS, it'd be a 'what-if' TAS. e.g. what if barrier skip was possible and didn't require anything complicated, what would the TAS/route look like. It would be good preparation if nothing else
Just do it for fun? Shouldn't take that long...
Basically the route would be:
bombs -> WW (and bottle) -> leaf -> soup -> FF2 -> Hyrule2 -> Ganons Tower
(maybe different order in the middle)
Btw. why didn't you just put the door in front of the barrier? That way you wouldn't have to leaf that far. On J you can use the sides of the bridge for the WW dive and you can use Tetra for text.
(Hyrule1 freezes later on anyway, afair, so Hyrule2 is the only option)
I think you also need mirror shield (to reflect the light arrow in Ganondorf fight). Unless the game only checks that your shield is up and not its type.
That's not how any% and low% are categorized.
any% means 'beat the game as fast as possible via whatever means'
low% means 'beat the game with as few things as possible, as fast as possible'
So if skipping a mission is faster than doing it, you'd do it in any% and low%. If skipping a mission is slower, you'd do it in low%. Same for upgrades, collectibles and so on.
A category for 'all missions' would be specifically titled that, if 100% also includes other things.
This might sound incredibly ignorant as I've never done or attempted TAS before, but why can't you just do the current non-TAS route that people do, but just TAS that? It might not have any of the tricks that a TAS would do, but at least it's something.
Because then it wouldn't be optimal. It wouldn't even be useful atm - the real time route is changing all the time as people decide where to superswim, where to use miscellaneous dry storage tricks and so on.
