Posts for Ramzi

1 2
12 13 14
18 19
Posted: 9/22/2005 7:40 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
That's hardly a rant. Try swearing more and talking about how the man is keeping you down.
Posted: 9/18/2005 9:54 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I found it. This file was used for testing a speed run. (I can consistently and easily do 13 minutes.) I was missing the normal exits on Star World 1 and Star World 2. The keys are only needed to move on to the next world, where as the regular exit merely makes you walk back to the star. After I completed them normally, Mario walked to the star before the level. I beat Star World 3 normally, and Mario did not walk. He doesn't walk if you've already gotten that exit. So I beat a ghost house, saved, and reset, and now I have *96.
Posted: 9/18/2005 9:40 PM
Post subject: Missing Two Exits in SMW
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Heya guys. I sometimes delete my SMW data and start from scratch, playing through and getting *96 in one sitting. I deleted my data, except played it a little bit at a time over a period of days. I just finisged today, but I only have 94. I made sure to do every level that was red twice. My suspicion is I missed something in the Forest of Illusion, or the Chocolate Island levels. I redid the ghost house in Forest of Illusion, but nothing. In Chocoland Island 2, I completed the level with all three exits: the one with the baseball throwers, the one with the floating mushrooms, and the one with the dinosaurs. Still, 94. Any idea what I missed?
Posted: 9/18/2005 2:42 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Been there, done that.
Posted: 8/16/2005 3:11 AM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I'm interested.
Posted: 8/13/2005 12:38 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
krieg747 wrote:
In the future, the internets will give you hugs through your monitor.
I do believe I just took a ride on the RoflCopter. In serious, though. What year can I see a perfect TAS?
Posted: 7/1/2005 11:15 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Yeah Boco.
Posted: 6/30/2005 8:41 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Making this video is impossible. The eyeballs just keep going in circles. 4matsy, I made it up to level 7 getting all the ghosts and fruit. If you want to work with me on this I'll send you my file. I'm thinking about just beating the game, because getting all the ghosts is too hard.
Posted: 6/30/2005 5:21 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I disagree. The reason I doubt that it's not a TAS is because the technology doesn't exist for it yet. It's unlikely someone independently created the technology just for tricking the internet. Maybe I'm thinking too devilishly, but if I wanted to trick people into think I did a real run, I would intentionally put mistakes in here and there. I thought the movie was fantastic. He knew the Princess slide and penguin race shortcuts perfectly. The 70th star was amazing. He cut so much time from it. I think the scariest jump was in the first Bowser, where he long jumps to a red coin that was not visible. But TSA, have you ever played GoldenEye? The accomplishments in that game are unbelievable. Mario 64 is a much much easier game. I have a video of someone beating the Aztec Temple on 007 Mode with everything maxed.
Posted: 6/30/2005 5:11 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
In regards to the Prisoner's Dillema, check out superrationality. It may be practical in a thread about a "perfect game." Some games can be played perfectly with a loss. Michael mentioned Connect 4. The second player can play perfectly, which here means survive as long as possible. If he lost within the first four moves, well, he's retarded. If Super Smash Bros. is comparable to Connect 4, then -- and for simplicity let's imagine only 2 players -- the loser will survive as long as possible, take as little damage as possible, lose as few lives as possible, etc etc etc. This all depends on the criteria you decide is important for "winning" without a technical win in Super Smash Bros. Some games will never have a winner, but would be a stalemate. Those would be pretty shitty games in terms of theoretics. I just invented one in my head right now. Imagine a game where there are two players. One can move three spaces on an infinite grid, and the other can move only one. If the only way the game ends is for the slower piece to capture the faster one, then only a retard would ever lose as the faster piece. The game, from a theoretical perspective, is stale. Now we're the retards in Super Smash Bros. The reason why the games are fun are because of our imperfections. Given such a vast amount of possibilities and decisions to make, we rely on quick wit and heuristics to read and predict the game. For some reason, I'm imagining that a perfect game of SSB would just be players standing idle, incurring no damage. Or, maybe they could evade each other so well, no one would ever get hit. This is like the theoretical game I made up earlier, except on a finite plane. Given 4 characters, though, and limited level space, I'm not sure evasion would be possible. We could use multi-variable graphs for all of the characters. We plot what we consider is important: speed, weight, power, jumping distance (to keep from falling in a pit.) The one with the most area would be the best player. This would be a bitch and a half to calculate though. Also, item drops may give a technically weaker opponent the advantage. Gah, my brain just broke. Good luck.
Posted: 6/29/2005 9:28 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Such creative jumping. That 70th star was amazing.
Posted: 6/23/2005 3:51 AM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Awesome video man. Definitely one of the most fun to watch ever. In the snow level where you ski, if you get hit and roll into a big snow ball, would that be faster?
Posted: 6/21/2005 3:02 AM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I posted a big ass video on Something Awful today and they raped my bandwidth. I don't know when I'm getting it back. It's a tool developed by the goons, for the creation of perler bead art. See this thread: http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1586 If anyone is really interested I can E-Mail it to you.
Posted: 6/20/2005 7:08 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
http://ramzi.completelyfreehosting.com/images/PixelTool_b2.rar You're welcome.
Posted: 6/20/2005 5:57 AM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I painfully read through this thread and I don't know wtf. So somebody answer this for me. Is it technologically probable that quantum computers will be able, at any time in the future, to brute force a perfect game of Super Mario Bros., or, would the task require such a ginormous amount of operations that more time than the universe has existed would be required to finish executing all of them? I don't want math. Perfect Mario Bros., YES / NO ?
Posted: 6/19/2005 7:31 PM
Post subject: N64 Rerecording
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I'm wondering how far in the future we're expecting this to be. What's the latest? Is anyone working on it? What kind of technical difficulties would be involved in creating an N64 re-recording emulator that were not faced with, for example, the SNES.
Posted: 6/17/2005 6:49 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I wanted to check last night, but I don't have any save files that have beaten the game. I just remember that I always used to play tennis with him, but one day at my friend's house he stood under the platform and hit him with one bounce. I know it's harder to time, but I wouldn't say it's unrealistic. It should be easy enough for a pro like TSA to pull off.
Posted: 6/17/2005 3:18 AM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
OmnipotentEntity wrote:
At Ramzi, if you're too close Ganondorf knocks out the blocks on the floor. He doesn't do the Black Hole attack or the Bouncy Ball attack.
Alright, how about when he's charging up the bouncy ball? Is there enough time to jump to the platform beneath him, or would he pound the ground?
Posted: 6/16/2005 6:21 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I didn't read this whole thread, so I don't know if it's been addressed already. Pardon if it already has been. In the Ganondorf fight, why do you stand on a far side and play tennis with him? Can't you stand right under him? If you do, you should be able to hit him immediately, rather than having to wait for all the bouncing back and forth.
Posted: 6/13/2005 5:46 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Bag of Magic Food wrote:
That'd be nice... It's just too bad that N64 processing is so piecemeal and not well supported. I've been thinking about how one might go about perfecting a 3D adventure game play. See, with traditional 2D bitmap type games, you can see your character's exact position through the pixels. But in 3D, you're seeing everything from one of many possible points of view, and it would be difficult to see exactly how your character is lined up and which direction you need to push to reach a destination in minimum time. I imagine it might require some kind of hacky solution where a program plots the straightest line between your current position and your goal and figures out what directions to use at each moment, factoring in camera positions. It might not be out of the question to have to "wobble" the camera to get it just right.
I've been thinking about this. How would we go about finding the fastest route on a bumpy terrain? It would require some kind of calculus I don't know. bleh... Wouldn't we need to know the distances of all the bumps? How can we even measure that without hacking the hell out of the ROM? If there are any good mathematicians here, offer your wisdom.
Posted: 6/13/2005 3:33 AM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
So should we be expecting more rerecording emulators soon? If so, should we make a new forum for, say, N64 games?
Posted: 6/12/2005 9:41 PM
Post subject: Explain to me how Rerecording Works
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I remember once upon a time when we only had rerecording NES emulators, and rerecording SNES emulators were still in the works. There still aren't rerecording emulators for many a platform, and I'm wondering why. If I understand a save state correctly, it's just a RAM dump. So to save an exact moment of a game, you save every variable, and then you reload that. Of course, to do a RAM dump for every frame of a game would lead to a huge movie playback file filesize. So movie playback files are just saved key presses and times. This has a small file size. If my I'm not mistaken about the stuff I just typed above, shouldn't a rerecording emulator do the exact same thing as a non-rerecording emulator, except put markers and RAM dumps at the location of the last save? This seems very simple to me; yet, so many platforms don't have this feature. I assume it's more complicated than I figure it to be. If it is, can someone please explain the complexity that I'm missing?
Posted: 6/8/2005 4:01 AM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Perhaps somethings apply. But the versions 4matsy and I are talking about have only 32 levels, pac boosters, and different stage types. I think the arcade version is essentially pac-man with a bow. Maybe the values of the fruit and pellets, and the ghost behavior is the same; however, the FAQs are not for the game 4matsy and I are talking about.
Posted: 6/7/2005 7:51 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Strange. Since the pellets are worth 10 (right?) it seems silly to even have the one's place. So it goes to 999,999 before looping? Would it be possible to get that score? I mean, say you get 2 10,000 flowers a level, which is 20,000. 200+400+800+1600=3000, times 4 is 12,000. 12k + 20k = 32k. 32k * 32 levels = 1024k = 1,024,000. Add the pellets. I don't know how much they're worth. Also you can die 4 (or 5?) times getting the flowers twice each time again, getting about another 80-100k. But it would be unrealistic to think you can get the flower all levels. Aren't level 1-7 definitely set with the fruit? I'd like to see if cracking 1mil is possible.
Posted: 6/7/2005 5:41 PM
Quote
Ramzi
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
Cool thread 4matsy. I did a forums search to see if anyone had posted something similiar, but no meaningful results showed up. I thought two fruits appear in the level. I don't know about the randomness. Would you think that beating Strange or Big would give the highest score? How did you know you get a 1-up at 300k? A couple things I forgot to mention in my original post. There are only 32 levels, so the game doesn't go on for too long, and there are no adequate FAQs at GameFaqs for this game.
1 2
12 13 14
18 19