Well, if Rog finds a way to include that funny death-level glitch, it won't really be "takes no damage" anymore, either.
...But it'd be a bit awkward to have an "uses death for entertainment purposes" category without it being seen as a time-waster, either, hehe.
...Either way, it should be reasonable to finish the run (just two acts to go!), submit it, then just take a break and go through it again later, knowing what you know now, to see if you can trim off a couple minutes through optimizing things like battles fought for experience/drops, sidetracks for food and accessories, that sort of thing.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Wonderful run. I saw the WIP earlier and got to see the rest of it now. This game's been waiting for a TAS for a very long time and it finally got a great one.
No doubt about it, this deserves a Yes vote and a round of applause!
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Yeah, but there hasn't been another new WIP yet.
So we wait, and sate our appetite for ridiculous physics abuse with what's already been shown.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Yeah because you can totally tell if something syncs from a savestate.
99% of the time, you can. But yes, you're right, it is necessary to play back from the start every so often. However, it's easy enough to just let it run over night.
It does sync 99% of the time with TWW of a savestate? Kind of doubt that, but okay...
I believe you misconstrued what you are quoting. The 99% figure is referencing whether you can determine if it synced or not, not its actual sync rate.
Back to the topic at hand, anyways, the (apparent) inability to skip the Hyrule barrier is somewhat unfortunate, but there's always the possibility of finding new glitches. There isn't much reason to just throw one's hands in the air and give up on a game just because a theory turns out not to be valid.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
I'm in favor of "manipulates memory". The definition of 'corrupts' carries a strong implication of negativity associated with it; when I hear about data being corrupted, it brings more to mind the runs that corrupt save data, such as Pokémon Yellow or Chrono Trigger, which cause very serious damage to the game's structure to accomplish its goals.
In contrast, the definition of 'manipulates' carries an implication of skillful alteration, which sounds a lot more TAS-y and more accurate to what's happening in this run.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Has anyone else ever wondered whether the Pokémon people were influenced by that classic Loreena McKennitt song "The Mummers' Dance"
The Mummers' Dance was released in September 1997. This makes the Pokémon franchise (Feb '96) older than it, although technically Oak was the only tree-themed person named at this point.
It would be a lot safer to assume both GameFreak and Loreena independently chose to reference trees than it would to think one of them was somehow calling out to the other.
Also, what does this have to do with TAS?
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
I'd be in favor of either of the 'gibberish text' screenshots. Moreso the actual corner-debug menu one.
Nothing about the "Ness gets attacked by the crow" screenshots really kind of says much about this run.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Then, I guess go ahead and fight it. If you save only two seconds from skipping the fight, then at least fighting it instead gets you more Mon for another smoke bomb.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
I would think it would be easier to skip the battle and proceed without it, then later go back to that point if it turns out you need the experience it would have provided (unlikely).
I take it that circumstances prevent you from using a Smoke Bomb for this fight? (I don't exactly know what fights are smokeable or not, I tend not to skip random fights.)
(Also note that there are some fights, in both stories, that can be 'skipped' by simply running through to the other end, as they're static to an area and not truly random.)
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Though I understand the run is a bit subpar and has room for improvement, I still feel it's interesting enough to warrant a "yes" vote. At the very least, it's a good platform for later optimizations and improvements.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Based on my experience reading about the SM64 submissions, the game actually does appear to be hex-friendly. The submission file change in the latest any% run, editing out a couple frames in BitFS, didn't actually seem to impact BitS whatsoever.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
I forgot who mentioned it, but we do need to add "glitched" to our glossary, to explain it.
Guilty as charged. >_>;
DarkKobold wrote:
Glitched covers the first. The second is any%, etc, etc. Not to mention, any% isn't non-glitched, it is just missing a glitch which fundamentally alters the flow of the game.
I wasn't actually suggesting category renaming. I was attempting to meet a compromise between mentioning all the categories, and my mind outright blanking.
And by "non-glitched", I was referring to the stipulation you yourself brought up to me, about how "glitched" meant "significantly warped/skipped through the use of glitches", as opposed to "a run with one or more glitches of any degree".
I was just simply suggesting a compromise that would give the pair of runs that each complete the game as quickly as possible, but with one using a game-breaking glitch and the other avoiding it, a sort of equal footing. Otherwise, we'll always kind of be stuck with people arguing which one "deserves" to have the base, non-category-marked, version, or questions on what "deserves" to obsolete what.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
God, they need to stop finding improvements, otherwise the TAS will never be finished!
If it means that each improvement is more awesome, then I wholeheartedly approve of them redoing stages to make the finished piece of work a masterpiece.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
In the end, it doesn't matter a huge amount -- everyone's runs can on the site, it's just a small matter of labeling. But it does feel unfair for the fastest run of a game on a site supposedly dedicated to, to quote the submission rules, "break[ing] all existing records" not to be displayed most prominently.
Technically speaking, the easiest way to fix this situation of "what should or shouldn't be labeled" is to force a label for every game with more than one category. So, hypothetically speaking, Super Mario World would end up with a "fastest glitched" run, a "fastest non-glitched" run, a "100%" run, and a "max% small-only" run. (Names tentative, of course.) No runs that are simply "Super Mario World".
Of course, like any option, this one would also have its detractors. However, it would strike a compromise in allowing the absolute fastest runs to be showcased, while also permitting appearance of runs with fewer game-skips to get attention (to combat the "TASes are only glitchfests" misconception).
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
There are a number of games that have scenes after the credits, and a number of those that do not automatically scroll any dialogue or pop-ups that occur in said screens.
However, current rules indicate input must merely last until the game reaches the credits and/or the ending screen. So, for any of those games with said scenes or data after the credits, the author is stuck with two choices; end the movie file at the proper time, causing any post-ending scenes to effectively freeze, or continue input for several minutes far beyond what is necessary in order to complete these scenes, causing what would be the worst speed/entertainment tradeoff possible in TASes.
As would be obvious, no-one would ever choose the latter choice. So that leaves only two options; force every such game's movie to freeze at post-game scenes, leaving movie viewers uncomfortably stuck at the beginning of the epilogue, or require the official encode to include whatever simplistic button-presses are required to complete these scenes for the viewer's benefit. (Games with more complicated post-credits scenes than button-pressing, such as Earthbound, would probably have to be examined on a stricter level.)
(Of course, technically a third option would be to revise the "run must be complete" rules to also require post-credits scenes to be completed.)
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
It's a playaround. Since judging fighting games by time is an exercise in futility (the result would be VERY boring), we judge by entertainment instead. On that regard, using an in-game cheat method to improve entertainment seems acceptable, at least to me, since playarounds aren't meant to be 'serious'.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Well, if it existed, it would be a run using obvious SRAM corruption. The closest the existing run gets is BLJ abuse, which is really more of a physics oddity than an outright glitch. So I think, if such a hypothetical run were made, it would gain its own "glitched" category.
(Plus, it's fun to watch the frame competition on SM64.)
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Is it worth sacrificing 3 frames "for speed entertainment tradeoffs" to show an earlier state of the credits and do a little better convincing of the viewer? Since people are so divided, I would probably leave this choice to the author.
It's a tricky line to draw... and not one that would be made by this run alone.
Primarily, the Earthbound run currently on the workbench has an identical conundrum; go for the absolute fastest (both in video time and in frames) condition that triggers a "The End" screen, or a slower condition that triggers credits instead. Only real difference, though, is that this video serves to lose a mere 3 frames* from switching to a version with partial credits, while Earthbound would lose eleven minutes due to being required to sit through the credits.
That said, while many people are in favor of maintaining credits, my opinion has gradually shifted to being more in favor of abrupt The-End-iness, as the glitched credits we'd get from waiting leave much to be desired. We'll always have non-game-breaking-glitched runs available to view credits from, and it is decidedly not the highlight point of the run.
* While there are those who would say three frames matter, please keep in mind that not only is this video nearly unobsoletable, this frame loss would also be required by any contenders to the video if it were determined that getting the "credits" are required.
As an unrelated note, I am extremely in favor of frame 6666 as the screenshot, as suggested by the author and Noob Irdoh. It's just too bizarre to pass up.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Though I am somewhat curious as how precisely this run gets faster than our existing Warpless run
The stairs at the end of levels are shorter IIRC
On more careful inspection, in addition to the stairs, it would actually appear as though levels are slightly shorter; little bits are trimmed here and there. (It could just be me, though.) Additionally, the port seems to handle pipes more quickly, and allows skipping of level transitions.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
It would appear it was uploaded to Nico yesterday. So still might be a bit before it's finished.
Lots of praise to the people making it, though. A lot of those new routes are both amazing and hilarious, especially BLJ Flying. ^.~ I can't wait for it to be finished!
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
Agreed with earlier sentiments. This run is basically just "Super Mario Bros warpless run", minus glitches, with a smaller screen and slightly worse graphics/sound. So I, too, will abstain from voting.
Though I am somewhat curious as how precisely this run gets faster than our existing Warpless run. Is the GBC version simply faster, or is the run itself better optimized? It's hard for me to tell the difference simply by watching it.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
In favor of that idea. It helps clarify and separate movies these movies (as well as some other ones, like the Pokemon Yellow run or the Super Mario Land 2 run) from games that use heavy glitching to shatter the game but still trigger the ending through standard game actions (usually defeating the final boss).
The term "ending" seems much shorter than "credits/endgame", however, for the tag name.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
I hope this is not actually true. There is plenty of space for a non-save-corruption CT! I'd like to think that the massive undertaking that is any RPG, coupled with Chrono Trigger's unmoving and unforgiving RPG is really why we haven't seen a new version.
I cannot vouch personally on this, not knowing the TASer in question, but there was information that there was a TAS of Chrono Trigger in progress to obsolete Hero's run, but it was abandoned shortly after the glitch run showed up and obsoleted the run itself. It could simply be a coincidence, but given the timing...
...Either way, I make a point of not holding judges' decisions against them. I'm partaking in the recent glitch debates only as a simple viewer with her own opinions. (Regrettably, I cannot even manage the clout of a TASer, lacking the knowledge and skill to really get started. Though if there's an opening for a Chrono Trigger run...)
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
And these runs have a dangerous level of precedent, due to the Super Mario Land 2 run that obsoleted the "defeat final boss" run with a "warp directly to credits" run
DarkKobold made an excellent point about that in the submission thread for the Super Metroid RBO run; the previously published any% run used the pipe glitch too, just not to the same extent that the glitched movie which obsoleted it did. He further went on to say that he'd welcome an any% without the pipe glitch.
I'm aware of the circumstances of the run. However, I understand that perhaps Super Mario Land 2 was not the greatest example.
Possibly a better example would be Chrono Trigger, where Inichi's save-corruption run obsoleted Hero of the Day's run. The reason was given that Hero's run was so old and unoptimized that it needed to be replaced, but rather than allow it to be replaced on its own terms, it was knocked down by the glitched run, which actually served to deter anyone from making a true save-corruption-free run of Chrono Trigger. While it was said that Hero's run also used glitches, it's not even comparable to the level of glitches Inichi used.
I have no desires to second-guess DarkKobold's rationale (quite the opposite, in fact, he makes a lot of calls I agree with), it is just that this past week has seen a sudden surge in glitchy runs, which has caused a heated argument in regards to records and categories. And it is because of the precedent set by CT and SML2 that makes this dangerous, because either precedent is followed and we lose non-glitched speedruns of Earthbound and Super Mario World forever, or precedent is denied and we are stuck with the uncomfortable idea that the non-glitched Chrono Trigger run was killed off for no real reason.
(On an unrelated note, I'm beginning to wonder exactly what counts as "completing the game" as per the rules. Especially as the aforementioned Earthbound and Super Mario World runs are stuck wondering if it's "get to credits" or "get to the 'The End' screen".)
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
For years, the finest scientists of the Mushroom Kingdom have attempted to figure out exactly how Yoshi biology actually works. Now that it appears that Yoshies are capable of restoring P-Switches, causing fish to spontaneously appear into existence, and even warping the fabric of space-time, it is probably a lost cause.
Yes Vote.
First a movie gets submitted, and ends up accepted despite breaking rules other runs have been rejected for. And when I vote less than spectacularly on this movie, I become the victim of harassment and threats.
Yay, favoritism.
