Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1508)
Joined: 7/9/2010
Posts: 1317
I made some little progress with the script as I added lua input functions for TAStudio to Bizhawk. Now the script no longer requires toggling between read+write and read-only modes. Also the bug with not catching the next waypoint was fixed and some massive time inprovements in the line drawing algorithm. And some clean-ups.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1508)
Joined: 7/9/2010
Posts: 1317
dokurokun wrote:
So to avoid upsetting any TAS authors, if you don't want your TAS to get uploaded or used by me, please reply your name here, I'll avoid using your TAS.
*The user can use many ways to add an output column; from RAM Watch or RAM Search where a button can be clicked to add selected Addresses to the Output log; In TAStudio going to Columns->Output->Add the standard Add Memory Address dialog from RAM Watch will pop up; or using lua
*In the Add Memory address dialog a new item will allow the user to set automatic coloring
*A second window where data is displayed graphically can be opened, too. Displaying values of addresses or lua variables can happen in either of those or both [graph window and tastudio]
*If the user displays a variable or address in both, clicking the corresponding column in the piano roll will cause the graph to have a indication dot on the frame the user clicked on the piano roll. The same can also happen backwards.
*With lua the user can also add "input" columns, where the user clicks or types in numbers which can act as modifiers for the actual game input, like: automatic moving, way point lists
*Double clicking into an output column or in the graph will open "Better" Basic Bot with the address and frame already typed in
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1508)
Joined: 7/9/2010
Posts: 1317
I'm generazing them to be lazy to learn basic programming or new tools. Only 2 submission texts from this and last year for N64 games have links to lua scripts or hinted that they used other tools than the traditional method. And this doesn't only count for TASers these platforms. I don't expect them to be able to use lua from day one on, but I expect them to actually evolve from where they started.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1508)
Joined: 7/9/2010
Posts: 1317
FaschZ wrote:
I'm just curious what are these tools that N64 TASers lack?
I'm saying that that SOME of them are not willing to learn newer tools, they use savestate, frame-advance and Virtual Pad and leave it at that. They never go into learning lua or TAStudio/debuggers/trace-loggers.
Then there are tools that don't exist yet (Output Log, setting game logic in intiutive ways, automating optimization). And they don't provide ideas on how to improve existing tools or on creating new tools, because they assume the tools they use can't be better or replaced.
I think you are seriously underestimating the complexity of TASing a game with hundreds of runners over time, no new tool is going to be created that will dampen the sheer amount of knowledge required to make even the most basic route.
Knowlegde has nothing to do with it. The tools don't take away the need of knowing the game, but it's possible to automate certain things based on knowledge. Of course next step is to integrate the knowledge into tool for trivial tasks, eg. initiating a SuperSlide/BombHover/etc.
There already exists memory watch, lua scripts, and a vast amount of information on ZSR/accompanying spreadsheets that are used. Hell, even this TAS makes use of a new tool to view collision... which you can find in the submission. [...] Attacking jmarvin suggesting he is lazy for not developing tools is fairly arrogant.
Then link the source, it isn't linked in the submission. And don't put it on whatever generic file hosting service. I wasn't talking about him specifically in the second sentence, sorry if it sounded offensive.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1508)
Joined: 7/9/2010
Posts: 1317
jmarvin_ wrote:
these two games are absurdly difficult and time consuming to TAS. i once seriously tried making a complex TAS before it became clear that, short of absenting myself from all responsibilities and working on it for eight hours a day, it would be impossible to complete within even a few years.
Work on new tools, or atleast share ideas on new tools. Many of the N64/GC TASers have their mindset stuck on acient inefficient tools which drag their productivity by a lot.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1508)
Joined: 7/9/2010
Posts: 1317
Some of my thoughts on the poll results:
The Sorted By Averages look to me as if people didn't even watch what they were rating. Apple II The Oregon Trail is 23rd out of 30, it is one of the least entertaining TASes to watch. People probably only remembered the submission text and based their rating on it. The Oregon Trail has an entertainment rating of 2.2 here on tasvideos, the TASes 24th to 30th have much higher entertainment ratings than The Oregon Trail. It is one of these movies were the "book" is good, but the actual movie is outright trash. If you were to show it just read the submission text to the audience without showing the TAS.
Same with N64 Magical Tetris Challenge, it shows nothing what a human can't do and it's rated 18th.
And some outdated runs are rated very high as well.
The top rated TASes are all from famous games as expected.
Many of the comments don't have actual thought to it, a few show lack of understanding.
But some show concerns about the commentary potentialy lacking proper explanation on TASing:
I feel like TASBlock is becoming a hard sell at *DGQ mainly due to the general audience's lack of understanding with the technicalities involved.
I feel like runs that will be the most immediately gratifying to people who don't have a good tech understanding are runs that completely break the game, with the Mortal Kombat playaround run being an excellent choice. It's got the nostalgia factor and its also completely off the wall. Same deal with the F-Zero X run.[...]
I think Mortal combat is the worst choice to explain TASing, F-Zero X is good, but not the best choice.
would be good to get live commentary from regular runners of these games
is in contrast to
[..]Commentary from the TASers would bump any score up a couple points.
Commentary from the RTA runners are a bad idea, just remember the SM64 this year, other commentary were RTA runners commentated were also just rambling. Letting the TASers from the game might be a good idea, if they don't explain like commentators on RTA runs do.
Feedback from the AGDQ 2017 thread shared the same worries as there were no proper explanation on TASing.
From the Poll Responses:
For rating where there are 10s as ratings and the rest empty indicates that (s)he only rated TASes of games (s)he like without ever looking at others. Some with some of the 1s ratings, people were like "I don't know the game, so I rate 1". One rated only 10s, while others rated nothing, these probably didn't watch any of the TASes. Compare the 10s ratings of The Oregon Trail to the others and count how many times there's a more entertaining run rated with 1.
Otherwise no abuse seen, one person rating only for one run multiple times or instructing people to vote for one run.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1508)
Joined: 7/9/2010
Posts: 1317
The content for HRDQ was quite enjoyable. The commentaries were fun and explained the games well.
The commentaries for every GDQ were to much game focused, never explained TAS techniques in detail. The commentary shouldn't be a tutorial, like it has been shortly done for SGDQ2015, which was no good. For a good commentary of that sorts a game which is self-explanatory, but still has hidden details (stuff that RTA runners usually don't attempt to optimize), is needed. ACE/heavy glitching is not allowed. The commenter should be a very good TASer who never [sic] worked on this game before, the only information he should know about the game is from submission texts/game resource pages. The lenght for a run would need to be about 10 minutes, the run should be played back while commenting. The commenter should talk about optimization (level of detail, differences between RTA runs), tools (explain what they do, evolution of tools) and the art aspect of TASing. I only have two runs that be pontential canditates for such commentary, although one is in the works and is unlikely to be finished in time. But I would gladly held to write down the commentary for the presenter.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1508)
Joined: 7/9/2010
Posts: 1317
Alyosha wrote:
I'm not purposely trying to be a downer here, but I'm pretty skeptical that just playing several normal TASes back to back will hold many people's attention.
As Warp already said, these runs wont be uncommentated. Infact the right commentary should make the key difference between holding peoples attention or not. Remember SMW Maker at AGDQ2016? That had almost no commentary in the long run and felt dragged. And most of the GDQ viewers have a very distorted picture of TASing in general. Which is mostly the fault of showing to much technical shenanigans, which then may cause potential future TASers away from the site, because they think they can't hold up to our standards, they think if you can't use debuggers and lua before making your first TAS project you're impractical as a TASer. But in fact the site has a low standard for the technical part.
A movie tag for TASes shown at GDQ's is something that is not in my favour, it doesn't show any relevant information about the TAS. The only information this tag has is were it was first shown, which is irrelevant.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1508)
Joined: 7/9/2010
Posts: 1317
Keep in mind the expected viewer count for TASBlock is 100k, that is much higher than the view count for some of the suggested TASes, even if they're some years old. Which means some runs will be new for several viewers watching.
I generally dislike the idea of making a TAS specifically for AGDQ, we would would need in advance if the game would produce an entertaining and short run, and wheter it can be finished in a reasonable time span.
