Provided there is a plenty of energy refillers spawning at all the convenient points of the game, I think one energy tank would be enough for all the "take damage to save time" purposes (too bad there's no damage boosting in Fusion).
Are you really sure my SRAM would work with the japanese rom?
Ah, I forgot that the hard mode was present only in japanese ROM.
The problem is, P.JBoy can't submit his movie here unless it starts:
a) from power-on;
b) from a verifiable SRAM snapshot taken from another movie published here or some trusted well-known place.
However, if he doesn't plan to submit his movie here, there's no problems.
STOP USING SMILEYS!
Is it that hard to say "man, that's funny!"? Or even, "hahaha dude, that's hilarious!"?
By the way, how about expanding TAS each time we say that? :D
The (U) ROMs are chosen because they run at 60 FPS (because of the NTSC standard; the (E) ROMs are PAL and thus they run at 50 FPS) which give you 10 additional frames of input per second, which will look faster and give you some more flexibility concerning frame precise actions.
I am just curious as to why there are two categories when voting, but only one when displaying them...
As far as I can tell, the end rating is ~66% based on the entertainment factor and ~33% on technical factor. That way movie which are perfectly executed (9—10 on perfection) but not very interesting to watch don't get too high rating, which is good.
This one. Don't know how exactly (can't really help with the exact wording); but as Warp suggests it, this is a speedrunning community, so I guess it should say something about aiming for fastest completion time as a primary objective and everything else as a secondary (despite the fact that in many cases, the appeal of a run is nothing more than a consequence of its speed, let alone a separate objective).
They're fast and extremely brutal demonstrations of luck manipulation.
I don't have to like anything else, but I fail to see how Monopoly run is connected to the art and stuff, either. Surely, what are you saying about it is true, but mere 30 seconds without any discernable action?… To me, the fact that the game could be beaten in such a ridiculous amount of time is much more impressive than the run itself.
even though the primary objective around here is speed
This is the primary objective in the real world, but the goals say… You know the drill. Apart from the guidelines, the goal section mentiones speed only in "the run must be entertaining, but fast as well; not sloppy" kind of context.
Nobody says speed and entertainment are mutually exclusive, but there are too many controversive situations around this that must be dealt with somehow. That's all.
Oh, sure, giving *one* example (on a fixed-speed scroller game) surely is enough to prove me wrong, yeah. It doesn't matter that several hundreds of movies have been obsoleted by faster entries and many submissions have even been rejected because of not being fast enough. "Hey, there's this *one* entry which was not obsoleted by a faster entry, thus we don't aim for speed." Sure.
Oh, come on. Somewhat later he submitted another movie, to obsolete Genisto's princess-only SMB2 run. "Albeit being faster, this run is not up to our current standards of quality, moreover we don't need it at all — but the older one will stay here."
And I'm dead sure it's not the only example. In the meantime, we say we are tool-assisted speedrunning community, but when it comes to obsoleting old movies with faster ones, it may become a matter of entertainment and art and whatever, but not speedrunning.
Warp wrote:
There's nothing contradictory in having different types of runs: A run of the type "as fast as possible, whatever it takes to do it" and runs which have some constraints or additional goals to them for entertainment value (but still are as fast as possible to achieve those goals).
Either you're consistently trying to miss my point, or you don't get it at all. For a recent example, check m2k2 forum for a 0% TAS of Metroid Fusion. The guy who made it, Dragonfangs, had two objectives: 1) going through each room the coolest looking way possible, 2) try to make that at maximum speed. In other words, he perfectly fulfilled our goals written on the WhyAndHow page. However, his run would never obsolete Megafrost's, cause we're not an entertainment community, we're speedrunning community. That's what I'm talking about. And the WhyAndHow page must be rewritten to reflect that.
Warp wrote:
Can you give some examples where speed greatly reduces the entertainment factor?
Basically, most (if not all) of the 1-vs-1 fighting games.
Then, puzzle games like Monopoly. They are a challenge to TAS but completely uninteresting to watch. "Wait, did he… oh, wait… and that's all? Oh…"
Then, games like Alien Soldier: "start-wheep-wheep-wheep-wheep-wheep-boss!-whoosh-bzzt-bang-start…" and so on. There are lots of games that totally lose their appeal when being TASed if their greatest timesaver is a move (or a glitch) that allows you to travel through the levels with so much speed that it strips the game from any action at all.
I'm sure I can come up with more examples, but it's enough for now to show what I mean.
Warp wrote:
And what is it that you want? Supermario fooling around, the objective being... what? Who dances the funniest?
You're starting to sound religious here, honestly.
No, that's not what I want. I want (*sigh*) the goals to be rewritten to reflect the true purposes of this site. If that's still not clear, then I give up.
Warp wrote:
Superhuman speed is exactly what makes these movies awesome, and achieving extreme tool-assisted speed requires in most games a huge amount of work and dedication. Anyone can easily make a movie where the character fools around and does "funny" things, but not everyone can beat the best (tool-assisted) completion time for the game.
Did you ever think that to get the tool-assisted movie to be interesting and generally entertaining (this means not only entertaining for the hardcore fans, but for the average player, either) requires about the same, if not even more, amount of work? If you browse up the movies rated 9+ for the technical perfection, you'll soon find up that not all of them scored the same in the entertainment domain. Donkey Kong FTW.
Warp wrote:
Ah, please don't tell me you are jealous. You would want to make videos yourself but you aren't able to beat people's times?
Wut? o_0
Attacking someone with offensive but a totally irrelevant point isn't the right strategy to win the argument, is it? It only proves that you don't have much constructive things to say.
As for the question, no, I'm not jealous. I have neither enough will nor dedication to start a TAS myself, and it's perfectly ok with me. But of course, if I decide to make a TAS to be published here, I would make sure it will be of high standard. Most probably, I will start with improving one of the older runs.
One guess is to show which movies you have voted on. The other is to determine the difference between your votes and the average rating.
Not essential, but still handy.
Great! By the way, now we have a really democratic and reliable mechanism to determine star-worthiness. Very clever idea indeed, thanks!
Edit: Sorting the movies by their rating would be very useful.
