O, darn, you're probably right. There is no Giana Sisters to NES... I'm such a friggin idiot. Well, I don't want this topic to be a total waste of space so I ask a question:
You guys aren't thinking of making TASs of games to Amiga, Commodor 64 and stuff?
I just read all nine pages of this, and have watched the side-by-side video. What a mess this is...
On one hand, it's a half-second improvement on what was thought to be perfect... for a game that takes less than 10 minutes to complete, that's really something. It's obviously not just a copy/paste of Sleepz's run -- I could actually pick out the differences with the side-by-side. I wonder if I could do the same with the 3-or-fewer-frames-different SMB1 runs...
On the other hand, I find Sleepz's run to be more entertaining around bosses, especially versus Wart. Stand inside the bad guy? Awesome. The wobbling in Phil's movie bugs me, even though it's rarely done. I already know it's a movie created in an emulator, I don't need anything other than the intro of the AVI to tell me such.
But you know what? I haven't said anything that anyone else hasn't at this point. I wonder why I even bothered to type this. Boredom, I guess.
Voting "meh" because I just don't care anymore...
He wobbels like 1 sec during the run. Don't know what you guys talking about really.
If Phil's run will be accepted, will the run get a star and come to the "best movie"-list like Sleepz's run?
That was cool. A perfect way to see the differences. Phil doesn't jump as high and as much as Sleepz. That shy guy doesn't get stuck and Phil doesn't get hurt. It's a win win situation! >D I miss the sound though. :I
Don't think he said what was "enough", but I'll read everything once again. Sorry if I missed something. Besides, I admire your work Sleepz, I have nothing against you.
Ok, I just read everyting through. And my question wasn't answered. Even if it isn't anything new (except of the fact that it's faster) it's always better with a faster run.
I also think that it would be cool if there were runs, which were made just for the entertainment, just to show all the cool stuff you can do, without thinking about the time. I've seen a few runs like that.
How much faster do you, Sleepz, think is enough to be "better" than your TAS? I think that 1 frame is enough and 36 frames = 36 times better than that.
Ok tool assisted speedrun, not tool assisted funruns. Whatever you prefer. ;D
I think it wrong to keep Sleepz' if we vote "yes" here, and it's wrong to have both if we vote "no" here, because why should we make some exception this time just tp please the minority?
Why don't you, Sleepz, try to make an even faster run without the "wobbling"? Right now the 36 frames faster run is the best and most entertaining and should replace your run.
Does the improved 36 frames entertain you? Or the wobbling? What do you find in the movie that entertains you more than sleepz movie?
The wobbling.
I don't understand why you guys, Vatchern for example, call other people n00b and stuff just because they have another opinion thatn somebody else.
Why do you call the movies "time-attacks" and not "fun-attacks", if you think more about the entertainment than the time? Both the time-attacks are good, but the last one is better.
Why don't you, Sleepz, try to make an even faster run without the "wobbling"? Right now the 36 frames faster run is the best and most entertaining and should replace your run.
That's what's fun. You don't know if what the people say is important or not. "Go up up the mountain ahead!" I think that you're a loser if you can't beat Zelda (and all other games) without GameFAQs. How fun is it if you get stuck and then ask somebody else what to do? It's a special feeling when you after loads of thinking get an idea how beat that boss or whatever and then it works.
