Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
Fabulous run. Great to see a very different glitch and setup from the other runs.
MrWint wrote:
I'm not sure about the procedure of updating the movie file, is the update small enough to simply swap the movie files, or do I need to cancel the submission and create a new one?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
I like the idea of grouping various scenes. Nach's suggestion of very precise survival could be one such group, with stuff like SM RBO, Rome in Commander Keen 2, and similar things.
I think the included scenes should showcase play that's TAS-exclusive - Pokémon RB is very glitched for sure, but all the glitches can be done in realtime, so it's not a very good choice.
For music I think using BGM from the games showcased is best. You could have 1-2 minutes of Mario scenes with music from SMB or SMB3, then Mega Man games with Wily Stage 2, Mega Man X games with Zero's theme, and so on. It'd also avoid copyright issues.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
Masterjun wrote:
Tangent wrote:
SmashManiac wrote:
- p4wn3r's run is on a deprecated emulator
This part's incorrect, or at least not fully accurate. VBA's deprecated, but it's still accepted
And where is that part now not fully accurate?
I mean of course it can still be accepted, else it would be listed as Not accepted at all.
However, deprecation can still be a reason for rejection.
That's not the case. VBA movies are currently accepted, and there are no plans for rejecting VBA submissions; if there were, you'd see news about it on the front page like with the Snes9x 1.43 deprecation. If VBA has major issues emulating a game, then emulator choice could be a reason for rejecting movies of that particular game, but outside that there will be no VBA rejections for the foreseeable future.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
p4wn3r wrote:
Scepheo wrote:
If you want to voice your opinion on whether or not to publish at all, the poll is simply not for you.
Exactly. That's why the poll is a joke.
With the neo-TASVideos publication system, the poll works a bit differently. For submission that are eligible for Vault, audience feedback (represented by posts and votes) is the main factor deciding if it's going to Moons or the Vault. For runs that aren't Vault-eligible, the viewer response largely decides if the run goes to Moons or is outright rejected.
In the specific case of this submission where Vault vs Moons and entertainment value aren't relevant to the verdict, the poll indeed serves little use. Howewer, for the vast majority of submissions that aren't controversial special cases, it is a very useful way for users to provide simple feedback on whether or not they liked the run. That's not to say you cannot voice your opinion of whether or not a submission should be published - you are welcome and encouraged to post your arguments on the matter.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
keylie wrote:
turska,
I also get desync in the beginning very often in the first second. Did you try to let the game go ?
If Tim is taking the first door correctly, then it is very probable that the whole movie will be synced.
About the Hourglass options, it is more robust to put "Multithreading and Wait Sync" on "Allow" in the main window.
Yes, I did let the game run, and it desyncs visibly on the first level. Howewer, I just got word from Atma that he managed to get the run to sync, so sync is now confirmed.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
I'm running into a Hourglass-detected desync between frames 8 and 16. Other sync attempts I know of have also failed, and the game uses 3D hardware which is known to cause sync issues in Hourglass based on the user's specific system configuration and the phase of the moon, so I'm requesting the cavalry's assistance in attempting to sync the movie.
Instructions for how to play back the run:
1. Get Hourglass.
2. Acquire a copy of the game that matches the author's copy.
3. Acquire a savefile that has the necessary Speedruns mode unlocked as instructed in the submission text, or download one here and place it in the directory %APPDATA%/Braid (create it if it doesn't exist; Braid will create it automatically when it saves the game).
4. Start Hourglass, find Braid.exe and the movie file and set the settings as listed in the submission text. If the game crashes or fails to start, try changing the "Multithreading and Wait Sync" option in the Hourglass main window.
Note: unlike most Windows games, Braid runs in Hourglass on Windows 7 (which is what the author used), so you're applicable even if you don't have an XP system sitting around. Even if Hourglass detects a desync right off the bat, the run might still sync for a while before fully desyncing, so keep watching until you run into a visually confirmed desync.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
jlun2 wrote:
Thanks! Did you encode this? How'd you get it to sync? What I mean is, at 3:29 of the encode, when I play back the input file, I get a desync message and then the ball misses the blue platform, causing it to die. :/
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
To chip in on resetting during saving, games can defend against it and most of them do have measures to prevent rampant save corruption antics. In the Chrono Trigger save corruption run, the corrupted save file after resetting is identified to be corrupt, and the game won't let you load it at the title screen (the corrupted save slot behaves like a blank save; the cursor hops over it and you aren't supposed to be able to load it). Howewer, loading a corrupted save file is still possible due to a curious bug on the title screen where pressing Down+A on the same frame allows you to load a save in a slot you can't normally select.
For another example, Pokémon series games after the 3rd generation have much more secure saving, and there are no major exploits aside from cloning, which is quite minor and causes no critical problems. RBY's and GSC's much less secure saving can be construed as a bug in the game in contrast, which you can exploit by hitting the power switch during saving. On Game Boy, it's also very possible to unintentionally cut power during saving - the console runs on batteries, and quite a few unlucky users must have ran out of power at the worst possible time and experienced unfortunate data loss with RBY and GSC, which in latter Pokémon games should never happen since a failsafe copy of the previous save file is always kept and loaded in case the main one gets corrupted. Unexpected power outage is also very possible for home consoles, and a plausible worst-case scenario every game should prepare for.
Save corruption's not a free lunch, and it's very possible for games to prevent it - if they don't, or if there are bugs in their code that allow you to wreak havoc with corrupted saves anyway, intentionally causing save corruption with a timely reset is exploiting flaws in the game code, not illegit and unexpected usage of hardware quirks.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
Hoandjzj wrote:
Hi, I've completed a TAS of version 2.3 of this hack, and I'm uploading it here, but the page rejected it and said: No acceptable movie file found in the ZIP
I used Snes9X to record it and the zip content *.smv file, what was wrong :(
I know it an outdated version of Snes9X, but is it acceptable?!
Please help!
To submit the run, you need to upload the movie file to userfiles with the submission text in the description, and then PM the link to admins (Nach, Ilari, and adelikat) who can override the snes9x 1.43 block and assign the submission to you.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
Hoandjzj wrote:
I started a TAS from 2011 but how to prove that, cuz the page rejected the movie :<
You uploaded a test run of Super Metroid Zero Mission v2.4 "Hard Edition" in May 2012. That seems like proof enough that you were working on Super Metroid Zero Mission runs prior to snes9x obsoletion to me.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
Warp wrote:
SmashManiac wrote:
Good to know the game saves. Also, I'm going back on previous opinion, since I forgot to consider the contents of the save data: the completed game flag in the save data appears to me to be a perfect and self-sufficient criteria to determine if the game was beaten, so considering this I'd classify this run as valid even if the end of the credits doesn't happen.
Even though the game enters in an infinite loop, making it impossible to fully finish, return to the main menu and continue with the saved game?
You can power cycle the console to get back to the title screen and continue with the saved game. IIRC this is how a regular non-glitched completition in RBY works, too - to proceed from the "THE END" screen to continue your save, you need to either soft reset or cycle power.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
I was surprised by how fast this TAS is for a nearly 6-hour RPG run. The entirety of it aside from grinding segments was perfectly watchable and entertaining.
Also, Saturn, when are you going to submit the Super Metroid Redesign run? I'm looking forward to it.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
Currently, Stars, Moons and Vault all have their own stated purpose, rules specific to each of them (with Vault being the worst offender in this regard) and they're called tiers.
What is a tier?
a row, rank, or layer of articles; especially : one of two or more rows, levels, or ranks arranged one above another
Are Stars, Moons and Vault tiers? Let's take a look at a few examples: the two Ing's Adventure runs currently sitting on the workbench (#3771: Abahbob's Windows Ings Adventure "No OoB" in 06:57.23 and #3760: Abahbob's Windows Ings Adventure in 03:04.02), and published Sonic 3 & Knuckles TASes.
Under current Moons/Vault rules, the "No OoB" Ing's Adventure TAS would be accepted for publication in Moons. Great! That makes sense, given it has good viewer response. But what about the "glitched" TAS? Its poor viewer response means it'd go into the Vault, but homebrew/unlicensed games that are not notable are to be rejected from Vault according to its rules. So a legit "low glitch" TAS of Ing's Adventure is an acceptable goal and game choice and is to be published in Moons, while "fastest time at any cost" Ing's Adventure is rejected for not being an acceptable game choice in any tier.
Then for S3&K. Out of the several published TASes, only [1656] Genesis Sonic 3 & Knuckles by nitsuja, upthorn & marzojr in 29:51.20 is in the Stars tier. But the other published S3&K TASes also have excellent viewer response and are easily as good as the one in Stars. Why is this? If two excellent TASes of different games are made, both of them can be in Stars, but if two excellent TASes of the same game are made, only one of them makes the cut and the other is arbitrarily thrown down to Moons.
Let's take another look at what a tier is:
a row, rank, or layer of articles; especially : one of two or more rows, levels, or ranks arranged one above another
An example of a hierarchy of tiers would be power rankings of characters in fighting games. They're very straightforward: characters that fare better go into higher tiers, and worse ones go to lower tiers.
The current "tiered publication system" is not comprised of a hierarchy of tiers. It is comprised of three separate publication classes that are not a direct hierarchy. It is not a row of ranks arranged one above another. Stars, Moons and Vault have overlap and they are aligned differently, with very different stated goals and rules. It is essentially similar to the old publication system, except instead of a single, convoluted publication class, there are three separate convoluted publication classes.
The system as it is is fundamentally broken at a very basic level, and completely unsalvageable without a complete overhaul.
How a hypothetical actual tiered publication system should be in my opinion is as follows:
*Rules for game choice, goal choice, verifiability, game notability, unlicensed/homebrew/hack status and just about everything, whatever they may be, are global and common across all tiers.
*Submissions that violate the global rules are rejected, while the ones that follow the global rules are published in one of several simple, hierarchical tiers based on viewer response and entertainment value.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
RingRush wrote:
Short, entertaining, and full of references for whoever gets them. I guess I'll vote yes for vault.
Under the current iteration of the Vault rules, Ing's Adventure would be rejected from the Vault due to being a homebrew game of poor notability. Please vote on the question "Did you find this movie entertaining?", not tiering choices.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
CoolKirby wrote:
Why was this immediately accepted? No one even posted yet.
I thought it was decided that this run isn't technically impressive because anyone could do the same thing in the same amount of time in real-time.
It was immediately accepted because I'd judged the run before, and based on the judging I'd done, it was clear to me that this run was fit for the Vault.
Avoiding the enemies like done in the run and the subframe optimization is not possible in real-time. The run is pretty low on complexity, but since it is a record of the game and a legit TAS, it's enough to make Vault.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
It would seem to me that TASes of most games that are TASed where you'd want to have more than two categories for different characters and goals would easily fit the "moon tier" criteria. Super Metroid, SMB2, STGs, SM64, and just about any popular game will easily make Moon for alternate categories — the amount of games that are boring enough to go into the Vault while still being TAS-desirable and versatile enough to have multiple meaningful categories would seem to be around nil.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(759)
Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 146
Scepheo wrote:
How are you going to handle this from a gruefood perspective? Especially as points will be assigned, quite a few runs that have been rejected become eligible for the speedrun (vault) tier (throwing in my support for AnS' naming system). I assume you don't want people grave-digging the gruefood forums looking for movies that are now acceptable, copying them (perhaps literally in the case of some movies, as doing it yourself would result in the exact same input) and submitting them.
Sorry if I missed this, I read through the thread quickly and couldn't find it. And I'd like to say I support the general idea. I've always liked the idea of having TASVideos be more completionist in its speedrun department.
Rejected runs that would be Vault-worthy will be rejudged.
