Submission Text Full Submission Page Publication Page

Essentials

  • Emulator used: FCEU 0.98.16
  • Genre: Platform
  • Aims for fastest time
    • Takes damage to save time
  • updated: moozooh's suggested screenshot (the greatest screenshot in the history of the world)

Version Change

Note: This run uses the (U) version of Bionic Commando. The previous movie by Genisto used the (J) version.
The initial reason was to include the hilariously bad dialogue. It has been said that the (J) version is the "harder" version, but we have found that to be not entirely true. There are quite a few differences, some which made the (U) version faster, and some which made the (J) version faster.
Regarding a ROM version change, the Rules page states the following:
If there is already a published video, do not use a different ROM than what it uses, unless the new movie is obviously better for reasons that are not only caused by the version change, or the ROM is superior (or a language change), and you can show how it should be compared to the existing movie.
Since the previous run was done with the (J) version, a direct comparison of end times is not an informative enough way to measure the differences in play. So, we've separated the differences into four categories and totaled them up.
In-level difference - Gained 1463 frames
This is the (mostly) directly comparable improvement gained during each level. Time was gained from better technique for many sections, especially the bosses, as well as retracting more with the grappling hook, which moves the guy a bit faster at the exchange of slightly less distance and less landing control. Time was also gained by keeping the 3-way gun for Area 7 instead of restarting the level.
Some of the in-level difference was due to in-level changes between the two versions, such as different enemy or platform placement. A rough estimation of this difference is between 60 and 90 frames.
Text speed difference - Lost 3185 frames
The text boxes scroll slower and hold more words in this version.
Scene change difference - Gained 110 frames
Minor differences in the number of frames between two controllable scenes, such as the title screen and room transitions. This was usually faster in the (U) version.
Map route difference - Gained 1741 frames
Slower text changes the relative position of the trucks during a given route on the world map, because the helicopter does not begin traveling to another area until the text "Ok. We'll move." is fully displayed, but the trucks begin moving immediately after selecting "Transfer". This allowed for better route on the world map, with more direct routes to some areas, as well as playing one less overhead stage. (This same route in the (J) version will enter six overhead stages.)
Total difference - Gained 129 frames
If you'd like to see a complete spreadsheet of this data broken down for each segment, please ask.

Cardboard's comments

I HAVE PAID MY DUES

JXQ's comments

The Bionic Commando (J) run on this site has been one of my favorites ever since I've been here. It sometimes felt odd obsoleting it.
This game is remarkably stable to hex-edit in early improvements found into a run that is farther along. This game is remarkably unstable with FCEU while rerecording in a laggy area, such as 6, 9, 10, or 11.
Thanks to Cardboard for being my partner, and to Genisto for his previous run.
Truncated: This movie has a better route and much better playing in the levels than the previous movie.
In response to all the arguments about the version switch: I dislike version switches. If it was up to me, the rules would state that all movies be played on (U) versions, unless it didn't exist or (E) or (J) included a glitch or shortcut or game element not in the (U) version. That way we wouldn't have any of this nonsense, or people switching ROMs just because the intro or dialogue is shorter, which has no bearing on the quality of play.
Also because i dislike version switches, I'm glad that this movie has now changed back to the "real" version, which the first published movie was made with, before it changed to the (J) version for no good reason at all.
Bisqwit: I don't think we have reached a concensus about whether this should obsolete the J version or not. I'm putting it on delayed. And, I disagree with the assessment of "no good reason at all"; in my opinion, Feitclub's reasoning re: J version was good.
BoltR: Since there is no rush to make a decision about this movie, and it's just causing an argument; I am setting the status to Needs More Info. We can wait until the updated (J) version is complete and pick up the debate from there. Blame version changing.
Bisqwit: Setting back on accepted, and to obsolete the current J version. However, the question what happens when the next J version is submitted, is still open. Some say only U versions should be accepted from here on, and some say any faster version regardless of version should be accepted. There may be someone who also thinks the next J version should be published alongside, but it doesn't seem to be a likely option. Such decision however does not need to be made until such movie exists and is submitted. However, if this movie is still in the workbench at that time, it will be delayed because then also its fate is in question. (We don't publish movies that already have their obsoleter in the workbench.)
Bisqwit: Processing.

Show more

Hide
1 2
5 6 7
Posted: 4/18/2007 11:17 AM
Quote
DrJones
Joined: 4/3/2005
Posts: 575
Location: Spain
I've trying to refrain on this, but I have to vote No. This movie has some good points, there are: 1) It's faster. 2) The U version is named Bionic Commando, which is a more familiar name to the audience. 3) Is played incredibly. If it were the first attempt at this game, I would have voted yes. Sadly, it has to compete with the already published, and I think it's worse in the following factors: 1) Longer text. Yes, it's in english now, but I don't care about text in a platform game. In the NES Strider, for example, I actually enjoyed more that some talks were skipped. The other problem is that the english is bad, but not fun. I enjoyed more the Ninja Gaiden series in that aspect. 2) The delay while bosses were destroyed was less interesting. It was repetitive. 3) I did not enjoy the truck phases on this one. Because the previous movie did a better work at keeping me entertained, I don't want it to become obsoleted. Edit: I was thinking that some of the concerns I have with some movies might come from the attempt of the author to not "copy the style of the previous author", including stunts. Maybe there should be more discussion about this point.
No.
Posted: 4/18/2007 1:33 PM
Quote
Tub
Joined: 6/25/2005
Posts: 1377
Bisqwit wrote:
The votes don't reflect anything on what kind of publication decision should be made. It just tells that people liked watching this movie.
Why don't you create another poll, asking which version is preferred by the audience? Arguments are starting to get repetitive and if everyone just keeps re-stating their opinions for another couple of pages we're going nowhere, except drifting further into a full-grown flamewar. For the record, I'd personally prefer the (U) rom since I consider history to be too important to be abused in video games. Seeing swastikas is quite counteractive to my enjoyment of the movie. I wasn't able to watch the new submission though and thus didn't compare their gameplay.
m00
Posted: 4/18/2007 1:42 PM
Quote
adelikat
He/Him
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player (3599)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4739
Location: Tennessee
TASer of 2010 NES TASer of 2010 DS TASer of 2010 Arcade TAS of 2010 NES TASer of 2008 NES TAS of 2008 Funny TAS of 2008 TASer of 2007 NES TASer of 2007 Funny TAS of 2007
upthorn wrote:
There's a 4th option you're overlooking. 4) Favor neither rom version, allow future (J) runs to obsolete this (U) run, if they are faster after version differences are taken into account. Allow this (U) run to obsolete the current (J) run, as it is faster after version differences are taken into account. This would be furthering the precedent that localization differences are not important between NTSC versions of a ROM. This is a precedent which has been shown on prior occassions, the most recent of which was Rockman 7's obsoletion of Megaman 7.
For the record this is my opinion on the subject. It is also the only option that isn't contradicted by precedents. EDIT: For this game in particular, I find it to be a good chocie because all the debating over the pros and cons really shows that neither one is clearly better than the other.
It's hard to look this good. My TAS projects
Posted: 4/18/2007 1:49 PM
Quote
Bisqwit
Editor, Active player (296)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 7469
Location: Arzareth
adelikat wrote:
For this game in particular, I find it to be a good chocie because all the debating over the pros and cons really shows that neither one is clearly better than the other.
Fine for me. For this game.
Posted: 4/18/2007 4:06 PM
Quote
primorial_soup
Player (87)
Joined: 1/15/2006
Posts: 333
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Tub wrote:
For the record, I'd personally prefer the (U) rom since I consider history to be too important to be abused in video games. Seeing swastikas is quite counteractive to my enjoyment of the movie.
I agree completely with Tub. This opinion is in direct opposition with those who favor the (J) version, which after reading this entire thread, seems to be the only thing hindering this movie's acceptance publication, despite various other trivial handwavings.
Phil wrote:
Hitler No Fukkatsu Pros Not censored and some sort of authenticity . (It does have Nazis swastikas and final boss named Hitler as the picture suggest.)
Bisqwit wrote:
In my opinion, the uncensored theme in the game is of bigger entertainment than the Engrish dialog texts.** ** But I realize this is not everyone's opinion. The question is, is it of majority or minority opinion?
The majority opinion? I think the majority opinion is not to be hung up on a little bit of background scenery. I think that the vote count clearly indicates this.
print reduce(lambda x,p:p/2*x/p+2*10**1000,range(6643,1,-2))
Posted: 4/18/2007 6:07 PM
Quote
Phil
Active player (410)
Joined: 3/16/2004
Posts: 2623
Location: America, Québec 
I vote for 2)
Edit:
primorial#soup wrote:
I think that the vote count clearly indicates this.
Bisqwit wrote:
The votes don't reflect anything on what kind of publication decision should be made. It just tells that people liked watching this movie.
Posted: 4/18/2007 11:44 PM
Quote
BoltR
Former player
Joined: 8/12/2004
Posts: 651
Location: Alberta, Canada
adelikat wrote:
For the record this is my opinion on the subject. It is also the only option that isn't contradicted by precedents. EDIT: For this game in particular, I find it to be a good chocie because all the debating over the pros and cons really shows that neither one is clearly better than the other.
This is what I was actually leaning to when I updated it to delayed for more information. Baxter, Phil isn't 'wasting his time' updating the (J) version. He has said that even if (J) version was obsoleted and (U) became the only acceptable version he would still make the run; if only to put it on his own website. Combining this fact, JXQ saying he doesn't even care about publication, there being no rush to even publish the run, and that I was thinking 4) anyways. I stand by my decision to wait until the (J) version is done. We will only get a higher quality run this way. Also we avoid the potential of having another huge debate if when the (J) run is finished it turns out to be way faster than the recently published (U) run. Moral of the story: If you are going to switch versions, or start a run with a different version other than (U). Make a post about it first, so that it can be discussed.
Posted: 4/19/2007 12:27 AM
Quote
jimsfriend
Former player
Joined: 1/17/2006
Posts: 775
Location: Deign
I don't understand why something should be discussed first when the change is clearly within the rules of the site (which in this case it is). What I have not seen in the rules (am I not looking hard enough?) is any hint at all that the change should be discussed first. If in fact it should be discussed first, the rules should be changed to include that information.
Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign aqfaq Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign Deign
Posted: 4/19/2007 12:30 AM
Quote
BoltR
Former player
Joined: 8/12/2004
Posts: 651
Location: Alberta, Canada
jimsfriend wrote:
I don't understand why something should be discussed first when the change is clearly within the rules of the site (which in this case it is). What I have not seen in the rules (am I not looking hard enough?) is any hint at all that the change should be discussed first. If in fact it should be discussed first, the rules should be changed to include that information.
Here, i'll officially add it for you.
Posted: 4/19/2007 12:32 AM
Quote
JXQ
Experienced player (750)
Joined: 5/6/2005
Posts: 3132
NES TAS of 2008 Speedy TAS of 2008 SNES TASer of 2007 TAS of 2007 SNES TAS of 2007 Funny TAS of 2007
BoltR, my annoyance was never with whether the run would end up accepted/published or not, it was only in how the discussion was handled by Bisqwit and yourself in this thread. I've already addressed the specifics, and it just comes down to the fact that I feel treated unfairly. I can't speak for Cardboard, but the fact that I don't care about acceptance/publication is exactly why I didn't start a discussion beforehand asking if everyone thought the (U) version was ok because I really don't care if some people don't like it. If enough people don't like it, then it won't be published. That's fine, I still had fun doing the TAS. What I do care about is when those people who do like it are not taken as seriously as those who do not, and that definitely happened in this discussion.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Posted: 4/19/2007 1:42 AM
Quote
BoltR
Former player
Joined: 8/12/2004
Posts: 651
Location: Alberta, Canada
JXQ wrote:
BoltR, my annoyance was never with whether the run would end up accepted/published or not, it was only in how the discussion was handled by Bisqwit and yourself in this thread. I've already addressed the specifics, and it just comes down to the fact that I feel treated unfairly. I can't speak for Cardboard, but the fact that I don't care about acceptance/publication is exactly why I didn't start a discussion beforehand asking if everyone thought the (U) version was ok because I really don't care if some people don't like it. If enough people don't like it, then it won't be published. That's fine, I still had fun doing the TAS. What I do care about is when those people who do like it are not taken as seriously as those who do not, and that definitely happened in this discussion.
I personally haven't been ignoring the people who have enjoyed the run, but you have to remember there ARE also people who enjoy the old run, and find it more entertaining. There are also more people that watch these runs, than there are who post in this forum (or in this thread). Also I think you will agree that this post has at times degenerated into a 'World vs Phil' style argument (again), which may or may not have skewed the general opinion in the thread. So we cannot conclusively say that your run is better based solely on that the people who have voiced their opinion in this thread. Next we have the whole version change. This is very subjective. There are the people who will get hours of entertainment from the word cock, and others that will prefer Hitler in the game. Then we have the rule that states you should use the same version unless there is an obvious reason not to. From what I've seen/heard from other people the changes to the actual game play don't REALLY make a difference. Especially if you aren't watching the two side by side. Then we have the difference of English vs Japanese. Again subjective. Some people will like the slower English text because they can read it, others will prefer the quick Japanese text because they could care less and just want to see the action. If the Japanese text was the slower of the two you would have a MUCH stronger argument. When it comes down to it, neither version is obvious better. Each has it's merits and flaws. This if we were going completely by the rules would, I suppose, get your run rejected. However, I do recognizing the work you guys put into the run, and because of that and the fact that the (U) version isn't any worse than the (J); it wouldn't really be fair to just flat out reject it. So if no version is obviously superior, and we can't say for absolute certain which run is more entertaining; then what left is there? Completion time, and yes your run is currently faster. Both in comparable and actual time. This is, as far as I know, the reason why Bisqwit has set the current status back to accepted (with a condition), and I agree with it on principle. However, I personally would have kept the status on delayed. Simply because if someone does publish this run, and shortly after the (J) version is submitted which is faster we will have yet another argument. Probably every bigger than this current one. Something I don't think any of the judges want to deal with. Moderating arguments is not something enjoyable and donating your free time to. I sort of get the impression that Bisqwit set it to accepted to satisfy the people in this thread, with the hope that the (J) run makes it into the workbench before an encoder touches it, so that a simple choice can be made by speed, so he wont' need to deal with the argument. As frankly he has better things to do. (These may not actually be his feelings, and I don't intend to be putting words into your mouth Bisqwit. Sorry) Also, I'm sorry you feel that way, but if you are knowingly bending rules and stepping on people's toes and simply don't care. Isn't it a bit naive to not expect some sort of backlash?
Posted: 4/19/2007 2:17 AM
Quote
JXQ
Experienced player (750)
Joined: 5/6/2005
Posts: 3132
NES TAS of 2008 Speedy TAS of 2008 SNES TASer of 2007 TAS of 2007 SNES TAS of 2007 Funny TAS of 2007
BoltR wrote:
I personally haven't been ignoring the people who have enjoyed the run, but you have to remember there ARE also people who enjoy the old run, and find it more entertaining. There are also more people that watch these runs, than there are who post in this forum (or in this thread). Also I think you will agree that this post has at times degenerated into a 'World vs Phil' style argument (again), which may or may not have skewed the general opinion in the thread. So we cannot conclusively say that your run is better based solely on that the people who have voiced their opinion in this thread.
This is EXACTLY the unfair treatment I'm talking about. Yes, Phil was heavily involved, and many disagreed with him. But for the most part, it was kept to the subject at hand - more so than past disputes. Both sides have good points, and both sides presented their take on things. This is a discussion, not an argument. Yes, there are people who haven't spoken yet. Do you assume they will all swing this thing in the other direction? Or is it a million times more probable that those who have spoken are a subset of this community that nearly accurately represents the community as a whole? Should we throw out every run's vote count and posts because there MIGHT be people who don't like it who haven't posted so yet?
BoltR wrote:
When it comes down to it, neither version is obvious better. Each has it's merits and flaws. This if we were going completely by the rules would, I suppose, get your run rejected.
No, it wouldn't. This submission is not breaking the rules. Please read this excerpt from the Rules, which I've stated several times: "If there is already a published video, do not use a different ROM than what it uses, unless the new movie is obviously better for reasons that are not only caused by the version change, or the ROM is superior (or a language change), and you can show how it should be compared to the existing movie."
BoltR wrote:
Also, I'm sorry you feel that way, but if you are knowingly bending rules and stepping on people's toes and simply don't care. Isn't it a bit naive to not expect some sort of backlash?
  • This submission is within the rules at the time it was submitted.
  • I am not stepping on anyone's toes by demanding a fair discussion.
  • I did indeed expect backlash/controversy.
  • I did not expect judges and admin to look at sides of the discussion inequally.
In all seriousness, I ask you to please try not to ask me questions that will make me repeat myself again.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Posted: 4/19/2007 2:35 AM
(Edited: 4/19/2007 10:32 PM)
Quote
Deep_Loner
Joined: 12/26/2006
Posts: 256
Location: United States of America
(Post deleted by me: was admittedly baseless. My apologies.)
Posted: 4/19/2007 2:43 AM
Quote
BoltR
Former player
Joined: 8/12/2004
Posts: 651
Location: Alberta, Canada
JXQ wrote:
Yes, Phil was heavily involved, and many disagreed with him. But for the most part, it was kept to the subject at hand - more so than past disputes. Both sides have good points, and both sides presented their take on things. This is a discussion, not an argument. Yes, there are people who haven't spoken yet. Do you assume they will all swing this thing in the other direction? Or is it a million times more probable that those who have spoken are a subset of this community that nearly accurately represents the community as a whole? Should we throw out every run's vote count and posts because there MIGHT be people who don't like it who haven't posted so yet?
Oh hey, look in normal JXQ fashion you ignored most what I wrote. Yes, both sides did have good points. Not everyone who posted in this thread did prefer your run. Some who did only did because it was slightly faster, even though they found it less entertaining. Not everyone that has given their opinion has posted in this thread, probably because they don't want to bother getting 'discussed' at by you, or care enough to spend their time posting when it will be ignored by you anyways.
JXQ wrote:
No, it wouldn't. This submission is not breaking the rules. Please read this excerpt from the Rules, which I've stated several times: "If there is already a published video, do not use a different ROM than what it uses, unless the new movie is obviously better for reasons that are not only caused by the version change, or the ROM is superior (or a language change), and you can show how it should be compared to the existing movie."
The ROM isn't superior, and I'm pretty sure that Bisqwit has said multiple times in the past that a simple language change isn't enough to warrant using a different version. Either way, it doesn't matter because I wasn't rejecting it anyways. Calm down there buddy.
JXQ wrote:
  • This submission is within the rules at the time it was submitted.
  • I am not stepping on anyone's toes by demanding a fair discussion.
  • I did indeed expect backlash/controversy.
  • I did not expect judges and admin to look at sides of the discussion inequally.
If you expected a backlash, stop crying about the ensuing backlash. This isn't grade 2. Stop trying to get attention like it is. Things don't always turn out the way you want them too. And for the main purpose of my post. I'm done arguing with you, the verdict was given. The rules will be updated so people don't try and stir things up again. No matter what is said it won't stop you from whining. You are worse than Phil.
Posted: 4/19/2007 3:07 AM
Quote
JXQ
Experienced player (750)
Joined: 5/6/2005
Posts: 3132
NES TAS of 2008 Speedy TAS of 2008 SNES TASer of 2007 TAS of 2007 SNES TAS of 2007 Funny TAS of 2007
I must have really struck a chord for you to just come out insulting like that. "Quoting" heresay from Bisqwit is not a strong retort to the rules of the site. Your statements about the posts in this thread are correct; both sides are represented. But the majority is clear, perhaps just not to you. Or perhaps you continue to rationalize away this majority with excuses like "those who don't like it haven't posted yet".
BoltR wrote:
"If you expected a backlash, stop crying about the ensuing backlash."
Unfortunately I must repeat myself again.
JXQ wrote:
  • I did indeed expect backlash/controversy.
  • I did not expect judges and admin to look at sides of the discussion inequally.
Please take care to not confuse the two. In the end, you will believe what you want, and so will I. But if you want to discuss things with logic and facts, you should stick to exactly that instead of producing heresay and insults when cornered.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Posted: 4/19/2007 5:27 AM
Quote
Phil
Active player (410)
Joined: 3/16/2004
Posts: 2623
Location: America, Québec
jimsfriend wrote:
I don't understand why something should be discussed first when the change is clearly within the rules of the site (which in this case it is). What I have not seen in the rules (am I not looking hard enough?) is any hint at all that the change should be discussed first. If in fact it should be discussed first, the rules should be changed to include that information.
It's just a matter of interpretation. In my case, I think it is against the rules. However, the rules don't state 2 version can't coexist. That's why I vote for solution #2
JXQ wrote:
No, it wouldn't. This submission is not breaking the rules. Please read this excerpt from the Rules, which I've stated several times: "If there is already a published video, do not use a different ROM than what it uses, unless the new movie is obviously better for reasons that are not only caused by the version change, or the ROM is superior (or a language change), and you can show how it should be compared to the existing movie."
Imo, the ROM is not superior. Also, I always interpreted the "or a language change" to be applied for games that have lot of text. Usually RPG games.
Posted: 4/19/2007 5:40 AM
Quote
upthorn
He/Him
Emulator Coder, Active player (388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
Sega TAS of 2011 Sega TAS of 2010 Sega TAS of 2008 Sega TASer of 2007
Phil wrote:
I vote for 2)
Edit:
primorial#soup wrote:
I think that the vote count clearly indicates this.
What primorial#soup means is that the fact that this submission got so many yes votes indicates that the majority either favors the US version, or doesn't favor either version over the other. Primorial seems to be taking this to mean that there is very little reason to prevent either version from obsoleting the other.
BoltR wrote:
Bisqwit has said multiple times in the past that a simple language change isn't enough to warrant using a different version.
This published movie disagrees. Furthermore, its submission text does not properly explain how the version differences affect overall framecount, but simply compares the number of frames spent in each stage. So technically, it's a violation of the rules, because it fails to explain version differences. This submission does not fail to explain version differences, and is a "superior rom" in the sense that the text in this version is comprehensible to most of this site's members, where the prior version's was not. The rules should be less prohibitive of this version change than of the version change from Megaman 7 to Rockman 7. Why, then, was Rockman 7 accepted without delay, where this submission sits embroiled in interminable controversy?
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Posted: 4/19/2007 6:32 AM
Quote
Bisqwit
Editor, Active player (296)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 7469
Location: Arzareth
upthorn wrote:
BoltR wrote:
Bisqwit has said multiple times in the past that a simple language change isn't enough to warrant using a different version.
This published movie disagrees.
I have to point out that I did not play any part whatsoever in the process of handling that submission.
Posted: 4/19/2007 9:46 AM
Quote
upthorn
He/Him
Emulator Coder, Active player (388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
Sega TAS of 2011 Sega TAS of 2010 Sega TAS of 2008 Sega TASer of 2007
Bisqwit wrote:
upthorn wrote:
BoltR wrote:
Bisqwit has said multiple times in the past that a simple language change isn't enough to warrant using a different version.
This published movie disagrees.
I have to point out that I did not play any part whatsoever in the process of handling that submission.
That does not invalidate the point, (which I believe is the source of JXQ's feeling of unfair treatment) that this submission is getting entirely wholly different treatment on part of this site's staff than that one, and other prior ROM version changes.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Posted: 4/19/2007 9:58 AM
Quote
Bisqwit
Editor, Active player (296)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 7469
Location: Arzareth
upthorn wrote:
That does not invalidate the point, (which I believe is the source of JXQ's feeling of unfair treatment) that this submission is getting entirely wholly different treatment on part of this site's staff than that one, and other prior ROM version changes.
That may be true, but I was just saying that I cannot defend or refute the decision on Rockman7 as I was not playing part on it.
Posted: 4/19/2007 12:20 PM
Quote
mmbossman
Experienced player (822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
GBx TAS of 2008
*Runs off to start a new, superior Megaman 7 run* ;)
Living Well Is The Best Revenge My Personal Page
Posted: 4/19/2007 1:46 PM
Quote
Boco
Former player
Joined: 3/30/2004
Posts: 1354
Location: Heather's imagination
upthorn wrote:
The rules should be less prohibitive of this version change than of the version change from Megaman 7 to Rockman 7. Why, then, was Rockman 7 accepted without delay, where this submission sits embroiled in interminable controversy?
Well the latter has the correct ending (inaction instead of murderous rage).. and has stage names (or whatever those are).. and both titles have an 'M' in them so they bypass normal delays.
someone is out there who will like you. take off your mask so they can find you faster. I support the new Nekketsu Kouha Kunio-kun.
Posted: 4/19/2007 7:52 PM
Quote
Zurreco
Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Giving this a yes vote. The playthrough was faster/more entertaining before, and the version change seems justified. Good job.
hi nitrodon streamline: cyn-chine
Posted: 4/20/2007 11:35 AM
Quote
AnS
Emulator Coder, Experienced player (723)
Joined: 2/23/2006
Posts: 682
Voting Meh. While the game is really well-suited for TASing, somehow this movie doesn't entertain me as much as bound-to-be-starred movie should. Maybe I don't understand the amusement of Engrish or just don't get this playing style, but I'd prefer J version.
Posted: 4/20/2007 8:46 PM
Quote
feitclub
Former player
Joined: 3/13/2004
Posts: 1118
Location: Kansai, JAPAN
While there's no dispute that HnF (the J version) has more enemies than BC, I suppose that it can be argued that does not necessarily make it "harder" to complete. After all, it doesn't take that much extra effort to fire Ladd's gun more often. However, I think the apparently higher threat level (that is to say, it looks harder) makes HnF a more impressive movie. And I believe if these authors used HnF, they would still be able to improve the existing movie even if it wouldn't play out as fast as this submission. So I am voting no. I am curious though: how does using the 3-Way on Area 7 save time over returning to the chopper and swap it for the Rocket Launcher? The destruction of the reactor seems to take a lot longer. (EDIT: Rephrase my question)
Do Not Talk About Feitclub http://www.feitclub.com
1 2
5 6 7