klmz: Accepted under a new "in bounds" category along with the current publications. However, this category may be obsoleted with a "100%"-alike or "all bosses" category playing as the same character.
klmz: For this game, forgoing the particular glitch to go out-of-bounds could demonstrate a slightly more "causual" route to the viewers, while it could be of some interest, does not help with the main aim of TASing - to demonstrate super-human gameplay. Meanwhile, the big plus as a side-effect of such a goal choice - showing more eye-pleasing Whip-Launching Techniques, is easily achivable by a "all bosses" or "100%" categorized movie using the same game character, and it is already achived. Therefore, this published entry is considered unnecessary at the present time. However, future submissions that would feature both "all bosses" and "in bounds" could stand a chance of being accepted as a new entry, as the "all bosses" concept is of an interest here and shares common points with "in bounds" as both mean to take inessential side tasks set by the author.
I think he's attempting a category similar to JXQ's run (or the Maxim no warps run). He uses door warps and the shuriken glitch, but avoids the zipping tricks in klmz's eleven minute movie.
I prefer this route over the glitched route, though both have their good sides.
Good:
- Overall, the run moves at a fast and varied pace.
- Technically well executed run, from what I can remember about the game.
- "New" boss fighting allows some of the more boring parts of the previous run to be skipped (getting the lightning book, for example).
- You can angle an L-button jump?! *embarrass*
- Better and more consistent use of dash/slide/whip launch in various places than I did in my run.
- Taking the knife for the pendulum room really helped there.
Not sure:
- You hit the ceiling in several spots when doing a L-button jump that seem to be slower than the alternative, but it's possible that they are indeed faster. (Two examples I recall were breaking the wall in castle B just below the entrance (gold-colored room), and getting Dracula's eye.)
- A couple of the dive-kicks that are clipped by walls seem as though they could wait a short time and dive-kick later to get the horizontal velocity as well. No specific examples come to mind, and this didn't happen much, so it may just be perception is not equal to reality.
Bad:
- Although the boss fights are better, they are still true Castlevania boss fights that are over very quickly, sometimes without looking like it took much effort. (An exception to this was the fight with Death which I thought was very well done.)
- There is one small improvement that could be made throughout - when entering a door, you currently dash up to it, stop the dash 1 frame before pressing left or right to trigger the "door open". However, if you stop the dash a bit earlier and walk toward the door for 2 or 3 frames, you hit the door with a strange type of momentum that slides you forward for a few more frames as the door opens, and the screen will fade to black a couple frames quicker. If done throughout the run, you may save 1 second, so it's nothing to get worked up about, just something to note for future runs.
Even if every improvement here is actually correct, there wouldn't be much time to gain. Maybe 5 seconds? Either way, I vote yes.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Hm, this had the look and feel of a low-glitch 100% run (probably because of the detours necessary to collect the body parts of Vlad). Why didn't you go for that as your goal instead? Why do you think this category should exist?
I think something like low-glitch(maybe) 100% with speed/entertainment tradeoffs to showcase the different weapons/spells would have been a smarter choice of category. I'm not really sure what to vote on this.
I agree that it seems to be technically well executed.
Hm, this had the look and feel of a low-glitch 100% run (probably because of the detours necessary to collect the body parts of Vlad). Why didn't you go for that as your goal instead? Why do you think this category should exist?
I think something like low-glitch (maybe) 100% with speed/entertainment tradeoffs to showcase the different weapons/spells would have been a smarter choice of category. I'm not really sure what to vote on this.
In the context of this game, what would a 100% run be? Map completion? Relics?
Anyway, I really am not sure what to vote on this run. On the one hand, it certainly was entertaining enough and seemed well executed. You had a nicely varied way of moving, the boss fights were nice and the route seemed optimized. I also liked the way save warps are used. However, I am not really sure wether a separate publication is needed next to the glitched and Maxim runs. Also, some of the choices you made in the run are very questionable. Why are door glitches fine, yet out of bounds ones aren't? Why do you kill some enemies, but jump or dodge others?
I will abstain from voting for this run, I think.
This is one of those annoying times where I like the run, but it is an arbitrary distinction on what glitches are used and what aren't. Abstaining from voting, despite the run being nicely entertaining.
The Maxim No Warps run did use the door glitch. I don't understand how that's not a warp, but if that's how it is, then this run's goals are well defined.
I'd like to see the author's comments before voting. It does look good on the whole, but some parts were a bit questionable.
If I recall correctly, the use of the door warp in the Maxim no-warps run basically served to avert a lot of otherwise not-very-interesting backtracking. The authors recognized it as being a bit inconsistent but felt that the use of the door glitch made the run demonstrably more entertaining without seriously breaking their rules, so they went with it. Given that the run was published, presumably the judges agreed.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Joined: 6/23/2009
Posts: 2224
Location: Georgia, USA
The distinction between "door-warping" vs. "wall-sinking" glitches made sense to me when the full Maxim run was done. This submission is just using that same allowed set of glitches. It made for a pretty nice run, and I think JXQ got a pretty good summary of it in his post.
This run has a good pace and shows off plenty of the game. I'm in favor of publishing this alongside our current runs.
Used to be a frequent submissions commenter. My new computer has had some issues running emulators, so I've been here more sporadically.
Still haven't gotten around to actually TASing yet... I was going to improve Kid Dracula for GB. It seems I was beaten to it, though, with a recent awesome run by Hetfield90 and StarvinStruthers. (http://tasvideos.org/2928M.html.)
Thanks to goofydylan8 for running Gargoyle's Quest 2 because I mentioned the game! (http://tasvideos.org/2001M.html)
Thanks to feos and MESHUGGAH for taking up runs of Duck Tales 2 because of my old signature!
Thanks also to Samsara for finishing a Treasure Master run. From the submission comments:
Shoutouts and thanks to mklip2001 for arguably being the nicest and most supportive person on the forums.
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
mklip2001 wrote:
The distinction between "door-warping" vs. "wall-sinking" glitches made sense to me when the full Maxim run was done. This submission is just using that same allowed set of glitches.
Perhaps the branch name needs to be "no warps", then. I realise it's a little misleading, but it would be consistent with the "Maxim no warps" run.
The distinction between "door-warping" vs. "wall-sinking" glitches made sense to me when the full Maxim run was done. This submission is just using that same allowed set of glitches.
Perhaps the branch name needs to be "no warps", then. I realise it's a little misleading, but it would be consistent with the "Maxim no warps" run.
Perhaps it would be easier to understand the goals by renaming the published "Maxim no warps" branch to "Maxim no out-of-bound".
EDIT: Note that the published "Maxim no warps" run does use wall-zipping without going out of bound.
<klmz> it reminds me of that people used to keep quoting adelikat's IRC statements in the old good days
<adelikat> no doubt
<adelikat> klmz, they still do
Regardless of the final decision, the run does need author's comments(or at least someone typing comments for it, as it appears English isn't his first language).
Yes, English is not my main language. I love TAS. Language can not stop TASer communication. I think the line is distorted into the wall, but the door is not.
I would like to listen to the opinions (especially on the goal choices) of the audience as well as the author. I would consider it "premature" if the decision were to be made with so little information.
<klmz> it reminds me of that people used to keep quoting adelikat's IRC statements in the old good days
<adelikat> no doubt
<adelikat> klmz, they still do
Hey, wasn't it still encoded?
I'm starting HD encoding.
klmz, how to name the branch in my encode?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
I think "no warps" would be inaccurate as this movie used both ingame and glitched warps. Maybe "in-bounds" or "in bounds" to be concise?
EDIT: oops.
<klmz> it reminds me of that people used to keep quoting adelikat's IRC statements in the old good days
<adelikat> no doubt
<adelikat> klmz, they still do
Okay, processing...
edit: yeah, i havent started yet.
"In Bounds" will be there.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
The run looks entertaining enough for me that I think it should be published.
There is just never enough categories for runs.
It can be argued that it's either glitched, or no glitch. It can also be argued for out-of-bound and not out-of-bound.
I vote yes for this run.
Due to the previous example almost no, so I think it is not easy to judge, adding the information I also not easy. But I thought this was interesting. ：）
