Explanation when submitted, i dont want to explain for my first TAS until descision.
I made this run tor enterteinmant only, I will explain shortcut later.
I saw no TAS or Speedrun of the game so far.
The gameplay looks good as far as it goes, but this seems a lot shorter than other Super Monkey Ball games. Are you sure you were playing on the hardest difficulty? (If there are multiple difficulties, then given that they typically contain entirely disjoint levels in Super Monkey Ball, I guess you'd have to complete all of them to complete the game.)
Joined: 3/2/2010
Posts: 2174
Location: A little to the left of nowhere (Sweden)
Submission Text wrote:
Explanation when submitted, i dont want to explain for my first TAS until descision. I made this run tor enterteinmant only, I will explain shortcut later. I saw no TAS or Speedrun of the game so far.
Explaining the movie will let the audience understand it better which can effect their vote. Also it will be easier for judges to make a decision if it is properly explained.
Explanation when submitted, i dont want to explain for my first TAS until descision. I made this run tor enterteinmant only, I will explain shortcut later. I saw no TAS or Speedrun of the game so far.
Explaining the movie will let the audience understand it better which can effect their vote. Also it will be easier for judges to make a decision if it is properly explained.
Yes, I know, but I had not alot of time, I will update the submission in the coming days. Thank you for your interest!
Also, this movie looks badly trimmed, in the end, there are 7948 frames (more than 2 minutes) of seemingly all zeroes input.
I wanted to let the end of the game.
You can end the input file on the last frame in which you put input. Encoders of TASes are instructed to extent the encode to include the credits even if the input file ended ages ago.
(If you need to put in input to reach the credits state, then that's ok to do. But you still end the input file on the last frame you input anything.)
I’ve only watched 1 second and can already tell that it’s bad
you need to tilt diagonally at the start of each level to gain a frame, not tilt fully ahead
you failed to tie the very first level’s best RTA time http://www.cyberscore.me.uk/chart/22748
Voting no due to optimization.
I noticed level 1-3 (curvature) was completed with 52.30 left on the clock.
The first search I found was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjE2DWvnREY which completes it with 56.68 left.
http://www.cyberscore.me.uk/game/250 is the Cyberscore page with times for this game-the aforementioned level supposedly has a real-time record of 56.81, confirmed of 56.80. Either way, that one level is 4.5 seconds slower in the TAS.
Elementary: 58.40 (58.41 is the real-time record, +.01) +.01
Sine Wave: 52.46 (52.70 +.24) +.25
Curvature: 52.30 (56.81 +4.51) +4.76
Progenitor: 49.38 (50.56 +1.18) +5.94
Anaconda: 45.20 (53.55 +8.35) +14.29
Fluctuant Travelator: 48.50 (54.06 +5.56) +19.85
Swathe: 52.95 (55.96 +3.01) +22.86
Assimilate: 56.06 (56.96 +.9) +23.76
Spiral Staircase: 53.86 (57.65 +3.79) +27.55
and that's World 1 of 12, the only one in this TAS, finished 27.55 seconds slower over just 9 levels!.
Overall, this TAS looks like someone got the game, liked it and decided to make a TAS of it without doing any research on strats or anything like that, or paying much attention to optimization.
Voting no due to optimization.
I noticed level 1-3 (curvature) was completed with 52.30 left on the clock.
The first search I found was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjE2DWvnREY which completes it with 56.68 left.
http://www.cyberscore.me.uk/game/250 is the Cyberscore page with times for this game-the aforementioned level supposedly has a real-time record of 56.81, confirmed of 56.80. Either way, that one level is 4.5 seconds slower in the TAS.
Elementary: 58.40 (58.41 is the real-time record, +.01) +.01
Sine Wave: 52.46 (52.70 +.24) +.25
Curvature: 52.30 (56.81 +4.51) +4.76
Progenitor: 49.38 (50.56 +1.18) +5.94
Anaconda: 45.20 (53.55 +8.35) +14.29
Fluctuant Travelator: 48.50 (54.06 +5.56) +19.85
Swathe: 52.95 (55.96 +3.01) +22.86
Assimilate: 56.06 (56.96 +.9) +23.76
Spiral Staircase: 53.86 (57.65 +3.79) +27.55
and that's World 1 of 12, the only one in this TAS, finished 27.55 seconds slower over just 9 levels!.
Overall, this TAS looks like someone got the game, liked it and decided to make a TAS of it without doing any research on strats or anything like that, or paying much attention to optimization.
First, your TAS must beat ALL known TASes and real time records for individual levels, segments or full game runs, unless differing circumstances (like the RNG being different, resources at the start of the level being different, emulator/game differences, etc) mean it is impossible to do so.
-
Obviously no TAS is ever so optimal that no improvement can be made (even supposedly perfect runs are obsoleted soon or later), but if your TAS shows a consistent level of optimization errors that
1) aren't because of not knowing of a trick's existence at that point into the run (such as the yoshi's island any% TAS not using walljumps because they weren't known yet)
2) don't require a deep understanding of the game to discover (e.g. it's okay if your TAS is unoptimized due to the RNG being frustrating to work with, or if there are lots of chaotic side-effects of doing actions that make it hard to save frames without trial and error)
it's not optimized enough for TASvideos.
First, your TAS must beat ALL known TASes and real time records for individual levels, segments or full game runs, unless differing circumstances (like the RNG being different, resources at the start of the level being different, emulator/game differences, etc) mean it is impossible to do so.
-
Obviously no TAS is ever so optimal that no improvement can be made (even supposedly perfect runs are obsoleted soon or later), but if your TAS shows a consistent level of optimization errors that
1) aren't because of not knowing of a trick's existence at that point into the run (such as the yoshi's island any% TAS not using walljumps because they weren't known yet)
2) don't require a deep understanding of the game to discover (e.g. it's okay if your TAS is unoptimized due to the RNG being frustrating to work with, or if there are lots of chaotic side-effects of doing actions that make it hard to save frames without trial and error)
it's not optimized enough for TASvideos.
But isn't the vault supposed to contain runs for every game? So isn't an unoptimized one better than none? Sure, terrible sloppy runs should be rejected, but this doesn't seems to be the case.
I liked this submission because it was short and fun, but I'm not actually trying to defend it though. I'm more trying to understand how the vault policies work.
Uhm, did you miss the sum in this very topic? It is blatantly unoptimized. Also, the rerecord count is so low that I question if some levels has any at all!
This run lacks optimization. No vote.
As I have no name pointed out all stages can be improved. Give it another try, but spend more time on it and optimize it as far as you can, even it would take month to do it.
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4083
Location: The Netherlands
caiophilipe wrote:
But isn't the vault supposed to contain runs for every game? So isn't an unoptimized one better than none? Sure, terrible sloppy runs should be rejected, but this doesn't seems to be the case.
I liked this submission because it was short and fun, but I'm not actually trying to defend it though. I'm more trying to understand how the vault policies work.
No, an unoptimized run is not better than none. Vault may be much more lenient in regards to entertainment value, but it still has technical standards.
Wiki: Vault wrote:
Technical Requirements
Must beat all known unassisted records and beat or match all known tool-assisted records.
Must show a proficient understanding of TAS techniques and be perceived as well optimized. I.e. should not have obvious pauses, mistakes, or sloppy play.
(...)
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
But isn't the vault supposed to contain runs for every game? So isn't an unoptimized one better than none? Sure, terrible sloppy runs should be rejected, but this doesn't seems to be the case.
I liked this submission because it was short and fun, but I'm not actually trying to defend it though. I'm more trying to understand how the vault policies work.
If we start accepting runs that were proven to be suboptimal, we won't find any more optimal runs at some point. Because the optimality standard will lower that way. There always are some possible improvements in the runs we accept as optimal enough, but those either were not found at all, or are not so significant to redo the very thing. So basically, the main question is, what improvement can be considered significant enough, to make the run get rejected if it was not implemented.
That question can only be answered by people who made a good amount of runs that were considered very well optimized by the community: viewers and other TASers. If a run contains errors that even non-TASers can notice (like bumping platforms instead of jumping over them, or not using vertical acceleration to fall down faster), then such run is not up to our standards. It does not represent superplay. Because superplay requires using the available tools to their maximum. Well, since 100% maximum is not achievable, there are Judges that must weight everything and apply the current optimality standards to the movies and make solutions.
About Vault: it does not lower our optimality standard. It lowers only our entertainment barrier. Because entertainment is quite a subjective factor, and unfair decisions are possible. Now almost any game run can be accepted to Vault if it is a speed record. So actually, optimality is a critical factor especially for Vault. Moons can in theory accept a run that is suboptimal, but was greatly received. Optimality is the only thing that justifies Vault's existence, so suboptimal movies can not go to Vault.
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.
Thanks guys. I've been kinda confused since the vault became a thing and watching what was published in it made the impression that "anything goes" without much question. I was just happy to see lots of runs that I think deserved to be on the site being finally published that it was enough for me.
To an untrained eye, like mine, this run deserves vault. But I understand now why this is not the case.
