Joined: 8/10/2004
Posts: 173
Location: Bethel, VT
Everyone's favorite board game! But, would a time attack even be worth it? I may be interesting to see who can manipulate the most luck, heh. I will attempt a time attack, if people think it will be interesting.
Joined: 8/10/2004
Posts: 173
Location: Bethel, VT
And I have already hit a snag.... the only rom that will even start on Famtasia is the japonese version; all the other ones get bad opcode errors. However, the japonese version gets a bad opcode error when you try to build houses. So unless someone knows how to get around this problem, this project is defunct already.
Joined: 6/14/2004
Posts: 646
I suggest you try a Genesis or SNES version then.
I like my "thank you"s in monetary form.
Player (67)
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjaví­k, Ísland
Well, you could use a non-sucky emulator called FCEU. There's a patched version with rerecording floating around somewhere. But it isn't supported on this site as far as I know (why not, though?) so you couldn't submit it.
Former player
Joined: 3/19/2004
Posts: 710
Location: USA
Is there a version for SNES? I would suggest that if it exists.
Former player
Joined: 3/30/2004
Posts: 1354
Location: Heather's imagination
Why Monopoly? Why not Rockboard?
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.
Active player (410)
Joined: 3/16/2004
Posts: 2623
Location: America, Québec
The Snes version is better than the Genesis one.
Joined: 8/10/2004
Posts: 173
Location: Bethel, VT
The reason I like the NES version of monopoly is because it has faster gameplay then the SNES and Genesis versions. Those you can't seem to skip through the animations, and the gameplay therefor seems much slower.
Active player (410)
Joined: 3/16/2004
Posts: 2623
Location: America, Québec
Itstoearly wrote:
The reason I like the NES version of monopoly is because it has faster gameplay then the SNES and Genesis versions. Those you can't seem to skip through the animations, and the gameplay therefor seems much slower.
You can disable animation and change the game speed on Snes one.
Joined: 8/10/2004
Posts: 173
Location: Bethel, VT
I see... well then, I request that this thread be locked, and I will start a new one in the SNES board. Thanks!
Active player (410)
Joined: 3/16/2004
Posts: 2623
Location: America, Québec
Itstoearly wrote:
I see... well then, I request that this thread be locked, and I will start a new one in the SNES board. Thanks!
No need to lock that thread.
Joined: 11/26/2005
Posts: 285
This was the only NES Monopoly topic I could find. Anyway, could someone make a run where you luck manipulate the opponent to accept unreasonable deals? I'd like to see a movie where AI is luck manipulated to get a fortune while P1 is near bankruptcy all the time. Then when the AI player gets almost all spaces on the board, it accepts an all belongings -- P1's belongings (or less!) trade.
Skilled player (1402)
Joined: 5/31/2004
Posts: 1821
You can't luck manipulate the comp just to hand everything over. He will however give up all of his belongings to a full set of streets. A movie of this was made by Hero of the Day, you can download it here. It was unfortunately not the fastest strategy.
Former player
Joined: 6/25/2004
Posts: 607
Location: Maine
Or, if you got oodles of cash to throw away, you can just buy them out. Although it can take a good lot of money to do so. But the computer can be bought out for a fair price. =P
Joined: 11/26/2005
Posts: 285
Goddammit.... It would've been neat though.
Editor, Skilled player (1942)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
We discussed another strategy a couple weeks ago: http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3500&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=32 Rather than trying to manipulate the CPU to accept an unreasonable deal, this strategy offers an unreasonable deal. Once the CPU has its hands on the monopoly, it can be manipulated to self-destruct.
Joined: 11/26/2005
Posts: 285
FractalFusion wrote:
We discussed another strategy a couple weeks ago: http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3500&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=32 Rather than trying to manipulate the CPU to accept an unreasonable deal, this strategy offers an unreasonable deal. Once the CPU has its hands on the monopoly, it can be manipulated to self-destruct.
:D
Editor, Skilled player (1942)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
We weren't able to make any movie, or else we would have submitted it.
Joined: 11/26/2005
Posts: 285
Oh, okay. :) I didn't realize that the movie wasn't utilizing those tactics.
Player (88)
Joined: 11/14/2005
Posts: 1057
Location: United States
here is monopoly beaten in 28 seconds, which is 2 seconds faster than the current best movie on the workbench. It uses a trade strategy, and for that reason it doesn't look nearly as cool or impressive. http://dehacked.2y.net/microstorage.php/info/942/Monopoly%20%28U%29.fcm
They're off to find the hero of the day...
Player (84)
Joined: 3/8/2005
Posts: 973
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Former player
Joined: 5/3/2004
Posts: 366
Interesting. Could be problematic, though. It's 2 seconds less input, but clearly the end of the game comes later than in the current workbench movie. Does that really mean this should be considered faster? Hmmm...
Joined: 11/26/2005
Posts: 285
Gigafrost wrote:
Interesting. Could be problematic, though. It's 2 seconds less input, but clearly the end of the game comes later than in the current workbench movie. Does that really mean this should be considered faster? Hmmm...
Yeah, I'd rather see someone luck manipulate to skip input. Sort of an autopilot. In fact, I'd like to see someone complete a game with as little input as possible, without any speedrunning. Just minimizing the input needed to win.
Editor, Reviewer, Experienced player (969)
Joined: 4/17/2004
Posts: 3107
Location: Sweden
>It's 2 seconds less input, but clearly the end of the game comes later than in the current workbench movie. Does that really mean this should be considered faster? I haven't watched this movie (yet), but I'm of the opinion that 1) shorter input length should only be used when it doesn't slow down completion of the game, and that 2) actual time of completion is more important than when input stops. Stopping the movie way before the game completes looks cool, but it is not what a movie should be judged after. We had this discussion about SMB1 also. Shorter time to completion won out in the end.
Editor, Skilled player (1942)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
I think that shortest input should be done if it acts as a surprise factor. The current submission (as with the last 6 movies obsoleted) ends input 18 seconds early. Wonder what the game does during those 18 seconds? If the 25-second strategy I posted works, the amount of time between input end and game completion would be about 3 times longer (75 seconds) than the input movie itself. Of course, in games like Mario 1 or Mega Man 5, ending movie on shortest input would look both bad and pointless. But this is Monopoly. So it really depends on which strategy is used.