The impatient among you may skip to the last paragraph.
I wanted to wait until this question became more practical than theoretical. It looks like I may finish my low-glitch Pulseman tas soon, so now seems like a good time to bring it up.
Twisted Eye submitted a movie of Pulseman (later published) that relied heavily on an interesting movement glitch that allowed him to complete most levels quickly. He did a great job optimizing the use of the glitch and the reception was good, but there were some complaints that the continued glitching was repetitive and decreased the entertainment value of the movie. I'm nearing completion of a tas of the game that avoids that specific movement glitch, although it exploits a couple other ones. For obvious reasons, the movie will be about 9 minutes slower than Twisted Eye's.
The game is great on many different levels (no pun intended) and I don't think it will be too hard for a slower run to get accepted. Still, I want to make sure this point has been aired before I get a bunch of unnecessary 'no' votes.
The question that I'd like resolved is this: Is it acceptable to avoid a specific glitch (but to use others) in a tas to increase the entertainment value of a movie?
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
The issue that always comes up, then, is: what counts as a glitch (versus a trick or an exploit)? In Link's Awakening DX, the game I'm currently TASing, there are a multitude of tricks/glitches, some being much more significant than others. For example, it's easily possible to clip the edges of walls and walk a few extra pixels into them, allowing for small movement optimizations. Is this truly a "glitch"? If not, then what about a trick that allows me to clip the wall and exit a room before some event occurs (e.g. an owl flying down and giving you advice)?
One may argue that only glitches that skip parts of the game should be banned. Well, in Link's Awakening, it's also possible to skip the text telling you what's in a chest (by using ABStartSelect). Boss text can sometimes be skipped in the same way.
Another example: It's possible to destroy the level 6 boss in Link's Awakening before he even starts talking (or attacking you). Does that count as a part of the game that is skipped? What if it could be achieved by glitching, and it were more entertaining to do so?
It seems to me that the only way to judge such a collection of "glitches" is to review them individually, and have some list that says whether each one counts as a glitch or not. This, in my opinion, is too subjective.
Take a look at megaman's pause button glitch that allows faster boss deaths.
It doesn't allow any faster boss kills, it just makes killing them in the fastest possible time easier. If it did speed up the run, it would most certainly be used.
The question that I'd like resolved is this: Is it acceptable to avoid a specific glitch (but to use others) in a tas to increase the entertainment value of a movie?
Is it acceptable to avoid a specific glitch (but to use others) in a tas to increase the entertainment value of a movie?
Sure- if it gets yes votes. That is, if it DOES add entertainment value, and successfully completes an objective.
I think the only caveat is that the objective needs to be concrete, so as not to be open to reinterpretation when someone wants to beat your time.
For example, "Avoids a specific glitch, but only in parts where it's less interesting" may be interesting to watch, but would be unacceptable.
For example, "Avoids a specific glitch, but only in parts where it's less interesting" may be interesting to watch, but would be unacceptable.
I don't see why, but then again it might be based on this site's (seemingly) ever-changing rules.
I would think that, as long as it is enjoyable to watch, it would make it through. But then again, these days it seems more important to have pure speed.
There are lots of movies on this site already which avoid a specific glitch to be more entertaining, and even some movies which avoid using a glitch in certain circumstances but use them in other places. I'm reminded of the Link to the Past movie, which uses wobbling to walk faster and over pits but not through walls.
I would think that, as long as it is enjoyable to watch, it would make it through. But then again, these days it seems more important to have pure speed.
Yeah, probably. I guess it comes down to whether or not the runner's logic is distinct enough to properly judge and compare against competing movies of the same game. Pits vs walls meets that requirement. I haven't seen the low-glitch tas yet, but I'm sure it'll be fine.
Take a look at megaman's pause button glitch that allows faster boss deaths.
It doesn't allow any faster boss kills, it just makes killing them in the fastest possible time easier. If it did speed up the run, it would most certainly be used.
It can speed up the game if a shot takes longer to leave the screen than it takes for the boss to be hit by another attack, or if the player needs to save ammo for a later level.
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
The way I see it, every glitch should be exploited in the most severe manner possible. If it breaks the game too much (like the ALttP one), then there should be two runs, one with super-glitchy-party-awesomeness, and one without. Rygar, for example.
Joined: 11/17/2005
Posts: 278
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Blublu wrote:
The way I see it, every glitch should be exploited in the most severe manner possible. If it breaks the game too much (like the ALttP one), then there should be two runs, one with super-glitchy-party-awesomeness, and one without. Rygar, for example.
That's exactly what I think. To add to that, I'd say that if you're using slow motion to build a movie frame by frame then you might as well go all out. The only four games I can think of where this strategy fails are LttP, Link's Awakening, Rygar, and Castlevania CotM. Zelda 2 is also arguable. But all of those movies have alternate versions anyway.
I've never heard of Pulseman, but is it as broken as any of these games? There's your answer.
Seeing someone unexpectedly take advantage of an amusing glitch is one of my favorite things about watching these. For example, nitsuja in his Sonic 3 & Knuckles run.
The question that I'd like resolved is this: Is it acceptable to avoid a specific glitch (but to use others) in a tas to increase the entertainment value of a movie?
One problem which I see with this is a question of clutter. The amount of published movies is already approaching 400 (just checked, 392 published movies, 389 video files). This is starting to be a pretty large amount.
There are two sides to this coin: On one side it's good that there's a high amount of movies. tasvideos.org has basically become a library of tool-assisted speedrun videos. Take almost any old console game, and there's a good probability that a TAS exists for it here. Many people can see their childhood favorite game TASed.
On the downside, however, an enormous amount of movies is an enormous amount of clutter. This has several consequences. People who are not hardcore afficionados easily get lost amont the hundreds of available videos, perhaps try downloading a couple, don't like them and don't know what else to watch really. They may lose interest. Another problem is a question of resources: There's a limited number of regular uploaders for an ever-increasing number of movies. This slows down the average download times for movies because there are less and less people who upload them.
I think that the problem would be made only worse if we start making lots of different TAS versions of the same game. It adds to the clutter, it adds to the confusion, and it makes the limited upload problem worse. In my opinion we should: a) improve existing runs, and b) have variety by using different games instead of variety by TASin the same game in different ways. The second point is important for the good side of the coin I described above.
IMO two versions of the same game TAS is ok when there's a huge difference in goals between the two. For example it's cool to have two Rygar runs, one which goes all out to just finish the game as soon as possible, and one which is a "full" run (in that it doesn't skip levels by abusing the warp bug). Both movies are interesting for people who have played the game and probably people who haven't.
However, I would consider making two versions of the same run with the only difference being that one doesn't use a minor glitch while the other does to be needless clutter. There may be good entertainment reasons for doing it, but do we really need yet another published movie for a game with an existing movie already? I personally would prefer one high-quality run of a game than several with minor differences.
@Kles:
The glitched-out version by Twisted Eye has already been published.
@Chef Stef:
This is unambiguously a glitch of a rather severe nature. I probably didn't emphasize that enough in my first post. Watch Twisted Eye's movie for 30 seconds and tell me if you disagree.
@Catastrophe:
I'd say the glitch is a little bit above Zelda 2 on the glitchiness scale.
@Warp:
I generally agree about clutter but I think a special case is justified for this game. Using the glitch makes the game very hard to follow unless you know it already. The low-glitch version is easier to understand and closer to what a viewer would expect. For some that will increase entertainment.
@all:
I'll feel better about submitting a finished movie now that I have some idea of what people will think. Thanks for sharing.
On the topic of clutter, I find that the links to "NES movies" and "SNES movies" (particularly the former) result in tons of movies, complete with tons of screenshots, every time one searches in them for one single movie. It really is confusing to a person who is unfamiliar with this site, apart from using bandwidth on stuff that the person does not care about. The number of NES movies right now is 213. I personally almost never click on the "NES movies" anymore, and instead search the game name or type "movies.cgi?name=...".
Perhaps it would be good to implement, under each system, a list of game names as links, similar to what SDA is doing. I had no problems browsing there.
Perhaps it would be good to implement, under each system, a list of game names as links, similar to what SDA is doing. I had no problems browsing there.
This is a great idea; It probably deserves its own thread. I second this idea, but I don't think that the complete list should be done away with, as I think it's still very useful. Perhaps another idea would be to have a combo box on the main page for each system. This way, the user could get where they wanted to go with a single action, instead of being directed to a page of links first.
If a glitch breaks the game severely, then the test of "is the glitched run more or less entertaining" should apply.
Megaman is severely broken by all the glitching, but the glitched game is a heck of a LOT more entertaining then a normal attempt at TASing the game without glitches would be.
But when there is potential for an entertaining run without glitches, like with Zelda 2, there should be a glitch track and a "game breaking glitches not used" track.
In such a case, both movies are entertaining.
Another example of "glitch more entertaining" is A Boy and his Blob, even though it's glitches are game breaking.
All non game breaking glitches should be used regardless.
What qualifies as game breaking? If the TAS is 20 minutes faster or more becasuse the glitch is used, it's probably game breaking. :)
Perhaps it would be good to implement, under each system, a list of game names as links, similar to what SDA is doing. I had no problems browsing there.
