yes, you are right, I didn't notice that.
I'll redo It.
Thanks for the tip.
EDIT: it would be 1 frame faster if you move the inf behind the other inf intead of moving it diagonaly because I can press A button earlier as distance remains the same. Also I'll be in a better position for selecting the artly.(some little improvements)
I don't feel like testing myself just wanted to say this: do you reply "Yes" to Nell's first question when she asks to explain the modes? because it looks like it, and that should be slower than replying "No"
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
ALAKTORN wrote:
I don't feel like testing myself just wanted to say this: do you reply "Yes" to Nell's first question when she asks to explain the modes? because it looks like it, and that should be slower than replying "No"
I just checked this, and there's more text if you answer no (at least 16 screens of text plus an additional question for no vs. 11 for yes).
I hope this isnt the vbm. that is submitted because there is a lot of poteintal entertainment that you would miss by just setting the cursor in place. Nice work though!
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
If you were willing, I'm sure one of the rest of us (me?) could submit the run? If you're concerned about the submission text, I always maintain that one should submit first and write the submission text later; failing that one of the rest of us could write the text.
EDIT: YouTube'd: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=3D8391050A614173
So, I'm letting you submit the movie as a co-author production but if you remember DarkKobold's words.
DarkKobold: This movie is improvable by a substantial amount. (To most people on this site, 24-25 seconds is a large amount.) This will be my stated reason for rejection. However, if you decide to remake, caveat tasor, TASer beware, the audience let out a huge 'meh' regarding the entertainment level of this run, and the chances of a new version being acceptable is questionable.
My personal opinion is that the movie in a more optimized form is good enough for publication, but we'd need to see the audience reaction.
As you can see audience is an important factor on this run. We have to be sure that audience won't kill us with a lot of 'meh'.
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
Sorry for the double post, but I think this warrants a new post.
Since the glitched run was published, I've been contemplating the logistics of a full campaign run. In my view one of the most interesting runs that can be achieved from a clean start would be an all S-rank run of the campaign.
Now, this introduces some interesting issues. To start with, sufficiently fast performances on the Kanbei missions will cause the Sonja missions to be played. Is it worth sacrificing time on the Kanbei missions to avoid this, or would viewers be more interested in watching the extra missions?
I think the latter makes more sense, both because I view it as more compelling to see individual missions - including the Kanbei missions - completed as quickly as possible, and it would be more interesting to see the strategies used in as many missions as possible.
By that line of logic, we're not necessarily aiming for pure speed in the sense of fewest number of missions completed. If that's the case, I think we should aim for the opposite extreme - play as many missions as possible. The goal then becomes "S-rank on as many campaign missions as possible". (This has the additional implication of using Sami for the Green Earth missions so as to unlock the final 'hidden' mission against Eagle.)
Does this seem like a reasonable argument? Do you think the site would be interested in watching a run of this nature?
EDIT: ALAKTORN has rightly pointed out that I meant to write "perfect S-rank" (i.e. full points).
