Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
This rules update I want to announce is indeed one people should be aware of, because it involves a little bit of extra work from TASers and staff.
http://tasvideos.org/MovieRules.html#PostCompletionInputhttp://tasvideos.org/JudgeGuidelines.html#PostCompletionInput
If you are a TASer, and you're TASing a game where you have to press some extra buttons to let the ending sequence fully actually end (see examples provided in the Rules chapter), always mention this in the submission notes! It is preferred to contain extra input right in the main submitted movie, but under certain conditions (see the first link) it may be allowed to exclude it.
If you are a Judge (or a helpful Publisher), always try pressing some simple buttons after the ending sequence has seemingly ended (switch to recording if needed). This will help to back up authors who forgot to address this, and to prevent publishing movies with incomplete ending.
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.
How will this affect the completion times of currently published runs?
For example, Circus Caper requires a few inputs to progress through the end-game story after beating the final boss.
If the completion point is considered to be the last input needed to beat the final boss and start the end-game sequence, the completion time listed is incorrect.
If the completion point is considered to be the last input needed to finish the post-game story, the time is correct.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Authors are free to provide us with an updated movie file, and we can deal with it as appropriate.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Completion times are not absolute. There are lots of ways to measure them, and we allow them all as long as main gameplay remains reasonably optimal. It's in line with how we compare improvements: cutscenes are disregarded, load times are disregarded, ending is disregarded, text speed, amount of dialog boxes, BIOS screen - all this is irrelevant when we want to compare optimality of main gameplay.
We allow authors to stop the movie in 2 different ways: either one neatly sets up the last actions in advance, and stops the movie way before they occur by themselves, or one manually forces the last actions to occur ASAP, and then stops the movie. So the same is allowed for post-completion input: we have a preference that this is included, but we allow it to be dropped too.
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.
For example, Circus Caper requires a few inputs to progress through the end-game story after beating the final boss.
"End-game story" sounds like part of the actual gameplay, rather than just ending credits.
Should the run end after the last boss is defeated, or right when the actual end credits (or whatever the game clearly considers an equivalent) is reached?
If there's some kind of epilogue (as seems to be the case in a minor form here), shouldn't it be played through normally?
For example, Circus Caper requires a few inputs to progress through the end-game story after beating the final boss.
"End-game story" sounds like part of the actual gameplay, rather than just ending credits.
Should the run end after the last boss is defeated, or right when the actual end credits (or whatever the game clearly considers an equivalent) is reached?
If there's some kind of epilogue (as seems to be the case in a minor form here), shouldn't it be played through normally?
Firstly, I don't see a difference between 'end-game story' and 'epilogue.' To me, that's semantics. The fact that inputs are necessary to progress from one screen to the next in this story/epilogue is trivial.
In my opinion, run timing should end on the last input to defeat the final boss; as all runs should be even timing through this epilogue portion (barring lag differences between emulators). The last input that impacts gameplay/timing differences is the last input for the final boss.
Also, there are no end credits, just a "The End" screen after the epilogue/story.
Here's a truncated version of the run that ends with the last input for the boss. Feos (or whoever) can do with this as they feel appropriate.
EDIT: The truncated file will save 599 frames off the publication time if the time is updated.
EDIT 2: It would be interesting to see how many other current publications have similar trivial inputs after the last necessary gameplay input has been accomplished.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Having post-completion input inside the main movie is preferred, unless the author explicitly wants to exclude it. So no need for truncated versions.
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.
It would be interesting to see how many other current publications have similar trivial inputs after the last necessary gameplay input has been accomplished.
[3410] Wii GoldenEye: 007 "007 Classic difficulty" by FitterSpace in 1:41:35.67 has over 2 minutes of blank input after beating the final boss because of an additional A press needed to select "continue" at the results screen, which is needed to reach the credits. Timing from power on until last gameplay input would be somewhere around 1:39:11 without that A press at the end. I don't see an issue with the encoder pressing A themselves outside of the input file, or supplying an extra input file with the A press outside of the actual submission.
I'd also be interested to see what other TASes have more cutscenes between the final boss and the end credits. I think Zelda: Twilight Princess has over 10 minutes of stuff after the final boss, and I'm sure there are plenty of RPG's that have several minutes of post-boss inputs too.
It would be interesting to see how many other current publications have similar trivial inputs after the last necessary gameplay input has been accomplished.
[3410] Wii GoldenEye: 007 "007 Classic difficulty" by FitterSpace in 1:41:35.67 has over 2 minutes of blank input after beating the final boss because of an additional A press needed to select "continue" at the results screen, which is needed to reach the credits. Timing from power on until last gameplay input would be somewhere around 1:39:11 without that A press at the end. I don't see an issue with the encoder pressing A themselves outside of the input file, or supplying an extra input file with the A press outside of the actual submission.
I'd also be interested to see what other TASes have more cutscenes between the final boss and the end credits. I think Zelda: Twilight Princess has over 10 minutes of stuff after the final boss, and I'm sure there are plenty of RPG's that have several minutes of post-boss inputs too.
It's almost 11 minutes for TP (10 minutes 49 seconds as a rough accurate estimate), so it's absurdly significant.
Having post-completion input inside the main movie is preferred, unless the author explicitly wants to exclude it. So no need for truncated versions.
I completely understand wanting the post-completion input provided in the submission from a publication standpoint...it's easier for the judges/publishers to do their jobs.
However, this topic does introduce the question of whether or not our published times are an accurate representation of how long it actually took a TAS to beat a game; at least in comparison to a human player (superhuman play is, frankly, a part of the whole point of this site).
Let's use the already mentioned Zelda TP as an example:
The current WR for RTA speedruners is 2h 56m 35s from file-select to final blow delivered to Gannon
The run awaiting publication stands at 2:44:46.77. Which includes both time from power-on to file-select and time after killing Gannon
While 12 minutes faster than human is impressive, if we knock the additional 11ish minutes off that number from when gannon is killed to the final trivial input, we end up with something closer to 2:34:00 which is even more impressive than humans. It's also a more accurate representation of how quickly the TAS actually beats the game.
I guess my point is that we need to reconsider when we qualify a game as having been beaten. Currently, the general rule is the last input necessary to get to the credits/game over screen.
Should we not reconsider this rule (if only for timing purposes) as something more along the lines of 'the last input necessary to guarantee the game will progress to the end with or without trivial progression inputs.'
I realize that this perspective borrows somewhat from the RTA community conceptually on when a game is beaten, but I also believe it's a more accurate representation of how long it actually takes to beat the game...especially for comparing against human-play.
TL;DR Having post-gameplay trivial inputs included in publication times, artificially increases the perceived time of play and misrepresents how superhuman that gameplay actually is.
FWIW I'd be willing to be the person to go through our library of publications and seek games that may warrant having their completion time adjusted based on this concept. It shouldn't be too difficult as the input files are already hosted and it would simply be a matter of redetermining the last necessary input to guarantee progression to the end.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
I don't object to adding a textual note to every such publication, telling what time it gets if you stop it at the last frame of real gameplay. But clearly not to the point of adding a secondary movie to every such publication.
Not sure where to put all your research tho. If it's in this thread, the rule is always obviously visible, which helps people to get used to it. And the announcement already happened, so why not keep this discussion in one place? What about a wiki page?
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 don't object to adding a textual note to every such publication, telling what time it gets if you stop it at the last frame of real gameplay. But clearly not to the point of adding a secondary movie to every such publication.
Not sure where to put all your research tho. If it's in this thread, the rule is always obviously visible, which helps people to get used to it. And the announcement already happened, so why not keep this discussion in one place? What about a wiki page?
I agree a secondary movie is unnecessary and would be a lot of extra (pointless) work. I would just suggest using the current input files to determine the 'new' final frame.
The question is which time is listed where?
1) Do we maintain the main publication time as the the final input to get to the end and add a text note of the alternate, shorter 'end-of-gameplay' time?
2) Or do we alter the main publication time as the input to guarantee progression to the end and make a note of the longer full-input time in the text?
I feel the main publication time is the one people look at from a 'beating the game' standpoint. I feel it should be the one to reflect when the gameplay is complete, not necessarily when the end credits are reached. For that reason, I think option 2 above is more appropriate way of indicating the main publication time.
I'm ok with a wiki page for comparisons....but I'd need help with formulating/maintaining that. I'm mostly wiki illiterate.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Publication time isn't changing. And we have several types of publications in that regard, and their movies stop at different points.
What if we use something like SDA timing for the end? How do they define it?
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.
Ending point: at the end when control is lost, even if that's long after the final battle, the timing stops. This is generally defined as the frame the character freezes on. If loss of control is hard to define for a game, a reference point, such as fade-out to credits can also be used. For RPGs, we use the frame the hit points of the final hit on the final boss shows up (unless there are gameplay elements coming after that point). Possible movement that can occur during or after the ending credits does not count (unless it involves actual gameplay elements that affect the outcome).
Honestly from this thread I'm starting to feel this is a relatively bad idea. If it's post-credits input that can be ok but I don't want to see people stopping input early when they're just an A-press or two away from credits. Seems a lot more work on the Judges and Publishers end.
[16:36:31] <Mothrayas> I have to say this argument about robot drug usage is a lot more fun than whatever else we have been doing in the past two+ hours
[16:08:10] <BenLubar> a TAS is just the limit of a segmented speedrun as the segment length approaches zero
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Yes as I said, we prefer this input to be included in the movie, for the sake of completeness and being self-contained. I might highlight in the rules that this is preferred in general.
Also I feel that SDA's definition is not what we want at all. They split at freezing character because it's easy to notice: you just keep slashing or punching air, and once the animation stops, you split. But you don't need to do it to make the ending happen any sooner.
As I explained above, this cutoff is vague and doesn't easily apply everywhere, so enforcing this would indeed be a bad idea. Perfect for a user maintained wiki page though.
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.
Maintaining the current method of determining publication time is fine with me (and requires much lest work on just about everyone's part).
So...How about we (meaning me with some help) add the wiki page for time comparisons.
We could list current TAS run time and what the run time would be based on RTA convention timing.
Then IF we wanted to also add this time comparison to publications as a side note, we could simply print something along the lines of 'Run time using RTA timing convention = XX:XX:XX.XX'
The question at this point is, (when they differ) do we use SDA timing rules or the speedrun.com timing rules to determine the RTA timing method?
To be blunt...I personally rarely visit speeddemosarchive.com and look more to speedrun.com for record RTA runs.
So...anyone want to help me get this started? Once it's begun, I'd do what I could to update and maintain it myself.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
I'll handle this tomorrow.
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.
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.
"End-game story" sounds like part of the actual gameplay, rather than just ending credits.
Should the run end after the last boss is defeated, or right when the actual end credits (or whatever the game clearly considers an equivalent) is reached?
If there's some kind of epilogue (as seems to be the case in a minor form here), shouldn't it be played through normally?
Firstly, I don't see a difference between 'end-game story' and 'epilogue.' To me, that's semantics.
I don't understand why you think that I consider them different things in my post. I'm using them as synonyms (to avoid repetition).
In my opinion, run timing should end on the last input to defeat the final boss; as all runs should be even timing through this epilogue portion (barring lag differences between emulators). The last input that impacts gameplay/timing differences is the last input for the final boss.
Just to avoid confusion: Are you talking about this one game in particular, or a more general rule of thumb?
In my opinion, run timing should end on the last input to defeat the final boss; as all runs should be even timing through this epilogue portion (barring lag differences between emulators). The last input that impacts gameplay/timing differences is the last input for the final boss.
Just to avoid confusion: Are you talking about this one game in particular, or a more general rule of thumb?
My comment regarding the epilogue timing being equal for all runs was meant for this game specifically.
Regarding Generalities:
My opinion of when any game has been beaten is the last input that guarantees the game will progress to its end (credits, "the end", etc.), not the input that gets to the end. This I believe is a more accurate numerical value for how long it took to 'beat' a game.
My reason for this general opinion is that there may be current games (or potentially future games) that have multiple possible epilogues of varying length, and which epilogue that plays depends on in-game variables.
So in the hypothetical instance that there is a game with the above multiple-ending situation...the following could be a possibility:
--The game has two submissions awaiting judgement.
--Run-A has a longer game-play section than Run-B, meaning Run-B is the faster method of guaranteeing the game will get to the credits.
--The epilogue for Run-A, however, is significantly shorter than the epilogue for Run-B; resulting in Run-A getting to the credits sooner than in Run B.
--If those respective epilogue sequences require gamepad inputs to progress through, it's possible that the Run-A would be timed as shorter based on current submission timing.
--In my opinion, Run-B is the more impressive run from a speedy game-play standpoint because it is the faster method of guaranteeing the credits are reached even if it takes longer to actually reach those credits due to a longer epilogue input sequence. And thus, in my opinion, Run-B is the one which should be published, not the Run-A with shorter submission time. (This goes for all tiers including vault.)
The above hypothetical situation attempts to provide an example of why I feel it's so important to highlight the time required to guarantee progression to the credits as compared to the time required to get to them. So thank you, feos, for helping me get this process started even if it doesn't result in changes to official publication times.
I'll just share some basic learnings from a private debate regarding current rules on the said "endless games":
* A complete run is to complete the gameplay, not the game content; The run reaches the end of the gameplay, not the end of the game (credits, "the end" etc.).
* The player decides what the gameplay consists of; Whether that is acceptable by others is a different question.
* What we as the TASVideos community (not any RTA community) want to make clear as our common view (and set in stone as the Rules) is, what gameplay shall a TAS consist of to be approved and published here.
I am pessimistic about having everyone agree on all of the statements above.
<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
