Post subject: Precedent on roguelite TASes and savefile anchored movies
rythin
She/Her
Skilled player (1139)
Joined: 11/4/2021
Posts: 56
As far as I can tell there's not really a precedent on how roguelite TASes should be handled regarding savefiles. While most movies tend to start from a "clean slate", roguelites as a genre fundamentally work differently from most other games, since unlocks from one run affect future runs of the game by adding more content such as new items or even new levels and endings. The usual state most roguelikes are played in is a fully completed savefile. Both in regular play and RTA speedruns these games are most often played with all unlocks available. As it stands right now, creating a TAS that follows this convention is pretty unfeasible, since save-anchored movies require a verification movie. Creating a full 100% movie of a roguelike game, even if unoptimized, is a monumental task due to the time investment required. These games tend to have a lot of content that takes tens of hours to get through to unlock everything. As far as I can tell I'm the only person to have submitted any roguelite TASes to the site recently, and my approach to them has been... mixed [5153] Windows The Binding of Isaac: Wrath of the Lamb "Sheol" by rythin in 01:50.67 - starts from a clean file [5729] Linux Nuclear Throne by rythin in 02:43.80 - starts from a partially completed savefile with a verification movie #9478: rythin's Windows Balatro "Tutorial" in 02:28.30 - starts from a clean file, though this one requires it There's also [2650] Windows Spelunky by Tseralith in 01:54.03 which technically starts from a savefile, though I don't believe it's mentioned anywhere and is easy to not realise if one is not familiar with the game (there's usually a forced tutorial at the start, but entering it once marks it as completed. Someone running the movie could just assume the movie desynced when the first level layout doesn't match, run it again and now with the tutorial completed it appears to sync fine) Now working on a roguelite movie that does require a fair bit of unlock progress, I'm running into a dilemma of how I should handle this. Should I: a) simply create the TAS on a 100%ed file of the game to follow the usual convention the game is played in b) create the TAS from a fresh file and include the unlock process in the movie. c) create a verification movie that unlocks just enough progress to reach my goal in one run I believe option a) to be the best as it most aligns with how these games are experienced in other forms of gameplay, but applying it would require changes to the rules regarding save-anchored movies. I think option b) is also fine, and it can be applied without any changes to the rules, though it will result in movies created this way to deviate significantly from what might be expected for a TAS of a certain game to look like. I find option c) to be the worst of the three. Depending on the game a verification movie for a certain goal might be unreasonably tedious to create, and playing on a partially completed savefile personally just feels arbitrary when the completion is only limited by how much of the unlocks the author felt like doing in the verification movie. As far as I understand it the requirement for a verification movie stems from the fact that the savefile a movie starts from must be legitimately creatable from within the game. This is a fair rule, but with how TASVideos in general seems to be moving in the direction of becoming less strict on many aspects of getting a TAS accepted, maybe this could be another area to look at in that regard? Would love some guidance here primarily of what to do with my current project, but also to start a conversation on the ruling mentioned, as it does feel a little outdated.
Emulator Coder, Site Admin, Skilled player (1260)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11789
rythin wrote:
a) simply create the TAS on a 100%ed file of the game to follow the usual convention the game is played in
Does that save file already exist and is it already verified by the game's community and hosted by 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.
rythin
She/Her
Skilled player (1139)
Joined: 11/4/2021
Posts: 56
feos wrote:
rythin wrote:
a) simply create the TAS on a 100%ed file of the game to follow the usual convention the game is played in
Does that save file already exist and is it already verified by the game's community and hosted by it?
Yes
Emulator Coder, Site Admin, Skilled player (1260)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11789
Some time ago Masterjun suggested a neat solution to this problem that would prevent complete chaos. Allow third-party approved savegame files if the respective community considers it legit and relies on it, but if a movie is made on a full verification movie, it'd obsolete. We haven't decided anything yet, for example can the latter even be slower and still obsolete, but this case sounds like a perfect reason to start this discussion for real.
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.
CoolHandMike
He/Him
Editor, Judge, Skilled player (1505)
Joined: 3/9/2019
Posts: 943
feos wrote:
Some time ago Masterjun suggested a neat solution to this problem that would prevent complete chaos. Allow third-party approved savegame files if the respective community considers it legit and relies on it, but if a movie is made on a full verification movie, it'd obsolete. We haven't decided anything yet, for example can the latter even be slower and still obsolete, but this case sounds like a perfect reason to start this discussion for real.
I have differing opinions on third party saves for ones that are solely used to unlock a character or mode, versus a third party savefile that uses data like carryover equipment and abilities for NG+. Also do not want a slower tas to obsolete a faster one unless there is some emulation or regional difference reason. 1) Third Party saves that are used just unlocking characters or modes without a verification movie should be acceptable. Very low chance of hex editing since it is only unlocking a mode or character and nothing from the savefile otherwise would effect the time of the tas. 2) Tases that use a third party save that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities I do not want to be acceptable without a verification movie. I would suspect them of hex editing especially if there is a long period of grinding. Think Chrono Trigger NG+ for example. Would still want a verification movie since I would not trust it. There is a large incentive for the player or taser to try and make the "optimal save". They could make the save then post it to the community for use and after a period it would be "legitimized". Basically laundering hex edited saves to make them legit. While in certain cases obsoleting a faster tas exists, but those are for reasons like emulation or region differences. Here it would just be a matter of trust. I know if I was a new user I would get really upset if one of my tases was obsoleted by a slower tas just because my savefile which I had trusted was seemingly deemed unacceptable after publishing. As a judge I would understand, but thinking those kind of obsoletions would just spread confusion and anger. We know most users do not even read the full movie rules and it is foreseeable that drama would result from allowing slower tases obsoleting actual faster ones. I would be open for tases that use a third party saves that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities for the non-publishable playground class though.
discord: CoolHandMike#0352
DrD2k9
He/Him
Editor, Judge, Expert player (2342)
Location: US
Joined: 8/21/2016
Posts: 1149
Location: US
CoolHandMike wrote:
feos wrote:
Some time ago Masterjun suggested a neat solution to this problem that would prevent complete chaos. Allow third-party approved savegame files if the respective community considers it legit and relies on it, but if a movie is made on a full verification movie, it'd obsolete. We haven't decided anything yet, for example can the latter even be slower and still obsolete, but this case sounds like a perfect reason to start this discussion for real.
I have differing opinions on third party saves for ones that are solely used to unlock a character or mode, versus a third party savefile that uses data like carryover equipment and abilities for NG+. Also do not want a slower tas to obsolete a faster one unless there is some emulation or regional difference reason. 1) Third Party saves that are used just unlocking characters or modes without a verification movie should be acceptable. Very low chance of hex editing since it is only unlocking a mode or character and nothing from the savefile otherwise would effect the time of the tas. 2) Tases that use a third party save that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities I do not want to be acceptable without a verification movie. I would suspect them of hex editing especially if there is a long period of grinding. Think Chrono Trigger NG+ for example. Would still want a verification movie since I would not trust it. There is a large incentive for the player or taser to try and make the "optimal save". They could make the save then post it to the community for use and after a period it would be "legitimized". Basically laundering hex edited saves to make them legit. While in certain cases obsoleting a faster tas exists, but those are for reasons like emulation or region differences. Here it would just be a matter of trust. I know if I was a new user I would get really upset if one of my tases was obsoleted by a slower tas just because my savefile which I had trusted was seemingly deemed unacceptable after publishing. As a judge I would understand, but thinking those kind of obsoletions would just spread confusion and anger. We know most users do not even read the full movie rules and it is foreseeable that drama would result from allowing slower tases obsoleting actual faster ones. I would be open for tases that use a third party saves that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities for the non-publishable playground class though.
If it’s written in the rules (that the longer run that uses the verified save file will obsolete an unverified save run) and someone complains/starts drama because they didn’t read the rules before submitting, we point them to the rules and say (as politely as possible) “it’s been written there since before your submission, you have no grounds for complaint.” EDIT: I don’t particularly like the idea of unverified/third-party saves, but I’m not going to argue strongly one way or the other
rythin
She/Her
Skilled player (1139)
Joined: 11/4/2021
Posts: 56
CoolHandMike wrote:
I have differing opinions on third party saves for ones that are solely used to unlock a character or mode, versus a third party savefile that uses data like carryover equipment and abilities for NG+. Also do not want a slower tas to obsolete a faster one unless there is some emulation or regional difference reason. 1) Third Party saves that are used just unlocking characters or modes without a verification movie should be acceptable. Very low chance of hex editing since it is only unlocking a mode or character and nothing from the savefile otherwise would effect the time of the tas. 2) Tases that use a third party save that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities I do not want to be acceptable without a verification movie. I would suspect them of hex editing especially if there is a long period of grinding. Think Chrono Trigger NG+ for example. Would still want a verification movie since I would not trust it. There is a large incentive for the player or taser to try and make the "optimal save". They could make the save then post it to the community for use and after a period it would be "legitimized". Basically laundering hex edited saves to make them legit. While in certain cases obsoleting a faster tas exists, but those are for reasons like emulation or region differences. Here it would just be a matter of trust. I know if I was a new user I would get really upset if one of my tases was obsoleted by a slower tas just because my savefile which I had trusted was seemingly deemed unacceptable after publishing. As a judge I would understand, but thinking those kind of obsoletions would just spread confusion and anger. We know most users do not even read the full movie rules and it is foreseeable that drama would result from allowing slower tases obsoleting actual faster ones. I would be open for tases that use a third party saves that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities for the non-publishable playground class though.
I'm unfamiliar with console TASing in general but why is hex editing (i assume same thing as editing a plaintext savefile with notepad) an issue? Especially to skip hours of grinding for a movie that would use lots of items carried over into NG+, isn't that the whole point of allowing community approved savefiles? The only other reason to allow them I could see is in cases where a verification movie can't be provided, which I imagine would be <1% of all save anchored movies.
Emulator Coder, Site Admin, Skilled player (1260)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11789
Hacking a save file has been traditionally seen as a very nasty way to cheat, but in reality it only happened once as a joke, however a judge quit over it hmm no, I was sure it was the reason but even our original judging module that shows decision time rather than submission time proves that it wasn't. #3519: RingRush's PSX Croc: Legend of the Gobbos "glitched" in 01:10.12 It's hard to tell how common this problem is to have a rule to protect against it, maybe post-moderation combined with ban is enough for those who actually lie about what they've done with save files. And we can unpublish if something goes unbelievably bad.
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.
Experienced player (910)
Location: Castle Keep
Joined: 12/3/2008
Posts: 983
Location: Castle Keep
The lie would have to be pretty elaborate to get trough the first pass of scrutiny, for each games the implications can be vastly different but for exemple, if it only unlock a game mode, I dont see an issue with just hexing the value responsible for it, provided theres sufficient technical info on how and why. The question is how do you figure other values were hexed, but maybe it can be somehow automated ? I mean its just a byte compare in the end? Granted this might get hairy on more modern systems but a save file on psx is ~ 10kb so maybe its possible to "parse" it? Maybe a special case can be made when the game is prone to corruption or smth silly is triggered by some data in the memory card, then a verif movie would be required, as opposed to always have one. How about a tool that would produce the sram and you have control over what he does write inside? (I mean it would log whats happening in there) Then you just have to load the script or whatever and you could have identical sram, if differs then you flag it as suspect? It doesnt require to have incredible knowledge on the whole game, only the 1 or 2 things the player requires to make his movie, the player would have to first provide the technical, you could review it, and then once accepted it could be reused anytime. (and of course even when the emulator is updated and the timing changes, desyncs no longer matters) Bonus point if its integrated in the movie directly but maybe thats a bit ambitious for now.
Noxxa
They/Them
Moderator, Expert player (4283)
🇳🇱 Netherlands
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4117
Location: 🇳🇱 Netherlands
feos wrote:
however a judge quit over it hmm no, I was sure it was the reason but even our original judging module that shows decision time rather than submission time proves that it wasn't.
It didn't make him quit directly, but he was open afterwards about how it destroyed his confidence and motivation in judging, which is why there's a sharp decline in activity afterwards, before eventually leaving less than a year later.
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.
eien86
He/Him
Judge, Expert player (4392)
🇨🇭 Switzerland
Joined: 3/21/2021
Posts: 380
Location: 🇨🇭 Switzerland
rythin wrote:
a) simply create the TAS on a 100%ed file of the game to follow the usual convention the game is played in b) create the TAS from a fresh file and include the unlock process in the movie. c) create a verification movie that unlocks just enough progress to reach my goal in one run
I think this list holds the key of the question. My initial instinct oposes (a) because it breaks the "chain of sync", where we can tell the result of the movie is reproducible end-to-end on a real unhacked system. Providing a savestate without proof that it can be created (via verification movie) loses this guarantee that we have for so long provided. But then again, emulation is imperfect, so my point above only applies for well understood systems where sync on real systems can be obtained. For any other systems where we know emulation cannot possibly emulate its system perfectly, the chain of sync is already broken from the get go. Furthermore, as we drift away from the rigid rules from the past and go with the flow dictated by each of the game's and TASer's communities, I could see allowing community-curated savestates for these kind of games would result in a win for all parties. Bottom Line: I can't decide, but the site's zeitgeist pushes me towards accepting (a) under very special circumstances. The author needs to prove (c) demands extreme effort, and there exists one savestate curated by the community (maybe used and documented in SRC). The savestate should only contain changes related to the unlocking, and no changes to the normal dynamics of the game, nor give any additional (undocumented) advantages.
DrD2k9
He/Him
Editor, Judge, Expert player (2342)
Location: US
Joined: 8/21/2016
Posts: 1149
Location: US
My main concern is clarity. If the site consensus is to begin accepting savestate and/or SRAM anchored movies without requiring verification movies; the resulting publications NEED to indicate (in some way that is blatantly obvious at a glance) that the presented run starts from an unverified source. This needs to be in place so that any viewers can see that we, as a site, acknowledge the presented run may not actually be possible to achieve through normal gameplay because we have not been able to officially verify the starting state of the run. Maybe some sort of icon on the publication? Though this wouldn’t be visible on YouTube encodes. It would be wise to have some sort of indicator that would impact both YouTube and on-site publications. Maybe a branch name along the lines of “unverified starting state.”
CoolHandMike
He/Him
Editor, Judge, Skilled player (1505)
Joined: 3/9/2019
Posts: 943
My opinion on this topic has changed after an unpublication of a movie recently. Publications are not fixed. If a savefile anchored movie without a verification file has a problem it could just be unpublished. Should be an extremely rare event if it even happens.
discord: CoolHandMike#0352
🇺🇸 United States
Joined: 3/10/2014
Posts: 13
Location: 🇺🇸 United States
I think from a future-proofing perspective, requiring verification movie seems inherently unsustainable just based on how the genre functions. Eventually a roguelike is going to come along with "beat the hardest boss which only unlocks after beating the game 1k times, beat that hardest boss 1k times" etc. And/or it'd require randomized gear/items with perfect stats with statistically astronomically small likelihood to require or literal months of materials saved up for meaningful stat increases etc. If a human player has full unlocked the game, I dont see an inherent issue if they upload their save and TAS's used it as a baseline or something. I think you can assume good faith until given a reason not to. retroactively invalidating or unpublishing a run because of deceit would solely be the fault of the submitter, not judges or staff imo, expecting staff to be omniscient to all games at literal pannenkoek expert level is obviously a sisyphean expectation doomed to fail from the outset. ideally the submission notes would link to a youtube playlist or something of the human let's play/streamer vods who made the save file or something, to lend some legitimacy I can envision these being separate categories even. a "Min NG+" similar to Low% where you try to use as few "excess" luxuries. while the opposite of "Max NG+" which uses bis perfect gear and items if you had perfect RNG or grinded ad-infinitum. Both of these could be compelling and interesting demonstrations, often that only TAS could reasonably accomplish. I think TASvideos should be the place where the "only TAS can accomplish" stuff should live, even if it requires trusting a starting point and skipping a "perfect sync chain of evidence" kind of thing, which i think unnecessarily restricts the possibility space and separates TASvideos from being a centralized place to see the relevant TAS's for a game. (meaning people might still make the TAS's using a premade or modified save file, they just now need to know of a separate place in addition to tasvideos to find it). If people don't want to consider these "real legit" TAS's, I dont see why "uses unsynced save data" can't just be a tag, similar to "glitchless" where the audience can filter them out if the want. Shouldn't be the site itself barring publication because some of the audience doesn't like it.
eien86
He/Him
Judge, Expert player (4392)
🇨🇭 Switzerland
Joined: 3/21/2021
Posts: 380
Location: 🇨🇭 Switzerland
TheBirdOfPrey wrote:
Eventually a roguelike is going to come along with "beat the hardest boss which only unlocks after beating the game 1k times, beat that hardest boss 1k times" etc. And/or it'd require randomized gear/items with perfect stats with statistically astronomically small likelihood to require or literal months of materials saved up for meaningful stat increases etc.
For this case I wouldn't be opposed to a surgically modified clean savestate. It would not only save the initial effort of beating the boss 1k times, but also result in a more pristine save that is not tainted with other secondary stats or achievements

1765043019