this thread has been bumped a painfully high amount of times by people who are basically begging or demanding a run, and this just seems rude.
Is there any part of this site that hasn't been tainted by this kind of behavior?
I guess it's my fault for trying to fix the internet, really. I should know better than to try to educate the hyperactive 14-year olds on game forums. I'll just go back to lurking and hope, against all odds, that people will stop flooding good threads with useless posts.
Bloobiebla says that the run was a low priority, and now it's less of one. I don't necessarily think it wise to assume he's speaking for the nebulous "they" in this case, nor do I see his post as a promise that the TAS will happen right away.
All I'm really trying to convey here is that anyone who isn't willing to do this run should just be patient and appreciate anything the runners do give us in their own time... this thread has been bumped a painfully high amount of times by people who are basically begging or demanding a run, and this just seems rude.
You have a handful of people skilled enough and experienced enough to produce a high-quality Zelda OoT TAS, and they don't want to go for an optimized run, finish it, and have Mupen+ come out two days later. Then you have a handful of people who, for whatever reason, feel obligated to demand a run anyway or try to convince the runners to do so. They don't want to do it themselves because they're either lazy or they just don't have enough experience with this game to do it effectively. So now we have some people asking for a run and other people explaining why it isn't happening.
I know for sure that I wouldn't want to run this game with Mupen+ in the works, no matter how long away it is. Being stopped, not by your inability to run a game, but by a technical problem, feels like a ton of suck. There's no one to yell at, because the guys who do Mupen+ are doing it for free and they owe us nothing. The guys who can run OoT also owe us nothing. But we all want something, don't we?
This was a fun little watch. I mean, it's a Kirby game and 100%, so maybe more wheel than I'd like, but planning seems solid and it really does make a big game look small, so yes vote from me.
Question: any analysis of the randomness of the roulette wheel? There was a time or two that you had to wait until near the end of the roulette to get what you wanted. No way to manipulate that, I'm guessing?
Captain Forehead wrote:
I know, that's what I've been trying to find but I can't find it anywhere.
I found it very easily. Sorry, obviously I can't say any more than that. If I were you, I'd just keep looking.
I thought this was TASVideos.org, not TASVideosAndAlsoHelpForOldConsoleGames.org.
Check www.gamefaqs.com, they're bound to have helpful guides, and there's a forum there that sometimes occasionally doesn't have totally idiotic discussion.
We really need to get this 1 frame improvement in 1-1, after all we're only a pixel away from succeeding. This gotta be improvable... somehow! :P
It'd be very cool to get that done :)
Corner boosting perhaps?
Oh man, good thinking. I bet no one tried that yet.
Out of curiosity based on input in this thread, I went back and watched some of the later levels of the run. They're more interesting than the earlier levels, but only in the sense that the puzzles are more complex; nothing that a TAS highlights or makes special. Effectively, we're still just watching a slightly faster version of a pre-planned playthrough of this game.
I find it interesting that this game has no "meh" votes, though.
I think it's the encoders who really suffer the most.
Will download and watch... I can't believe a game with a friggin' frame rule is getting pulverized so badly lately.
Having no upcoming MM TAS, after everything that's been discovered, is a real letdown, but I can hardly blame Swordless or anyone else for not wanting to tackle it. Swordless especially has probably seen the first cycle of this game far more than anyone ever should.
Is there any singular compiled source of the TAS tricks and skills and MM breaks that've been found? It would go a long way towards encouraging new blood to take on these games... and sifting through over 100 pages reads like a big sign that says "run away."
obviously a good deal of others agree, because it was published.
While I mostly agree with your post, you got this part backwards: it's published because people agree, not the other way around.
Aw, I like the version of the world I came up with where publishing instantly makes people like runs. :P But yeah, that's what I should've said, oops.
Omega wrote:
The main objection from people here seems to be that the game is boring. I disagree with that. Although it's "just a puzzle game", isn't it very interesting to see all the perfect solutions deciphered right in front of you?
Zurreco said half of what I wanted to say. The other half is a problem particular to this game: the puzzles just don't look all that hard. Maybe it gets more challenging later, but you have to wade through so much crap to do it.
What's more, the puzzle system looks poorly designed. You can make pushable ice blocks, but only if you start from a wall, make a platform two tiles long, and then remove the other ice block? Why not just make ice blocks? That's the kind of thing that would really annoy me in a puzzle game.
Again, I'm sure that this game is fun for a subset of people, and those people probably enjoy watching a TAS as well. I just don't think it's publishable material... and I can't imagine I would ever recommend watching this run (or even playing this game). It probably shone brighter during the NES era.
Actually, I think the SMB run is entertaining, and while obviously that has something to do with the game's popularity, I think I would enjoy it anyway because it is a short game. If the any% SMB run was over an hour long, I do not think anyone would enjoy it. As it is, even the warpless is less than 20 minutes.
If a game is not a classic, lacks viewing entertainment, and is not short, it is going to be very hard to watch. IMO, SMB is fun/short/entertaining, and obviously a good deal of others agree, because it was published. I don't think it's really fair to put it in the same category as this game, which is not interesting to watch and takes way too long. Some games are fun to play and horrible to watch; those just don't seem suitable for publication.
I watched this until the third world, then I decided to sleep instead.
Very, very boring game to watch. I'm not sure whose idea it was to ever publish this game. But as this run is a better version of the previous accepted version, I'll vote yes for improvements. I'm sure it's more fun to play.
Edit: Wait, what? The previous submission was rejected? Well, in that case I'd say no because this game is just not entertaining to watch IMO. It does seem technically great and I hate to shoot down a run of considerable length, but I think the game choice is just bad.
They were mentioned earlier, but the non-game-breaking CT any% run and the Sonic non-zipping runs also warrant their own categories, imo.
I'm not demanding anything. The name of the thread is "movies you think shouldn't have been obsoleted." The discussion was interesting and I lent to it my thoughts. I argue most strongly for the 14% because, of the examples given, I think it's the most obvious and deserving a candidate for its own category. I'd consider the CT run a close second.
I don't like the idea of beating a dead horse. In this case, I really do feel like there's still something lost in tossing out some truly interesting categories. Like I've said before, I'll keep those thoughts to discussions of relevance, like this thread. I'm not interested in stuffing my ideas down anyone's throat, but I can hardly feel bad about arguing for one or any runs in a thread about runs that I think should still be around.
mmbossman wrote:
Me either. The point I'm trying to get across is that, by and large, if someone submits an entertaining movie, it has a very good chance of being accepted. I won't lie and say there are never exceptions, but they are the exception, not the rule.
That's the sort of thing I can totally agree with. It sounds sort of conflicting with the prior statement of "it wouldn't." I understand there's a lot of bitterness and frustration around this issue, and it's not like I've ever posted something I wanted to re-word later, so I don't feel any need to play word games or try to catch anyone in anything. I assume, for the most part, that everyone here has the same goal in mind: make the site good, better, the best for TASes. Having enemies on the internet is silly anyway.
How much time would be lost by getting the leaf-ride treasures with no leaves? (If 100% includes full inventory, then of course it's impossible to spend any magic beans and still have it count.)
I think that's an extremist interpretation of the definition of "100%". How about the light arrows and magic you use in the Ganondorf fight? Well, now you don't have 100% items stocked any more, and your magic bar isn't full... No bombs or bombchus could be used either. Do we also fill all the bottles with blue potions or faeries? I mean, otherwise they aren't at full capacity...
I think having obtained all items is more important than beating the game with them all in inventory.
Wasn't the site all about showing the "best" TASes? So, what's the point of limiting the possibilities?
Oh, I totally agree with you on this point, but it has been made clear in this thread, by the guys in charge, that this isn't the position of the site currently. I hope that changes, but we can't force someone to embrace those ideals, no matter how well we argue them.
OmegaWatcher wrote:
And Gruefood Delight isn't even an official section, it's just a directory made by Alden. It lacks information, most videos don't have encodes or even screenshots. Alden is a genius putting this up on the site, but he has a life, you know. Seeing the page's edit history, no one tried to help him with page formatting, adding pics, encoding...
If people really like this section, Alden should be helped
Maybe it's not official, but it's still a great section--some of my favorite runs were ones I found there. If Alden ever asked for help, I'm sure it'd be offered. I just meant that there's clearly people on the site who appreciate good (or silly!) runs, even if they aren't approved for publication.[/quote]
Because they care too much about their run showing up on a movie list on some dumb video game website.
Sad but true. Though it ultimately is and should be up to the runner to TAS for himself, for others, for publication, or for rejection.
I hope we one day see runs of the aforementioned games in these categories, even if TASVideos won't publish it. They'll still have an audience, and there's always Gruefood Delight.
You might say then that the actual complaint is not that there was so much glitching that nothing recognizable remained, but that so much of the game was simply skipped that people want to see too. But that's been true since the first Mario 3 TAS ("what about the other levels?") and generally it gets answered with a 100% run or some other variation, and usually whatever that variation is doesn't conflict with aiming for speed as one of the top priorities.
I think this nails the issue. So what about when a 100% run (or other variant) doesn't answer this problem?
A lot of submissions of a TAS of a game will seem like other submissions of TASes of the same game, assuming you don't actually watch the runs. Besides that, you could make the same argument about Happy Lee's run, as it knocked adelikat's previous submission into gruefood territory over a "minor improvement" that was discussed in the submission thread.
That aside, I feel I should say again that I like adelikat's style. Nicely done.
I agree with full inventory count, and I think the 37th heart piece should also be included because it will entertain anyone who doesn't know it's there, and it will be left out of any other run. So, yeah, 102% + heart piece. So what is that now, 103%?
Uh, I wasn't trying to 'help' the discussion of the 14%. Its a discussion whose time passed a while ago, yet keeps getting coughed up repeatedly.
I was stating that, in a humorous manner. Negativity? Did you see the guy beating the dead horse? Hilarity!
I'd think the fact that the discussion keeps coming back is evidence enough that there's still reason to talk about it. I don't mind if some people disagree; I'm saying that that disagreement doesn't contribute to an actual conversation unless there's more argument provided than "we already talked about this, so let's move on." If no one wants to talk about it, let the discussion die, and that'll be that.
However, I am not debating the humorous-ness of animated .gifs.
