Posts for Acheron86


1 2
15 16 17
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
I think I'm noticing a trend here. Can't really add to what superjupi said much. if I set out to watch a 100% run I'm at least somewhat familiar with the game, otherwise I watch the any% first if it exists. Whether or not I'll enjoy the 100% more just depends on how much more entertainment can be gotten out of the extra time added. If it takes a huge chunk of time to do a 100% the tricks will have to be pretty amazing to keep me interested.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
I guess I was under the impression that the vote represented something more than a simple reflection of preference. It looks like that was an incorrect misinterpretation, so my apologies.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
To clarify, I think the problem comes from the way the question is phrased. If someone asks me if I like a run, I say yes, meh, or no. That's a question of personal taste. There's some runs which I think are amazingly done, but I don't enjoy watching them personally. If I said "meh" or "no" I have answered it accurately. So, I guess I think it's not the right question to ask. I think "should this movie be published" might be a better one, but I'm still fairly new here and I imagine this has been discussed plenty, so I'm sure that idea's come up as well.
jaysmad wrote:
someone who hasnt seen the whole movie, because of the lenght, should not vote or just say "meh" unless he or she noticed something that could be faster.
I think this is a pretty good point, actually. An obvious exception can be made for improvements of runs you've already seen, of course, but if you're not willing to watch the parts that have been changed, you shouldn't really bother voicing your opinion, because you're not informed on how the run is different than the original publication. I think alden's suggestion might be better overall though. Hrm.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Maybe someone could clarify something for me, I'm a bit confused. If a run of a previously published game receives constant improvements, and a person watches the improvements each time, it's a given they'll be less impressed, especially in a game like this one which is cutscene-heavy. So, voting "no" because a movie's boring to you at that point isn't wrong, because it does answer the question of "did you enjoy this movie"... but it seems like that practice is a good way for improvements of long games to rack up the no votes just because it's been around a while. I'm sure the judges take this into account, but it still feels lacking somehow for a person's vote to matter when they might've enjoyed the original runs but don't care for improvements. I remember a similar problem coming up in the most recent SM64 run (someone saying "I didn't see enough improvement and it's getting boring now, voting no" or something like that). I'm not saying any of the "mehs" or "nos" here were wrong, because they're honest expressions of the voters' feelings, but it seems like an unfair reason for an improvement to get no-votes. Of course, this isn't an improvement run, but it looks like it's getting no votes for the same reason, and this seems like it'll only become more of a problem as newer-gen systems become TASable, since newer games are becoming more cutscene-heavy.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Sidescrollers are generally boring, unfortunately, but this one was fast enough that I didn't mind. Yes vote.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Technically you could skip all that with RBA, and then you'd just have to get into Ganondorf's castle, right? Now that would be a cool run to watch, were it only doable. Wonder why the forest temple freezes. Oh well, no point thinking too hard on it.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Nice little run there, pretty confused throughout most of that but hey ice arrows are cool so whatever. Now I'm wondering just how much of the game is completable as Young Link. Too bad the entrance to Ganon's Castle is about the only place you can't reach as him.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
More than four minute's improvement to a classic game... good lord. Well done! Watching now, will vote when I'm done.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Flip wrote:
But then again, thinking about it now I cant imagine what actually would satisfy me. I'd like to see all rooms of the temples get TAS'd, so each puzzle or group of mobs getting done quickly, and then completing each room of a temple in the intended order. But then trying to define such a run will cause even more problems. There's debates about dungeon map, compass, skultula rooms, and which glitches are allowed. Collecting the boss key in the spirit temple for example, it may be a minor glitch but it still renders all the puzzles in the room pointless. So a confused status on this run really
It sounds like you're wanting to see a really quick run of OoT. I'm not sure this would be entertaining enough to warrant publishing, just because it would be boring for anyone who isn't already completely fascinated with every little facet of OoT. I just don't feel it'd bring enough new entertainment to the table to justify the greatly extended length... not if you're still just pushing blocks or wearing heavy boots half the time (which is what a no-cheating-on-puzzles-run would be doing, I assure you). I'd be in favor of an "all bosses, all items" run, I think. No BA/RBA, presumably. No need for a special category for BA/RBA 100%, because anyone who wants to see all items collected probably doesn't want to see you do it with bugs and a fishing rod a bunch of times. I can't imagine a 100%, all bosses, all items run that doesn't use RBA getting obsoleted by one that does. So 100% could be defined as "defeats all bosses, collects all items" run, and this run fits a niche between the totally broken any% run and that. We're still only looking at three categories, and given the game and the variety of tricks available in it I don't think this is really a problem.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
I feel it'd be different enough from the regular run to be interesting on its own. I'd watch it.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Cpadolf wrote:
Figured it would be better to post here than to make a new topic, as I have no intention of having any longer discussion going on for this. In lack of anything better to do I set out to improve this TAS, as the game though horrible do make for a decent run. So far I have completed the first world and it is ~330 frames faster than the last run. In the two frist stages the improvements (118 frames in total) came mostly from better speed management and avoiding more yarn balls. In the 3rd stage I skipped rolling out the bridge which saved a major part of the remaining 210 frames. Smv here. Tell me what you think, should I go on with this all the way through? Improvement suggestions and information about glitches (if there are any known) are also welcome.
Sounds like I need to hurry up and finish Aegis then. ;) Yeah, I would watch a full run of this, played it as a kid so I'm sure it'd be entertaining Not 100% sure it's going to be that unique a video though.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
61% seems like a frighteningly low requirement of "Yes" to warrant publishing. I'm sure it's happened before, but does that mean it should ever happen at all?
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Yeah, yes vote, not really sure how you could have done this any better. Well played, sir. Edit: I can only wonder what people who haven't played this will think at Mathfun.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Downloading now, watching soon. Pleasant surprise for a boring evening. Not having all gold gems makes me sad, but it also probably would drive you crazy, so I'm not complaining. Will vote when I'm done viewing.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
XIF wrote:
I meant to bring back up the discussion of what KIND of 100% run. As the previous discussion left it at "well it'd be cool but probably way too long" I'm inquiring specifics here. I am not entirely familiar with TAS'ing, but I do know the mechanics of SSB very well.
I'd be interested in seeing a run like this, but I don't think it's publishing quality, mostly just because going through classic mode multiple times would be mediocre. You might think "well, different characters would make it more interesting" but suppose viewers would want to easily access the third run, using character X; they have to fast-forward through two runs to do it, or download a big chunk of encode, as opposed to simply submitting three separate classic mode TASes. I don't think the trade-off of time is worth fighting three extra characters; when it comes down to it, KOing Ness/Cfal/Jigglypuff isn't going to look very different from KOing any other characters. I would like to see a TAS time attack of the target test and platforms, just to see what the lowest possible time is. That might be publishable.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Well that got goofy. Don't forget there's an encode already:
Gromba wrote:
For people who aren't able to view it with snes9x, i've encoded the run. You can stream and/or download it here: http://gromba.nl/cpadolf100p (325MB, h264/aac)
Cpadolf, in general, how many frames does the blueball save compared to just bombing? Hard to tell since it's sort of circumstantial in the run breakdown, or it could just always be circumstantial, hrm...
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Seems like people are having a lot of desync issues. Be aware, there's a bad dump of Super Metroid out there that appears to be a good one; "Super Metroid (JU) [!].smc" is its ROM name, and it runs fine in regular play, but there are about $B00 bytes in the level banks of this ROM that cause problems for game hacking and for movie playback when certain rooms are entered. It's still the same size as the original ROM, so it's about impossible to tell unless you open up the ROM in a hex editor and compare it to the clean one. Sorry I can't say much more on that, I can only recommend you try downloading another ROM.
klmz wrote:
I think the point is that the poll is "Did you like watching this movie?" rather than "Do you think this movie is entertaining?"
Your original unedited post implied that you felt it lost points because of technical issues, which technically does affect the viewing experience but is against the spirit and purpose of voting. I understand that the purpose of voting is to produce feedback about the video itself useful for a decision of publication, so viewing problems shouldn't change your vote. It is probably still a good idea to say that you had problems viewing it, of course. Far better than to simply not watch a run, or worse to not watch and vote no because it's too hard to run, which thankfully wasn't the issue here.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Comicalflop wrote:
I have yet to see a recorded match of Isai losing at SSB. I once, in a rare moment, saw him lose in Melee, but that's it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQNPJYX3DBI Of course this is a Link fight in SSB on a small level... At least we have proof that Isai was at some point still human.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Twelvepack wrote:
Pre-emptive no vote for finalfantasy 7-8-9. No tas should be longer the the Lotr trilogy.
This guy is working on an FF7 TAS-ish (savestates etc.) already, though it's not really what you're talking about exactly. I think it could be interesting to see the game beaten at a ridiculously low level but not sure it'd be worth wading through hours of crap to see it. Still, I'm sure there are plenty of people who would enjoy watching it because it's FF#, right? Guess we'll see how that goes when the time comes. Or maybe they'll find a glitch to skip, I don't know, disc 1 and 2 entirely. That'd be nice.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Cpadolf wrote:
No it IS .swc, almost all my ROMs are .smc but for some reason the version of the SM ROM that I have used for all my runs is a .swc file. No idea what the difference is.
Huh. I don't think the extension really matters as long as the file itself is the same, so even if it's named "swc" it probably still is an smc. Similarly, the ROM I originally found has the extension *.fig, yet I renamed it *.smc and compared it to a clean ROM and there's no differences. Sorry, shouldn't presume to know more about your run than you do, eh? I'm just glad you do this. I would not complain about an "Aegis.swc," no sir. And now that I read bkDJ's intriguing post about the lua scripts I am going to re-watch sans pauses.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
hero of the day wrote:
Now available in html format, http://www.mediafire.com/?gidmda1ymqi
My hero! Thanks.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
petrie911 wrote:
Funny, I used the unheadered ROM and it synced fine. I'm using 1.43+ v12, BTW; not sure if that makes a difference.
Figures, it wouldn't work with my ROM until I re-headered it (I hate working on headered ROMs). There is a bad dump of SM floating around the internet as well, pretending to be a good one [!] but I've had trouble with it in the past too. I don't think this is the case though because I assume Warp has probably watched SM .smv content before. Will have to look into this. Wish I could read the breakdown file but it's a spreadsheet and I've not put office on this machine. Ah well.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Warp wrote:
I still don't really know what Super Metroid (JU) [!].swc is. I tried it with Super Metroid (JU) [!].smc, but it desyncs after about a minute in. Is "swc" just a typo, or is it really a different rom format? Or maybe the emulator version does make a difference...
It's .smc, he just wrote it wrong. I had no problems emulating with a headered (3,073KBs) ROM but the unheadered (3,072KBs) ROM does not work. There's versions of both floating about on the internets so you'll want to make sure you have the headered version. Plenty of applications can add/remove headers (SMILE is what I use but I know there's others) to ROMs, but I imagine you know this by now good sir.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
symbolic X wrote:
I just want to see it published and encoded before I give my vote. I know you defeated JXQ's 100% record. BTW, did you use them glitch methods from the run that you and hero of the day once did? Or does this include another mother brain battle?
He kills the Mother Brain normally before the hyper beam and uses the glitch to get up after hyper beam to take her down to no health while the hatchling heals Samus/dies. No x-ray glitching in this one, if that's what you mean.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
What do you know? I can vote now. Yes! Edit: I'm ashamed to call myself a SM player after asking a question as dumb as that one. Carry on.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
1 2
15 16 17