Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
People are saying only input matters, yet the movie rules contradict that thought. "There is no strict authorship rule for cases when research or development was contributed instead of actual movie input." Saying that there is no strict rule means that sometimes that person should receive authorship credit, and sometimes that person shouldn't. Considering that I contributed a very large majority of the research and development of this movie, this certainly seems like a prime instance of deserving authorship. Otherwise why is this statement in the rules? As for signature tricks/strategies, I think four have been mentioned already, and there are a few others.
CC2 says "You are free to ... remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit[.]" Is this movie not building on the previous movie's material? Synonyms for "build on" include expand on, develop, refine, and improve on (per thefreedictionary.com). Is that not what DreamYao did to the previous movie? (To be clear, of course players can improve other players' movies and claim authorship.)
Again if the stance of the site is "our movie rules allow stealing ideas even though that directly contradicts the concept of plagiarism," the question is why is that the rule, since that is generally not how plagiarism is handled? I do believe that previous authors should be credited as authors as long as their ideas are still being used in the most recent movie. That is not always the case since sometimes their ideas are later found to be suboptimal. It is also the case that people do not always want their name associated with a work, for reasons such as believing the work is low quality or that they did not significantly contribute to it, and that stance also has to be respected.
In the interest of solution-seeking, I would be open to the 'Hollywood' solution to writing credits, which is to credit a limited amount of people who made the most significant contributions. This avoids the two extreme positions—where either the list of writers is exceptionally long or only one person takes unwarranted sole credit despite using ideas from other people. So perhaps in cases like this one that are a mix of input and ideas from various people, movie authorship could include the ideas as standard policy but limit authorship to the 3 or so people who made the most significant contributions. (Again this is just a suggestion for the sake of possibly reaching a reasonable agreement.)
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Any dictionary site will inform you that plagiarism is passing off someone else's ideas as your own without credit, which is generally not acceptable anywhere in the Western world, except on this website, evidently.
In reply to yet another tu quoque attempt, Alyosha specifically wrote that he didn't want authorship credit. Speaking of Alyosha—whom I have great respect for—he is an example of someone who always gives other people proper credit when he uses their ideas, which should be standard behavior. After he credited me as coauthor in his Super Pitfall improvement, we worked together and made an even better movie.
This is about the intellectual property rights of everyone on the site, not just me. I have in fact defended someone else's work on the exact same principle: Post #495619
If the policy of the site really is that uncredited theft of ideas is acceptable and only input matters, then there is nothing stopping people from directly copying input, making it look "different enough" by changing the timing of inconsequential movements/jumps (it is now their own "original input"), finding 1 frame of improvement at the end, and claiming it as their own work. There is also a disincentive to provide any substance in submission text, because are just giving someone else a how-to guide to stealing your work without credit. (Of course, ideally people would both improve your work and properly credit you for your contribution to encourage collaboration and an optimal movie, but again the whole point here is that this site's stance on plagiarism creates a bad faith environment with the apparent justification that crediting too many people, even when they deserve it, is somehow bad.)
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
I submit movies allowing others to use my ideas as long as credit is given, per CC. Even if it were public domain, there is still plagiarism protection. "Romeo & Juliet by DreamYao" would be plagiarism of Shakespeare's work; public domain just gives DreamYao the right to publish "Romeo & Juliet by Shakespeare." Likewise, you cannot steal the entire plot, setting, conflict, and structure of R&J and claim it is your own work just because you changed the characters' names.
In proper English, the stage 6 submission text would say, "I had to wait 10 frames so that I could use the solution that Arc already found." No, DreamYao did not independently come up with the house escape, stage 4 X-position boost, big guy boost, etc. He did not just compare times to my movie as a reference. If you say he independently created the movie "from scratch," you are saying his movie would be as optimized as it is even if no previous GnG movies existed. If Koh1fds or hirexen (Karnov) want to make a claim of authorship, that is fine with me.
Plagiarism is passing off another person's ideas as your own without attribution; TASVideos does not have the authority to redefine this concept. Plagiarism is easy to identify with these 3 steps:
Is the creator aware of the source material? (Yes)
Did the creator take ideas from the source material? (Yes)
Did the creator give credit to the source material? (No)
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
It's not hard to give credit. All it takes is "& Arc." I always properly credit people who contribute to my movies even though I really worked on them alone, because I am not a plagiarist. My ideas and techniques are used in nearly all parts of this movie, with a few optimizations added. DreamYao waited until I had done all the hard work researching and discovering optimal manipulations, routes, tricks, etc throughout 11 TAS versions in 12 years and then swooped in to take all the credit for himself by slightly improving a few parts. It is ridiculous to believe that DreamYao completely independently created this movie. He improved on my work.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
I think that the goal choice is fine. Uncommon goals are acceptable and encouraged for Moons. It is clear what the goal choice is and how it could objectively be improved (by pressing A fewer times). The key phrase is "offer new TAS material," which this movie does. Yes, there are 5 branches for this game already, and this movie would make it 6. But they all are both entertaining and substantially unique in gameplay. And again with this movie, the restriction makes it both entertaining and clearly distinct from any other branch.
There have been bad goal choices in other SMB submissions, such as pacifist, which does not really add entertainment to this game nor distinguish itself from the any% branch.
It is reasonable for a person to ask in good faith why this movie should be accepted after #3556: Brandon's NES Super Mario Bros. "minimum button presses" in 05:48.04 was rejected, but I see a clear difference. Although the minimal buttons pressed submission was a technical challenge, the gameplay still looked fairly similar to the any% movie. And, worse, it lacked entertainment because it generally looked like a very sloppy any% attempt. Whereas with this minimal A presses submission, the gameplay of every stage must be totally reevaluated to consider factors that were previously unimportant. And the resulting entertainment level is very high because of the outstanding creative solutions found by the authors to minimize A presses.
Perhaps on a visual-only level, some people may complain that it is not as entertaining as seeing non-stop high speed action. But that is not the only way to hold someone's attention. It is intellectual entertainment, at the very least. It is like the difference between an action film and a mystery film. Both are entertaining for different reasons.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Samsara wrote:
asking for feedback once again
My initial impression was that it looked like [4260] GBC Hamtaro: Ham-Hams Unite! by illayaya in 43:02.29. Both are cute animal protagonists in games based on anime/manga, but there appears to be no direct connection between the development of the two games. Hamtaro is a Vault movie, so "he cute" is not a good reason by itself for Moons.
However, this movie is more entertaining than Hamtaro because most of the gameplay in Hamtaro is just talking to one hamster and then running to another hamster somewhere else. Although the overworld and whirlpool parts are not very interesting, most of Shounen Ashibe is spent platforming. It's the non-linear platforming style with the objective of collecting items before reaching the exit, which is significantly superior to pure left-to-right platforming and a strong argument toward Moons.
Still, half of the published movies on the site are platformers, and so I feel like I've seen this type of thing a lot, especially in SNES and Genesis games. But, those movies usually are Moons. Even [3704] Genesis Chester Cheetah: Wild Wild Quest by Jigwally in 09:45.69, which is a fairly good gameplay comparison to this movie off the top of my head, is Moons.
The current overall site distribution of tiers is
5.0% Stars
57.7% Moons
37.3% Vault
But 71.7% of Platform games are Moons or Stars, so as a group they are seen a bit more favorably.
Furthermore, 81.3% of SNES Platform games are Moons or Stars. The ones that end up in Vault tend to be slower paced and/or pure left-to-right movement.
The gameplay here is pretty quick and sharp with a few little boosts here and there. The fact that it's a seal rather than a human is interesting. The music and sound is suitable for the game—not too noticeable, but appropriate for the tone, and standard SNES style. Overall it's probably in the 55th to 60th percentile of entertainment, maybe higher for people who like this kind of thing. I would be surprised if it did not make Moons.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
greysondn wrote:
The problem with free-form creativity activities is that "proper" turns out to be very loose and at times poetic when judging whether something is "properly done". There would have to be a strong definition of what, exactly, the goals are in order to judge relative speeds in a universally fair manner. In that sense, the community would have to establish a category with constraints.
If I were to make a 'proper game' of Color-A-Dinosaur played within Mario Paint, I think these 3 rules would be sensible:
1. The goal is to finish coloring as fast as possible AND
2. All white spaces must be filled with a color AND
3. Any two filled spaces that touch must be a different color (to prevent using a single color to fill every space). [This could be changed to something similar, such as requiring a minimum of 2 or 3 colors for each drawing.]
It would be up to the author to choose aesthetically pleasing colors/patterns that enhance the entertainment.
greysondn wrote:
However, a followup question: Why this specific recreation instead of some other coloring-based video game? More narrowly, where should the community draw the line in permitting demands for new categories under such a framework?
I'm not sure I understand, so I'll say that the essence of the site is that all published are both games and art. Usually players use a game and create art. In this case, the author uses both a game and art to create both art and a game. I think this is good, and similar efforts would also be good if they continue to introduce interesting creative ideas.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Samsara wrote:
greysondn wrote:
I am still listening for guidance on what specifically the community would like to see in a run of Mario Paint. It may be of help to everyone here listening - judges and runner both - if the community would make moves to make that information clear to all of us, as we all seem to be moving to understand it for different reasons. (Yes, even just "do the meme!" gives some insight here.)
Absolutely this. Everyone interested in seeing Mario Paint published, please pitch in with what you'd like to see in a future submission!
I would not be interested in a Mario Paint tech demo that has no real gameplay, and I'm not sure such a movie would be publishable.
I like the movie in its current form pretty well, not just for the memes. I think it would be publishable as long as there is a real gameplay element. Mario Paint is a "published video game," giving it initial site eligibility. However it is really just an art program on a cartridge, and so the author has to do something especially creative and introduce actual gameplay in order to make it publishable. But the author has done so by using Mario Paint as a resource to recreate Color-A-Dinosaur, which can be considered a game as long as there is a specific goal (like properly coloring all the dinosaurs as fast as possible).
Color-A-Dinosaur may not be a very interesting game on its own, but the fact that it is being played via Mario Paint makes it interesting. I believe it is more similar to [2513] SNES Super Mario World "arbitrary code execution" by Masterjun in 02:25.19 than [1734] DS Brain Age "playaround" by Ryuto in 06:33.66 because, similarly, Pong and Snake are not particularly interesting games, but it is very interesting to see them played via Super Mario World. (I realize the creation method is different.)
To summarize, I like seeing Mario Paint used as a resource to create a whole new game (like Color-A-Dinosaur) that has a gameplay objective that is optimizable (not necessarily speed, but speed makes the most sense). The created game itself does not have to be all that interesting if the method of constructing the game is what makes the movie impressive and creative, which is the case in this scenario.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
I believe that the SNES Test Program discussion is relevant to this submission. This type of submission is what I was trying to anticipate in that thread. The question is what exactly is the game here? Do you accept Mario Paint as a "video game" (not talking about the Gnat Attack mini-game)? If yes (because it was published) then what exactly is the gameplay? It's an art program. Is the Mario Paint software being used as a resource to play a different game? I took a pro-creativity position in the SNES Test Program thread, and now that there is a relevant submission it seems that sentiment has shifted to the pro-creativity position.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Ah yes, Power Punch II: Even Punchier, the infamous sequel to everyone's favorite boxing game, Power Punch I.
Being Champion of the Universe is pretty impressive, but I'm concerned that if every possible quantum outcome is realized, Tough Guy Tyler may not be Champion of All Possible Universes.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Kung Knut wrote:
It is not Error himself that should be talked to. It is the nameless man in Mido that should be talked to.
Talking to the nameless Man in Mido changes RAM (and the save file) permanently much in the same way that talking to Bagu does. Bagu's note changes the action of the river man in Saria permanently. The Mido-man's "note" changes the action of Error of Ruto permanently.
I fully agree that Link does not need to speak to Error, to the red ache in Nabooru, to the bot in Saria, and even to the river man in Saria. Neither of these are "actions or items that can be objectively measured". Neither change RAM (nor the save file) permanently.
Talking to the nameless man in Mido, however, is an action that can be objectively measured, just as talking to Bagu is. It changes RAM (and the save file) permanently and can be counted towards 100% completion.
Ok, let's assume that the Mido Man gives Link an actual note. My 100% definition included the word "meaningful." I am not doing all things that can be objectively measured because that would open up killing all enemies, going in every house, reading every town sign, walking on every tile, etc. (because there is a finite limit to all of those things, e.g., 8 town signs exist). The issue is whether Mido Man is meaningful. 'Meaningful' means something that directly helps Link on his adventure.
The six quest items all have direct consequences. Quest items are meaningful only because they lead to other meaningful things.
It is impossible to get Jump without the Trophy.
It is impossible* to get the Hammer without Bagu's note.
It is impossible to get Life without the Mirror.
It is impossible to get Fairy without the Water of Life.
It is impossible to get Reflect without the Child.
It is impossible to get Fire without the Water.
But the Island Palace is accessible without Mido Man/Error.
For Mido Man's note to be meaningful, one has to take the position that Error's tip, itself, is meaningful. If one took this position, then all of the tips from townsfolk would have to be considered part of the 100% as well, and perhaps all information (like town signs) would have to be included too. But the only 'information' that is meaningful is when Link learns a spell or sword technique. If Error's tip is not meaningful then the Mido Man's note is not meaningful either.
I agree that it would be easy to edit Mido Man into the movie. I just philosophically disagree that it should be done.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Kung Knut wrote:
Speaking of future versions, there is a seventh quest item that fits your category definition "actions or items that can be objectively measured": Talking to a guy in Mido permanently changes what Error of Ruto says when spoken to. Not much different from Bagus note (imagine the guy saying "Show my note to Error of Ruto" instead of "Ask Error of Ruto about the palace"). First time playing the game, Error's new message is practically essential for game progress, since it gives the location of the cave to palace 3.
Edit: If you agree with my reasoning on this seventh quest item, it should be trivial to edit into this submission on your only visit to Mido, since you reset after getting the fairy spell.
I'm glad you mentioned the quest items. I understand that it may appear that Link is only talking to Bagu (and, to a lesser extent, only talking with the Mirror Lady and Thirsty Lady). So it may appear that those are actions, because there is no visual representation of the note, mirror, or water—in contrast to the trophy, water of life, and child.
However, they are, in fact, all items. The six quest items appear sequentially in the RAM:
$0798 changes from 0 to 16 after getting the Trophy
$0799 changes from 0 to 1 after getting the Mirror
$079A changes from 0 to 8 after getting Bagu's note
$079A changes from 8 to 72 after getting the Water of Life (possibly 64 if no note)
$079B changes from 0 to 1 after getting the Water
$079C changes from 0 to 32 after getting the Child
And so the main point is that Bagu actually gives Link a physical note to give to the River Man, not just a verbal message.
I understand that Error is a famous meme. But if talking to him counted as a meaningful action, then I think that talking to any character that gives gameplay tips would also have to count. There is a red ache in Nabooru who gives a tip about a Heart Container if Link talks to it twice, for example. I think it would be subjective to determine which characters have useful tips, and I don't think getting tips from characters is meaningful. Also Bagu's note is a required item to cross the bridge in Saria to Death Mountain, whereas the Island Palace is accessible regardless of whether Link talks to Error.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Kung Knut wrote:
Hmm... It works that way on my Swedish PAL Zelda 2 NES cart from 1988. Perhaps it's a PAL only "feature"? If I have, say, 100 exp and next level is 5000 when I place the crystal, wait for the exp ticking, and A+UP-reset when it has ticked to, say 110, then when I restart, the exp starts ticking from 0 all the way to 4890 (5000 - 110).
I can actually even restart on any save file, and the "buffered" exp carries over to that save file. It was fun playing around with as a child, to get lots if exp to a new game file. Sorry, I thought this was well known.
I see now, there seems to be a difference between using CONTINUE and SAVE. If I use CONTINUE, the XP resets to 0 and doesn't increment. But if I use SAVE, then the XP increments in the North Castle.
But as you mentioned, the issue is that the XP starts from 0 and only goes up to the difference between the next level and what the XP was before the restart. And so if I were to restart after Palace 3 with 1220 XP, it would go up to (5000-1220=) 3780 XP. Then I would have to gain another 1220 XP to reach Attack-7, and that's too much.
From there it gets more complicated, because the next logical idea would be to minimize the amount of XP gained before the crystal so that a restart would give almost the full 5000 XP. I would have to gain a minimum of 301 XP in Palace 3, but in reality it might be more, which could be a problem. Using a SAVE restart could cut out ~5.8 seconds of waiting for XP to increment, but it would be at the cost of avoiding all the Magic upgrades in Palace 3. I would have to go into Palace 4 at 7-1-1 instead of 7-4-1. I would lose ~1 second at the Palace 4 crystal because it would take longer to refill the magic bar. Then I would finish Palace 4 at 8-4-1 instead of 8-5-1. I need to finish Palace 5 at Magic-8 or be close to it. I'd be at 3300/6000. I'd need more XP in Palace 6. I'd have to open the menu 3 times to use Reflect to kill 6 wizzrobes. There might be some other differences as well.
Overall I think that it could theoretically work to save a little time. I am not sure that it would work in practice. If it works, it would require significantly redoing the second half of the movie. For now I think it is minor enough to allow some time to pass and then look at it again in a future improvement movie, when there may be other improvement ideas as well. It is an intriguing idea with real potential, though.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Kung Knut wrote:
A question: When placing a crystal and the exp begins to tick, one can UP+A and have the exp continue ticking on restarting in the North castle. Was this considered (to avoid waiting for level up), but not useful anywhere?
As far as I know, XP from a crystal does not continue incrementing after restarting. I checked it again after your post. Restarting at any time before reaching the level-up resets XP to 0. Knowing that XP resets to 0 after a restart was a major factor in XP planning. If XP continued incrementing after a restart, then I could have restarted earlier after Palace 3. But if I don't wait for the XP to reach 5000 and accept the level-up, I lose it all on restart.
Also sorry about the notification sounds in the temp encode.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Zinfidel wrote:
The bigger problem is that the movie desyncs for me at frame 110932. This happens shortly after Link collects the shield magic. After exiting that village, and re-entering the canyonway, link does not properly jump to the left to exit the sidescrolling section. This happened on every dump that I tried
EZGames69 wrote:
My first thought would be that this movie was made on fceux then converted to the bk2 format, and it just so happens that the one lag frame wasnt emulated in fceux but it is in bizhawk.
Yes, I made the movie in FCEUX and converted it to BizHawk.
I know the spot with the lag frame because I encountered it while making the movie. In FCEUX as well, sometimes a lag frame appeared at that spot, and sometimes it didn't. So it is not a BizHawk issue; it happens in both emulators. I don't have an explanation for it. But fortunately inserting or removing the lag frame does not affect the RNG. Adding the one extra frame to account for the lag frame is the right solution.
Thanks for all the positive feedback.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
mklip2001 wrote:
Minor note: Isn't the palace 6 boss actually named Barba in the original game lore? It would make sense for it to also be Volvagia, to refer to the same dragon as in Ocarina of Time.
The naming issue is interesting and I've spent a bit of time trying to verify it from the original sources.
The boss isn't listed in the Japanese Zelda II manual. The name seems to originate from the 1987 Futabasha Zelda II guide.
The Japanese name is バルバジア
I am no expert in Japanese, but it seems to translate directly as Barubajia.
バ = Ba
ル = ru
バ = ba
ジ = ji
ア = a
The American Zelda II manual also does not list the boss. But it appears in Nintendo Power #4 with the name Barba, which is just a shortened version of Barubajia.
As for how it went from Barubajia to Volvagia... evidently it is from ヴァルバジア (Varubajia) in Ocarina of Time.
As far as I can tell, 'Volvagia' has been retroactively retranslated as the English name of both the Ocarina of Time and Zelda II dragon bosses.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Kung Knut wrote:
I agree with this. Definitely avoid L+R and scroll lock as an entertainment tradeoff, but include all kinds of warps (maybe there are even warps between palaces that can be utilized in 100%?). I believe that maxing out levels will make the TAS more enjoyable to watch, as Arc's monster killing is always a blast, and you have so many more locations to visit where you can raise entertainment by killing monsters. I would personally not have included the dolls, but I have nothing against it, either.
Looking forward to watching this!
Thanks. There won't be a warp from one palace to another because there's no incentive to revisit a previous palace with the 100% goal. But there will be at least one Fairy warp that hasn't been used in any previous movies. (It saves about 11 seconds.) There might be a second new Fairy warp, but I'm not sure whether it will work. I'll test it when I get to that point. I'm in Palace 5 right now. It's all planned out and so far there have been no major problems.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
The rationale is that those glitches make the movie unwatchable. The 5-minute glitched movie exists for people who want to see the game played that way. From a few posts ago:
Arc wrote:
I've been thinking about which way would be most entertaining to TAS 100%. I think it's best not to do any serious gamebreakers, because if people are watching 100%, I think that they want to explore of whole game "in peace" without graphical corruption or other glitches that would make the game not "authentic."
It's not just a matter of technically gathering every item. It's the enjoyment of seeing the process of facing all the challenges that the Zelda II world offers. The priority on the site is entertainment. It's the difference between Moons (or Stars) and Vault.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Here is a preview of 100% with everything before Parapa Palace
http://tasvideos.org/userfiles/info/68592214198229296
Perfect death cycle again in Death Mountain (i.e. 1 frame slower would have lost 21 frames).
100% really is like a final exam of all accumulated Zelda II knowledge.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
An additional factor that convinces me to include Link Dolls is what happens with the 9000 XP upgrades. It acts like a normal level upgrade, but it gives Link the 1UP instead of the Level-9. And so although the game has infinite potential 1UPs, it does not have infinite Link Dolls. If, hypothetically, a Link Doll appeared in Link's hand during the 9000 XP upgrade, then I would say that there are infinite Link Dolls and therefore they cannot be considered part of a 100% run. But this is a clear-cut case where there are only 6 Link Dolls in the game.
The definition of 100% needs to be internally consistent, and so I think that the important questions are:
1. Can it be objectively measured and maximized?
Yes:
-Attack/Magic/Life levels (8/8)
-All Heart/Magic Containers (4/4)
-All Link Dolls (6/6)
-All inventory items (8/8)
-All quest MacGuffins (6/6)
-All spells (8/8)
-All sword techs (2/2)
-All keys (31?/31?)
-All bosses (6+2/6+2)
-All palaces (7/7)
No:
-P-Bags, Jars, Fairies, 1UPs (infinite)
2. If not infinite, is it a meaningful action or item toward the adventure (lowercase) of Link?
Examples of No:
-Reading every town sign
-Going in every house
-Touching every square on the map
It is true that Link Dolls and Keys are not "permanent upgrades" but they are both items that directly help Link achieve his goals. They also both cause a verifiable change to the menu (incrementing lives/keys).
Getting all levels to 8 is possibly the most interesting and challenging part because it requires the XP to be planned out beforehand. It also creates a "compelling difference" from the other branches because of the need to collect much more XP. Otherwise the levels would just be 6-5-1 or whatever again.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Yes, 100% No Scroll Lock is an accurate RTA description. I don't see why the fairy glitch or any other warp should be arbitrarily excluded when they are obviously faster, since there is a TAS already specifically dedicated to not using warps. The goal here is 100%, not 100% warpless.
I don't understand how RTA runs are called 100% without max levels. How is it full completion when the levels are clearly not fully completed? Levels can be objectively measured and maximized. The Link to the Past TAS upgraded all items to the highest level (e.g. Sword-4) and obtained half magic. I don't know what the RTA argument is supposed to be, but I think the TAS needs all 8s.
Likewise, what is the justification not to collect Link Dolls? It makes sense to exclude P-Bags, jars, and fairies because there's an infinite supply of them and they aren't really "items." But there are only six Link Dolls. So, I don't see how the game is 100% without collecting 6/6 Link Dolls. Perhaps the most important point is that Link raises the Link Dolls over his head when he grabs them. They are clearly collectable items. I think the RTA community is wrong to exclude them from the 100% definition.
There's also a finite number of Keys and getting them seems rather obvious if the goal is 100%. But it's also perfectly fine to Fairy through a door before getting a key, if it's faster.
Yes, hearing from other runners would be insightful.
The Japanese name is バルバジア
I am no expert in Japanese, but it seems to translate directly as Barubajia.
バ = Ba
ル = ru
バ = ba
ジ = ji
ア = a
The American Zelda II manual also does not list the boss. But it appears in Nintendo Power #4 with the name Barba, which is just a shortened version of Barubajia.
As for how it went from Barubajia to Volvagia... evidently it is from ヴァルバジア (Varubajia) in Ocarina of Time.
As far as I can tell, 'Volvagia' has been retroactively retranslated as the English name of both the Ocarina of Time and Zelda II dragon bosses.