Posts for Arc


1 2 3 4 5
21 22
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
I’m not familiar with the Hamtaro manga/anime, which has a target audience of tween girls but evidently has fairly widespread appeal. The game sold well in Japan, and Nintendo had enough faith in it to release it in America and Europe. It looks like the GBC BIOS adds about 185 frames, and so the total improvement should be about 350 frames. There is not much to say about the gameplay. Most of the game consists of hamsters talking to each other. Not that it’s trivial, it’s just lacking action. The hamsters are large and cute. But otherwise the game seems like a small step forward from Zork. Previous entertainment ratings are fairly low. People who are into it tend to like the big innocent eyes and winsome language rather than the actual game. It should stay in the Vault.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
I’m looking at judicial precedent for what “new content” means in the context of second-generation console games in need of an end point. I consistently see three aspects used to define "new content" in previous judgments: 1. Levels are new content. Landmark case: #6323: Spikestuff's A2600 Tapper in 06:05.47 2. Increasing difficulty is new content. Landmark case: #5952: Noxxa's Coleco Dragonfire in 01:40.60 3. RNG changes to enemies/obstacles, on their own, are not new content if they don't increase difficulty. Landmark case: #6588: Lobsterzelda's A2600 Bobby is Going Home in 03:26.03 The single dot symbol on the right side of the screen indicates that the game starts on the fastest speed, but the author says that there are 7 loops of increasing difficulty. If I understand right, the author also says that the 7th loop is unbeatable. In that case, the game should be played until it reaches the point of being impossible to continue. Whether the last loop is possible or impossible, I don't think a single loop qualifies as a complete movie, since increasing difficulty is new content.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Regarding the actual TAS, this game came along fairly late in the Atari 2600 lifecycle (1987), but it still precedes the well-known Skate or Die! It definitely has the feel of a David Crane game. But when I started looking at it from the routing perspective, it reminded me a bit of the work I did on Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Some aspects of the gameplay or route may initially look questionable, but usually the reason is that Sk8er Boi has to jump before he can crouch through a tunnel, and he has to be moving left or right to initiate the jump. Knowing that, the one part that still looked uncertain was the part labeled as the orange section. The author probably examined this route idea, but I checked it anyway. The blue path is the alternate possibility, but if my timing is right, it's about 37 frames slower than the red path that the author used. Whether to put the movie in the Vault or Moons is a tough call. Most A2600 games go to the Vault. However Crane's Activision essentially created the concept of third-party development because the talent of Crane and others was going unappreciated in-house at Atari. Activision is well-represented among the few A2600 Moons. This game came along after Crane had moved on to Absolute, but the point remains that his quality typically exceeds that of in-house Atari or the flood of Activision wannabes that contributed to the '83 crash. Anyway, the game is a fun time, and the skitchin' adds extra entertainment. I think that the movie belongs in Moons. According to the manual, you are Totally Awesome, so congrats on that as well.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
The main question here is exactly how bad is Dash Galaxy? The combination of Australia’s Beam Software and Data East USA does not inspire much initial confidence. There doesn’t seem to be much of a backstory to the game. Data East had been publishing bad NES games for years, and Dash Galaxy was one of the many forgettable games quickly pumped out by Beam between 1989 and 1991. The movie input ends early. Using real-time speedrun timing, I recorded the time as 6:07.53, which is faster than the real-time speedrun record of 6:15, but not by much. The gameplay has two different styles. The first style is best described as a weak ripoff of Bomberman, but there are not many bombs exploding. The second style is a platformer with a lanky character somewhat resembling Albatross from Rolling Thunder. The gameplay appears unimpressive mainly because of the awful controls that allow Dash to do either a long jump (while running) or a high jump (while walking) but not both at the same time. Although Dash moves faster left-right while doing long jumps, there is also a significant delay every time he lands. I sample-tested the input from the first platformer screen, and I beat it by 3 frames on my first attempt. (The screen turns black on frame 1545 v 1548.) Since Dash immediately does the exact same screen, that’s another 3 frames that could be saved, in theory. The author says the game has no RNG, and so I assume that these improvements are genuine and could be incorporated easily into the TAS. I can’t say whether there are other sub-optimal parts since I haven’t examined the input anywhere else. The currently published movie has quite low entertainment ratings, although I should disclose that my own rating of it is the lowest one publicly available. Regardless, the movie clearly belongs in the Vault, as Nach judged.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
When I first saw this game, a number of similar shooters came to mind. Operation Wolf (no TAS available) is the most similar, since Mechanized Attack was likely meant to capitalize on that game’s arcade and critical success. Cabal (also no TAS available) is on the more entertaining side for the shooting gallery type of game. Unfortunately the closest TASes are Gotcha! The Sport! and Lethal Enforcers, both of which have very low entertainment ratings. Mechanized Attack is fairly low on entertainment as well, but on the positive side, the game doesn’t take too long and the stages have variety. The shooting looks quick visually. Compare the tank fight (5:15 in the video) of this TAS with the real-time speedrun record, and it becomes obvious that the game is not trivial. For the final boss, I looked at alternating between shots and grenades in an attempt to avoid blank frames between each attack, but that idea is clearly slower. The input seems well-optimized. Although the game was not a big seller nor particularly well-liked, the Vault exists for this type of game. It comes from a notable publisher (SNK) and is one of the few third-party NES Zapper games. It has a place in history worth documenting. BRAAM! Another game completed for TASMania.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
If I understand correctly, it appears that this run should have a branch label such as "all obstacles." The counter to the right of the timer counts down from 30, and the run indeed completes all the obstacles. But if aiming for any %, the real-time speedrun record is a little over 29 seconds, since it does not complete all obstacles. However, "all obstacles" seems like it would qualify as a "full completion," and so the run would be Vault-eligible.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
One of the biggest challenges in the run was calculating whether leveling up was worth the time that it takes, because it takes 184 frames to accept a level-up compared to 29 frames to cancel. I understand that it looks like the 1000 Exp is wasted, but basically I don't want the level up because I want to limit Link's final levels to Attack 4 and Magic 5. The Maze is also the last chance to restart in the run (which resets Exp to 0), and so the math wouldn't work properly if done otherwise. Here's a post where I sort of explained it at the time: http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=442011#442011
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Arc wrote:
I have a revised movie that is 2 frames faster in the final boss section. I'll make a separate post for it.
Judge, here is an updated movie file http://tasvideos.org/userfiles/info/64753369928898037 Would you believe that the far-right path is the fastest? The left path is the shortest distance. But the weakness in this path is that Lucia's vertical speed while flying is capped at 32. Jumping creates faster vertical movement. Therefore the obvious path to consider is the far-left path. And although the detour requires more leftward movement, the increased vertical speed allows Lucia to reach the exit door faster. But there is a critical flaw with the far-left path: Darutos isn't on the left side of the screen. Therefore it isn't possible to flashsword him unless Lucia does a good amount of running back to the right. But the primary goal is to move Lucia quicker vertically, and so this idea fails. If Darutos is on the right, then why not take the far-right path? This idea didn't immediately work either. Darutos is at the center-right, not the far-right. And so although Darutos appears partially on screen now, the flashsword only grazes him and doesn't kill him. But if Lucia takes a little bit of time to move more to the left before flying, then flashsword hits Darutos with full force and kills him. The end result is just a little bit faster overall.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Thanks. If I don't damage boost from any particular enemy, there are many possible reasons: (1) Lucia must maintain a minimum HP level for the upcoming boss, (2) the enemy would do too much damage to make the boost worthwhile, (3) the RNG would require a delay longer than the benefit from the boost, (4) the terrain is restricting movement, (5) the boost negatively affects future boost RNG. A notable HP planning chain is stages 6-9. Lucia has 820 HP after the stage 6 boss. There's an opportunity for a damage boost at the end of 6 from a Nigito, but it would cost -400 HP. It's skipped because HP plans are locked-in through stage 9. Lucia goes -500/+500 on stage 7 to maintain 820 HP. Then it's a necessary -700/+500 on stage 8, leaving 620 HP. It's just barely enough for the -600 hit from Joyraima on stage 9. After that point, bosses don't do damage and HP is used purely for boosts. I have a revised movie that is 2 frames faster in the final boss section. I'll make a separate post for it.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
nymx wrote:
Since your last submission of this game, I've become a fan of how detailed your work has been.
Thanks, I enjoy planning everything in advance. When I first started this game, I thought that the map/route was going to be overwhelmingly complex. It was kind of disappointing to realize that Floor 1 is actually pretty small, and the rest of the game is almost totally linear.
ktwo wrote:
I couldn't find any improvements that didn't impact e.g. the health. Arc, I finally got the RTA run I was looking for yesterday (4:45). Since I'm not aware of anyone else actively playing this game, you can probably catch your breath from this game for a while now. :-)
The TAS in RTA time is about 4:24 now, yeah? 4:45 is excellent. I tried one RTA attempt for fun and got 5:40. I appreciate that you helped lower the TAS time. Any minor timesavers before the critical 2-7 to 2-9 section probably wouldn't matter because of the RNG. There may be a few theoretical frames to save with better overall RNG on Floor 3.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
For the warp glitch movie, I only edited a few parts, in contrast to being the primary author of the two longer movies. So all I can say is that it's possible that some other parts are not optimal, but it would require examining the whole movie to find out for sure.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Archanfel wrote:
Why only 1 extra Red Potion is maximum, what obstacle to receive more than one? Not enough mana for Flash or what? And can enemy spawns can change for the better or currently enemy pattern is perfect?
The obstacle is that red potions appear on a 256-frame cycle. In other words, there is a 1-frame window every 4.26 seconds. The enemy has to appear at nearly the exact right moment in the cycle, otherwise Lucia has to stand still rather than continue moving forward. For example, look at the potion drop from the egg at the start of stage 11 (10:19 in the video). I intentionally timed that flash to drop an orange potion even though I had no intention of picking it up. You can see that even though the timing is fairly close, Lucia would have to wait way too long to pick up the potion. I can't say that the current spawns are perfect. In general, they are pretty good. In Zelda II, the enemies are totally predetermined. This game is more random. Certain enemies appear on certain stages, but they can change spawn positions or not spawn at all, based on changes in timing.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
I don't get Flash until the end of stage 9. Before then, I have to kill enemies with the sword. So I could get one red potion at a time (100 HP). Assuming that it would take no time to slow down to kill the enemy, and also assuming that the enemy appeared in Lucia's path at the exact right time in the 256-frame cycle (rare), I would still have to wait for the potion to drop after the kill. I believe that there is a 32 frame delay for a potion to drop, and that is greater time loss waiting than what I would gain back from a boost. Even with Flash on the later stages, I could maybe get 1 red potion with minimal delay, which would maybe (or maybe not) be worth one extra boost... but even if that's so, it's unknown how that would change enemy spawns and boosts in the future (they could change for the worse).
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Thank you. 0704 is speed 0036 is X 0038 is Y
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
EZGames69 wrote:
What harm comes from including it though?
Memory wrote:
That's not remotely a clear "no political statements in submissions" rule. I'm fairly sure several april fools submissions also do not stay entirely on topic.
The harm that comes is that the site is an international retro-gaming community, not an American far-left political activist site. People do not come here to hear political opinions, whether they agree with them or not. I also believe that this political statement, which is undeniably left-wing, is being given a pass because it is a popular opinion here. I doubt that the same standard would be applied to unpopular political statements. Do you want to invite unpopular political opinions as well as popular statements in submissions, or do you want to simply read about the movie? If we are going to say that there is no rule against saying whatever you want in submissions, then you are inviting illicit imagery, advertising, referral links, and whatever else is not illegal. What purpose other than self-interest does it serve to force these unrelated things into movie submission text? The author of this particular submission openly confesses that his statement has nothing to do with the movie and that he wrote it only because he believes submissions attract more views than regular posts. You can believe whatever you want, you can post whatever views you want, but do it in the proper place (on the forum). It's fine to liven up submission text with jokes or whatever, but the point of the submission page is to explain your movie.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
feos wrote:
Arc wrote:
It should be categorized as abuse of the submission mechanism.
What rule does it go against, or what loophole in the rules does it abuse?
"It is very important that you describe your movie in the following ways." "A “submission” is a candidate for a movie that will be published on this site." A political statement is not a description of the movie or the process involved in making the movie. It has no relation to the movie. There is an Off Topic forum for political statements.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Political statements don't belong in the submission text, regardless of whether readers agree with it or not. Most people on this site would not tolerate seeing far right-wing rhetoric in submission text, and the same standard should be applied no matter where the statement falls on the political spectrum. It should be categorized as abuse of the submission mechanism.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Confirmed, it is an excellent discovery that will save significant time. I'll redo the TAS in the near future.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Syllabus Precedent for the legitimacy of the game and branch was first established by the 2008 mmbossman 2104 ruling. It was upheld as a Moons-tier run by 2013 feos 3997. This TAS is about nine seconds faster than the currently published TAS. Speedruns for the Japanese game Hebereke are faster, but the games cannot be directly compared. Speedruns for Ufouria are significantly slower. Opinion The game qualifies for the Metroidvania platform-adventure genre. The primary feeling that I had while watching it is that it is what Super Pitfall could have been if Super Pitfall had been well-made. It also felt like a "kawaii" version of Castlevania (like Kid Dracula). The best comparison may be Little Samson because of the rapid character changes. All of these games are pretty entertaining. Some of the quick vertical movements were the most entertaining aspect for me. The bombing parts and the repetition of the boss fights were the least entertaining moments, but not much can be done about those issues. Generally, the movie was neutral-to-positive. The Moons classification for Ufouria is fairly clear cut. The optimization is at a high level. I watched this movie side-by-side with Aglar’s movie. There was a notable difference in the improvement of the tree area. It never seemed to fall behind Aglar’s movie; instead it was always creeping ahead or staying even. It is clear that the author used advanced techniques to save time over a movie that was already very well done. The main concern that I had about this run was whether it would be appropriate to credit Aglar as co-author. The author admits that Aglar’s TAS was helpful. Even if the previous input wasn’t directly copied, should the ideas of the previous run be considered “public domain” in this case? Mainly, the light-switch skip (first discovered by KennyMan666) was implemented in the previous run by Aglar. It is a significant time-saver that is difficult for someone to independently discover and verify, and it significantly increases the entertainment value of the run by cutting out a boring sequence. Is there a reason to say that Aglar should not be credited as co-author? Overall, it’s a good improvement. The runtime may seem a little daunting, but I felt that there is enough variation in the setting, movement, and characters to keep it from getting boring. It is one of the Top 1000 movies on the site. For the reasons stated above, this movie deserves to be Accepted to Moons.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Syllabus There is no known history of TASing or competitive speedrunning for the game. It is a homebrew made in 2015. It falls into the Platform-Puzzle genre. The game works with the GB World BIOS. There is a clear ending that congratulates the player after completing level 50. Opinion At a minimum, the quality and notability of the homebrew is good enough for Vault consideration, and the debate is really over whether it is good enough for Moons. While watching the movie, I felt that the most similar game to it is Solomon’s Key. The commonalities are the static-screen levels, moving on blocks suspended in mid-air, and the need to avoid the dangers on the screen. I consider Solomon’s Key more entertaining between the two, but I’m higher than the consensus view on Solomon’s Key. Other less similar games that came to mind are Maoi-kun on the optimistic side and Kwirk on the duller side. Compared only to other puzzle games, The Bouncing Ball is on the higher end of the entertainment scale, but that still leaves it in an uncertain place between the Vault and Moons. On a technical level, it is clear that the authors have put in a lot of effort. The game appears simple, but the authors have deeply analyzed both the movement and strategic aspects of the game, which are surprisingly rich. There are many solutions displayed that are not intuitive. In the few situations in which there is waiting time, the authors make an effort to create entertaining movements. The movie has gone through much refinement. It seems that it would be difficult for a speedrunner to replicate all of the tricks used. Feedback has been mostly positive. The main cause for concern seems to be the lack of music in the game. I actually felt more immersed in the game because of the lack of music. The ball makes different sounds when it comes into contact with different types of objects, all of which I felt were appropriate and useful for increasing focus on the gameplay. Overall, I found it entertaining, rather than a mere guide to solving the puzzles. The levels become increasingly complex as the game progresses, creating a sort of “rags to riches” storytelling arc that increases the emotional connection. Because of the level of optimization, the length of the movie feels just right to avoid boredom. The game is not too short to establish a proper feel, nor does it drag on too long like Boxxle. The authors deserve acknowledgement for elevating the game beyond expectations. For the reasons stated above, this movie deserves to be Accepted to Moons.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Memory wrote:
some people were proposing accepting this submission to Vault. If the tier is Vault, this submission becomes substantially sub-optimal as it intentionally avoids damage, even where it could save time. A movie that intentionally avoids damage as an artistic choice is acceptable for moons, but not for Vault.
It is true that Vault movies should not have goals that sacrifice time, but it is also true that judicial precedent was established when the previous movie with the same no-damage goal was accepted for the Vault. Doesn't stare decisis have the higher priority?
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Syllabus Precedent for the legitimacy of the game and branch was established by 2012 adelikat 1163. The previous run was accepted to the Vault, and the justification was that the game lacks variety. This TAS is about 1:44 faster than the currently published TAS. It is similarly faster than the best time on the speedrun.com leaderboard. The movie satisfies the “not slower than” condition. Opinion The game qualifies for the Metroidvania platform-adventure genre. The film on which the game is based—Rambo: First Blood Part II—is a classic of the 1980s action genre. The combination of these two facts should theoretically yield a vastly entertaining game. 92 percent of Metroidvania movies are Moons or Stars, yet the currently published Rambo movie is one of the few in the Vault. The viewers agreed with the tier placement; the previous movie has unanimous low entertainment ratings. But does this new movie change the entertainment value significantly? It is certainly an improvement to some degree. The gameplay is almost identical to Zelda II’s gameplay, which is well-liked enough that more games aside from this one have copied it. The problem in the previous movie was that there was too much continuous running around in an unclear manner, as if the entire game were nothing more than one long Zelda II random encounter screen. The multiple uses of the vertical wall glitch in the new movie provide a pleasant surprise and cut down on some of the endless running. However, the game is still not close to Zelda II’s entertainment level (as a game, not regarding any particular run), since Zelda II involves not just its gameplay mechanics but also the boss/enemy variety, item discovery, puzzle-solving, assortment of glitches, and route exploration. This game also suffers from the fact that the speedrun does not visually appear significantly different from the TAS. Much of the time lost in the speedrun compared to the TAS is from taking enemy damage, as opposed to any TAS-exclusive demonstrations. Talking to the final two characters appears optimized. Rambo could move further left to initiate the talk with Murdock earlier, but the backtracking afterward would add too much time. Rambo moves the minimal distance left needed to initiate conversation. However, I believe that there are at least minor optimization flaws in the movie. For example, early in the game (starting at frame 4700), Rambo changes direction at an exit, goes left for a little while, changes direction again at the next exit, and walks right for a while. In the current movie, the black screen comes up at the end of this sequence on frame 5755. When I tried it, I knocked four frames off and the black screen came up on frame 5751. I believe this part is a genuine timesave rather than an intentional delay to change RNG. But the author is correct to note that enemy placement can be bothersome and cause delays. Other feedback noted the AVGN glitch, in which Rambo took damage and fell through the floor. It appears to be an extension of the vertical wall glitch, except it is horizontal. When Rambo reaches the edge of the screen, the game has to eject him somewhere. For example, around frame 8100 in this movie, the author creates a right-side exit that shouldn’t exist, and so the game figures out somewhere to place him. In the AVGN glitch, it is oversimplified to say that it is a mere warp back to the beginning. AVGN first lands on a screen in the same industrial area, and then it appears that he triggers an exit in the ceiling rather than the floor. The game may be unsure where to eject him at this point and returns him to the beginning by default. It may operate similar to the fairy ceiling glitch in Zelda II. The Battle of Olympus, which is also very similar to Zelda II, has glitchy ceilings too. Although the glitch ultimately may not yield any shortcuts, it seems that it should at least be investigated further. It is worth noting that the author’s real life return to TASing this game after 14 years away (the previous movie was submitted in 2006) is a perfect parallel to the plot of First Blood Part II (1985), in which Rambo returns to Vietnam to search for POWs at the camp from which he escaped in 1971. The author deserves a standing ovation for this extraordinary effort to immerse himself in the psychological state of the character that he controls in the game. For the reasons stated above, this movie deserves to be Accepted into the Vault.
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Syllabus There is no known TAS precedent for this game. The movie must be examined from scratch. Nintendo officially licensed the game, which falls into the Action genre. The game is not trivial because even though it has some space shuttle cutscenes, stages within the missions require skill. After completing the sixth mission, the game has a clear ending, in which former US President George H. W. Bush appears. The current speedrun record according to speedrun.com is 56:44, timing from pressing Start to completing the final landing sequence. This TAS is more than two minutes faster, and so it satisfies the “not slower than” condition. Opinion The game has an intriguing premise that is unlike other games of the time period, and it is strong on audio/visual quality. But, because of the gameplay design—rather than any fault of the author—the movie is on the lower end of the entertainment scale. The main fault is the combination of the length and the repetitiveness of the shuttle launch and landing sequences. These sequences account for approximately half of the 54-minute runtime. They conjure memories of the infamous landing sequences from Top Gun, which has unanimous low entertainment ratings. The time spent in control of Astronaut Gamer is more entertaining. The least interesting of the astronaut mini-games is the six instances of fueling/boarding. It is a duller version of Elevator Action, in which the tension created by dodging enemies and navigating multiple elevators is replaced with simply beating the clock. But the three EVAs requiring construction of the space station are more interesting. The space movement is unorthodox and resembles the Moons-tier Solar Jetman, which is well-regarded specifically because of its physics. The three non-construction EVAs have more slow and steady straight-line movement, and so they are less interesting but still of some interest because of the exotic space setting. Even for the astronaut mini-games, Absolute’s game design didn’t provide the author with much opportunity to do anything other than complete the tasks in a straightforward manner. There is nothing readily available to exploit in terms of RNG, glitches, or shortcuts. The author demonstrates knowledge acquired from studying the instruction manual. The inputs are precisely timed in most cases. The author utilizes his extra lives. The movie properly ends on the last essential frame of input. The movie is very well-optimized. For the boarding stages, there is no U+D or L+R hyperspeed. Movement is timed to maintain acceleration. The oxygen and hydrogen have to be activated before gathering the crew. For the rescue on mission five, the CCCP station’s wing is solid material and requires a difficult curved path to go around. Movement immediately after the rescue is limited by the space debris. For the deaths on mission six, Astronaut Gamer needs to approach properly to get caught in the moving shaft—otherwise he’ll bounce off the wall. Death occurs when the shaft moves down. Thus, there are no easily spotted technical errors. A seemingly theoretical improvement is to get a faster security code at the start of the game. The code changes if the initial Start press is delayed. However, the numbers do not appear to really matter. While the numbers change, the input timing remains the same. For example, delaying Start by two frames means finishing the code two frames later. Thus, it seems that it cannot be done faster through RNG manipulation. As of this time, there is no other feedback to comment on. Overall, it appears that the author did the best that he could have with what the game offered. The author made this movie as part of the ongoing TASMania project, which began almost four years ago. He deserves special recognition for his outstanding efforts on that project. For the reasons stated above, this movie deserves to be Accepted into the Vault.
Post subject: Re: What defines the triviality of a game?
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
feos wrote:
If the game in its nature is trivial to TAS, any TAS of it is rejected, because it won't be a meaningful tool-assisted speedrun record.
Is it more precise to say that we don't want to publish movies that play a game as the creators' intended if such gameplay is trivial? In other words, if a trivial game gets broken, it can become non-trivial. Here is the simplest example I can think of: Imagine a simple game that you win by walking the character 2 pixels to the right, and the character can move 1 pixel per frame. The intended gameplay is trivial because someone could do it perfectly on their first playthrough with no knowledge of the game just by holding right for 2 frames. But then imagine that a TASer discovers that by holding L+R, the character obtains hyperspeed and moves 2 pixels to the right in 1 frame. Since this trick is unintended by the creators and the TASer has demonstrated special knowledge and/or talent to obtain a faster time, the "game" is no longer trivial, right?
Arc
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player (769)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 534
Location: Arizona
Thank you, that's very good info. Going through the warrior at 1-2 seems to be based on timing. I was able to do it either by going back right for a few frames or just standing still for a while, as long as the timing ends up the same when I get to him. But it did matter whether I jumped or not. Running straight through doesn't work because it seems that Goldmoon collides with the warrior's body without the jump. It's worth noting that in 1-4, hits from the dwarf are not solely based on timing. I got different results when using the same delay timing with different movements. There is a way to do this screen another 3 frames faster (11 faster than published), but then the bozak always shoots me on 1-5. The bozak's shot in 1-5 (and perhaps 2-6) seems somewhat timing based but also somewhat not. With the new timing, it doesn't shoot if I run right away. But if I created a delay at the start of the room, it would hit me with a shot. However, if I do the previous room in a different way with the same timing (or faster), the bozak does end up shooting me. So far I had worse luck with the arrows at 2-3, and the bozak still took his shot in 2-6. Changing the timing in the earlier Floor 2 rooms might change those things for the better. 'Exit skimming' seems somewhat related to the menu teleportation trick because it can somehow cause a shift to the next 16-pixel mark. It also seems to be more likely on screens that go right-to-left. It could be related to the fact that it's possible to slip through the baby dragon without using magic on the right-to-left screen (2-9), whereas it's seemingly impossible to do so on the left-to-right screens on Floor 3. The 'double speed' theory is interesting. Usually while moving, either the character's screen X-position is changing (0059) or the window position (006E) is changing. But indeed while going through the enemies in 1-2 and 2-1, both are changing simultaneously. However, they are not both changing when I slip through the bozak in 1-5. With a minor delay (2 pixels behind full speed), I got a clean slip through it.
1 2 3 4 5
21 22