I would like to know if the glitched run could be done faster by using the wizard, as you shouldn't need to collect two cards before being able to use the glitch.
If I'm not mistaken, the previous run was played on easy mode because bosses take too long to beat in the hardest difficulty, which made the run look boring.
On the other hand, I haven't played to River City Ransom, so I can't be of any help.
I'll vote 'Meh', because you spent more time traveling between places than doing things (which is not your fault), and the only interesting part in the run was the Doom fight.
Being a big fan myself of glitched runs, I vote yes in this movie.
"Uses death as a shortcut", he. You should add "Two players control one character", too, being the recorded demo one of them.
Voting No because you don't like the game is o_O. What's wrong if he played it flawlessly? Donkey Kong is boring but is more popular than supposed "excellent" games here. Popeye is also a classic.
And I really don't care if a game is a classic...Donkey Kong is also very boring to watch...(your run is well-done, but, again, boring to watch)
I find the Donkey Kong movie amazing, how he merely walks around the levels while every barrel and flame tries hard to avoid him, looking more like a Chuck Norris game than a Mario one. Seriously, a game that is a minute long is never "very boring to watch". I think a better example would be Kung Fu Master, which is truly there solely for competition purposes.
Cool, metajoking. Reminds me of the prison joke where guys throw out mere numbers to the laughter of others (all good jokes are already used and numbered). My post is probably metametajoking btw.
Is that one in which the person that must tell the joke says "four", and only
two people laugh? The first, because he told the joke in a funny way, and the second, because it was the first time he heard it.
The published movie is already a bit repetitive after some levels, and using only the 3-ball powerup would just make it more repetitive, and slower.
Ehm... I just don't know how to react to this... but basically I disagree with every word of this for a number of reasons. And using the 3-ball powerup only wouldn't be that much slower...
That's because I see both the 3-ball powerup and the Laser as stunts. I think showing two stunts is better than one, no matter how much cooler it is. I also think that missing to hit any block with a ball doesn't look nice, too.
One thing you could do is to place those stunts across the run to show different things as the run progresses, much like the "A link to the past" run does, showing new tricks as powers are gained.
There are two questions I'd like to ask (to everyone):
Do you like the restriction of only using the 3-ball powerup?Do you have problems if balls were lost to complete the level faster?
1. No. The published movie is already a bit repetitive after some levels, and using only the 3-ball powerup would just make it more repetitive, and slower.
2. One good thing of the published movie, is that it never misses a ball. However, if you can gain a significant ammount of time by missing extra-balls, then I would suggest doing so, as I think a shorter movie will be more enjoyable.
I was never able to beat that stupid game on a Commodore 64 because that stupid gate always killed me. Having to rewind the cassette every try was annoying, too.
Now that I know the trick to pass the gate... I'll let the game grow old as dust. It already took more time of my life than it deserved.
Why are you so rude with Phil? atro city talks as if he hadn't taken into account that the only way to know if a movie is the fastest is to test every input, which cannot be done with current technology.
If this movie has been possible, it's just because new ways to manipulate luck in this game were discovered. Without those new discoveries, it's likely that the last movie would be unbeatable.
If you expect people to wait until all tricks have been discovered before submiting a run, most Rockman movies wouldn't be there yet (and probably wouln't in the years to come).
Instead of starting a discussion, why don't you try to obsolete Circus Charlie? It's pretty short, too, and you would get rid of another famtasia movie. :D
Something must be done about this submission. It's the last one on queue with a number under 600.
I have watching it and it's boring. I think it would be more enjoyable if the ninja could simply ignore most enemies, but that still wouldn't be enough.
I'll vote NO, so there is space for better versions of the game.
I haven't watched this movie yet, but so far, Morimoto's Movie is one of the most popular among everybody I have exposed to TASes.
Even so, I agree that it should be improved, mostly because the "flying spaghetti monsters" part, but the new movie should keep the stunts. Another reason to improve it, is that it would obsolete another Famtasia movie.
Voting YES.
A question. On stage 3, where the giants with moustaches appear. I have tested it now and it is possible to make them fall from the bridge, if they are on it and walk down too much.
Have you tested it? Was it slower?
One friend purchased recently a collection pack with "The New Zealand Story" and shown me some warps. I wonder if Heaven could save you time, though it is unlikely.
I'm going to vote yes on this movie, though I agree it's not very fun if you haven't played the game.
Maybe you didn't know about the 'run' button. It's hard to beat the AI without using it, and forgetting about it it's a common mistake among my friends.
I find the computer AI rather easy to beat, but maybe that's because the game runs slow on my computer. After testing in other computers, I decided that the game at full speed is too fast, which makes it less enjoyable.
Sorry for being ignorant.
Can't you force the computer to make a move on this platform? This option was available in some Battle Chess games I own (for Amiga and PC).
I think that if the system allows you (and others) to do so, the most wise move is to vote for yourself.
The reason: if everyone votes for him/herself, the result is not different that if nobody voted his/her own work.
Why it's best: if someone chooses not to 'follow the etiquette' when people agreed not to vote for oneself, is detrimental for the others. On the second case, not following the etiquette is only detrimental for the performer.
Why democracy doesn't work: most people will dismiss self-voting without ever listening to this reasoning.
Why this doesn't matter: The votes on this forum are just orientative, and one vote more or less is not significant.