15 minute limit is lifted if you meet certain (easy-to-hit) criteria. Check your channel settings on that. (note there is a 12 hour limit for YT)
That said, thank you for the encode!
"Completionist", which can then get obsoleted directly by faster completion of same goals, more goals, or cross-obsoleted by an actual 100% run (as defined by the community, since a definition is not clear from the game itself).
On the other hand, if a focus on fastest time to end was made for a certain other submission last year rather than just meeting the frame rule, the judgement might not have been as controversial and possibly may have been different entirely.
In this scenario, though, entertainment is definitely the better choice over pure speed.
100% would be at least twice as long and require an absurd amount of optimization. It would also quite likely require a fair bit of route planning as well, due to the day/night cycle and various other factors. I'm going to throw out a guess and say 100% would take at least four years to create.
Skyward Sword would require Motion+ Emulation, which is unlikely to be soon, or an inane amount of trial and error, which is absurd assuming possible at all.
Is German text actually faster than Japanese text for this game? If so, that's interesting. Usually Japanese or Chinese has the fastest text speed. Also, can you elaborate on what that version of Dolphin is (what is "Zelda Edition")?
Surprisingly, it's entirely irrelevant how fast Japanese text is, because the Japanese version lacks a required glitch in Map Glitch. This alone is enough to sway the scales far away from Japanese as a possibility. See http://zelda.speedruns.com/tp/knowledge/version-differences for more information, and credit goes to the entire TP community for building that page up.
Spikestuff, shouldn't that be brakesliding in a Yes Vote? :P
I intuitively understand some people's disappointment, but I'm not sure how exactly to define a category that would make them happy other than banning glitches completely arbitrarily.
For instance, some people are upset that you can superjump through locked doors. But keep in mind the Torizo door is locked kinda maybe sorta and speedruners never respect that, nevermind TASers.
That being said the aesthetic of superjumping is frankly awful. If you zip rather than dash, then rather than flying past segments of level you straight up don't get to see them. The graphics glitching out of the cherry on top.
But what is this new category that you'd like to see? "no superjumping" doesn't make any sense. That's way too specific to the game.
"no out of bounds" is sensible. For instance castlevania games use a similar category. "kills all bosses" is sensible too. "doesn't use cheats" is also reasonable. For instance Celeste.
If anything the name of the category needs to be changed. Rather than "no major glitches" it should be:
* No OOB
* Kills all bosses
* Foregoes cheat codes
There's nothing wrong with a No Major Glitches category on the surface. The problem comes in when stuff that's relatively glitchy comes along and starts pushing heavily on the topic of "what is a major glitch", and that leads to a serious disconnect between people with what a major glitch actually is. If you're going to call something No Major Glitches then you have to define what a major glitch is. And that definition exists. The problem is it doesn't match what people expect the definition will be, and part of why is because No Major Glitches has been associated with allowing only minor glitches (Not a Major Glitch =/= Is a Minor Glitch, and this is the crux of the issue).
To get a perspective on the problem, let's look at the OOB definition for SM. There's no confusion once you know what the definition is. Inside a wall? Okay. Going through a locked door? Also acceptable. Moving into a map square outside the game's defined areas? No-go. From a pure "inbounds or oob" perspective, this TAS does not go OOB (despite, at times, appearing to do so). That is a definitive fact. It may be awkward at times (people {not myself} are going to think "clipping through a wall/locked door isn't going OOB!?). But the fact is that this TAS does not go OOB, and this fact can be proven.
To summarize: While there may be some confusion due to the graphics, the OOB definition for SM is clear and there is ultimately no reasonable confusion that can be had answering the question - "Does the TAS remains inbounds at all times or not?" - and the answer is clearly "It does.".
The confusion that exists with the No Major Glitches definition is because the expectation from the viewer does not match the definition as it's given, and the definition given is not concretely provable to dissuade the viewer from their confusion. No Major Glitches is viewed (as a side note, this same problem exists with bug limit and glitchless rulesets, in that the perspective of the viewer is different from the perspective of the runners. Efforts to merge the two viewpoints are difficult at the best of times and nearly impossible in other cases) as a category that's mostly normal but does include minor glitches despite that its ruleset in SM is different - No OOB, No GT Code, No Memory Corruption/Arbitrary Code Execution (aka ACE). The viewer sees superjumps and thinks "that's not a minor glitch" and feels cheated, even though the TAS follows the ruleset as it exists. You can change the definition of what "No Major Glitches" is but the name itself features your problem - if you don't make the ruleset what the viewer expects it will be, you are always going to get the same questions. The simple solution, thus, is to drop the "No Major Glitches" name itself.
In short, the definition of No Major Glitches and the expectation of the viewer for No Major Glitches are often different, and while you can define it however you want, some things go beyond the expectations of what a viewer will believe is a minor glitch, and superjumping is one of those things that, as you have seen from this whole thread, has. Perhaps moving away from "No Major Glitches" and simply calling it what it is - "Any% No OOB No GT Code No Memory Corruption/ACE" - is the best thing to do, since this run absolutely fits that criteria (and is incredibly entertaining while it does so).
Final note: As to what I feel a No Major Glitches ruleset would end up being if you actually wanted to follow the viewer's perspective, you'd end up getting rid of superjumps, g-mode, clipping locked doors, likely Draygon Underflow, and possibly even X-Plasma and Bomb Torizo Skip. As much as I liked seeing SM TASes without superjumps, even I know this wouldn't have a shot in hell at getting made, let alone accepted.
No, you will not. As a runner, you will be able to register once your run is accepted, you will not have to register before then. This is how it has always worked. I just got a confirmation on this in the GDQ discord from an admin.
[quote Habreno]Indeed. In short, you can leave the room's boundaries as long as the minimap stays on the same square. Or to put it in other terms, you can go OOB or into the room walls as long as you're still in a valid minimap square.
Note that the Mini-Map (which isn't even updating in its usual manner during certain events, mainly during boss fights) can only be seen as supporting measurable indicator regarding the limitations of where Samus is allowed to go, but is not the determining factor (as it could possibly be manipulated or tricked; one has to be careful about such).[/quote]
My apologies. Thank you for clearing that up.
Indeed. In short, you can leave the room's boundaries as long as the minimap stays on the same square. Or to put it in other terms, you can go OOB or into the room walls as long as you're still in a valid minimap square.
The example more appropriate was the elevator spark, because that one Sniq actually did have to do in a specific way that he did not go OOB.
Can you clarify why that matters? I don't see how that's relevant to your argument that I initially responded to, which was that it's problematic for something to "look OOB." Are you saying that the elevator spark "looks more OOB"?
Or are you arguing something else, that we should be banning "inbounds but almost not"? It looks to me like Sniq made sure that the superjump touched the room transition tile whilst barely being inbounds... just like every other inbounds door transition that has ever been taken in a Super Metroid TAS, human speedrun, or casual playthrough.
Maybe you could argue that this instance is different from a typical door transition because he "could have" just skipped right through it. You can also shinespark through doors into OOB by pausing. Is shinesparking through doors bad because you have to "do it in a specific way" so that you don't go OOB?
Or perhaps as I said earlier, we should be banning OOB specifically and not glitches that can lead to OOB.
The point is that when you have to take significant precautions to avoid glitching your way OOB, perhaps said glitches shouldn't be in a "no major glitches" category in the first place.
In regards to your comment about shinesparking, shinesparking alone is not a glitch. Neither is pausing, as someone else mentioned. I am explicitly using the word glitch and explicitly talking about glitches, not normal gameplay mechanics and features. When you are using glitches and need to take precautions while using said glitches to avoid going OOB (once again, in a no major glitches category), then perhaps the glitch itself is the problem and shouldn't be allowed in a no major glitches category.
I don't know much about X-ray glitches, but how does this compare to the "cloud" issue in Super Mario World? RTA runs of SMW use the cloud for "low glitch" runs but the possibility of TAS doing that has been ruled out several times because grabbing the cloud is the starting point of ACE runs. Is this a similar run? Is there any point in the run where an ACE-potential gltich was used in another way?
No, nothing remotely related to ACE happens here.
I think inbounds xray climbing has been left out before because it has the potential to be used to go OOB, and you could make the same argument about superjumps here, but that's something I disagree with entirely. I don't think glitches should be banned because they can be used in a more gamebreaking way. If OOB/ACE are the things to avoid, then ban OOB/ACE, not things that can lead to OOB/ACE.
When you're actively taking precautions with your glitching so that you can say "I didn't technically go OOB doing X" that's a bit much, don't you think?
You can also get oob by simply pausing, should all TASes of Super Metroid be banned from pausing?
Pausing is not a glitch. Superjumping is very much a glitch. Reread what I said.
I don't know much about X-ray glitches, but how does this compare to the "cloud" issue in Super Mario World? RTA runs of SMW use the cloud for "low glitch" runs but the possibility of TAS doing that has been ruled out several times because grabbing the cloud is the starting point of ACE runs. Is this a similar run? Is there any point in the run where an ACE-potential gltich was used in another way?
No, nothing remotely related to ACE happens here.
I think inbounds xray climbing has been left out before because it has the potential to be used to go OOB, and you could make the same argument about superjumps here, but that's something I disagree with entirely. I don't think glitches should be banned because they can be used in a more gamebreaking way. If OOB/ACE are the things to avoid, then ban OOB/ACE, not things that can lead to OOB/ACE.
When you're actively taking precautions with your glitching so that you can say "I didn't technically go OOB doing X" that's a bit much, don't you think?
Way to just ignore his entire point there.
As an actual answer, I don't think that would happen, Saturn, as part of the rules require beating the four main bosses. Even if possible, I don't think it fits the ruleset.
As someone who's been out of the loop for quite a while I found the sheer amount of new improvements and tricks to be pretty staggering. Even knowing about the superjumps, moonfall, shinespark storage, etc, the ways in which everything is implemented goes far beyond what I would have imagined. And the care with which everything has been planned and optimized is also fantastic. moozooh already mentioned the Inverse CWJ into morphball at the LN break-in which was probably my favorite "small" thing that i noted in the run, and I've always gotten a kick out of perfect health management which happens a lot here.
I'm kind of with moozooh on categorisation though. Just as a general rule I'd say anything that leaves permanent, distracting graphical glitches is troublesome for a "no major glitches" run, and while the superjumps and x-ray abuses are intriguing a lot is sacrificed in favor of those. Both in terms of comprehensibility (also something that I find at least somewhat important for a no major glitches run) and diversity of play. Zipping through a room get old after a while, and the beauty I find in Super Metroid is that almost every room otherwise contains unique platforming challenges. Likewise, while I'm looking forward to someone hopefully tackling the 100% run with all new tricks and the far greater level of knowledge that the community has, I think some of the more severe tricks would take away a lot of what makes that category interesting.
So, massively happy and impressed with the run. Somewhat ambivalent about obsoletion.
You're not the only one. As I've said before, I'd be estatic about this as a new category (a more pure Any% whose sole goal is to beat the four bosses then Mother Brain, and finish the escape, use whatever tactics you want to), but for obsoletion, I'm entirely against it.
Will need some descriptions for this.
As far as how I feel, I'm... not exactly enthralled by it. I mean, "technically" it's Any%, but really only on technicalities. I mean, on one hand, to see SM get destroyed in this manner is nifty. But when I think about what Any% in SM *has* been, this just isn't it for me. No vote on entertainment, because I think it's not entertaining in what I feel the spirit of the category is.
For clarification: if this were an Any% TAS whose only goal was to beat the four main bosses and Mother Brain, no glitch restrictions otherwise, this would be an overwhelming Yes for entertainment. Since this is (presumably) going after what Any% has usually been for SM, though, I'm not entertained viewing this from that perspective. I kinda feel cheated by it. Just not what I expect for this category.
I won't register my vote until I know exactly what category this is going for, but since I presume it's going for what SM's normal Any% is, that is what I have based my opinion here on.