Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
bkDJ wrote:
You'd need to change the values at 0xC and 0x18 I think.
They are already at exact movie length, what should I change them to? Do you mean adding extra frames?
Edit: I tried recording extra frames and changing it to the right length with a hex editor, and it still pauses.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
DarkKobold wrote:
z0MG wrote:
Flip wrote:
OK, looks like I wasnt paying too much attention here, took me quite a while to realise that there were 2 submissions. With the cross of improvements between the two movies, does this mean that there are still improvement to be made?
Nope, they didn't do anything better than us.
SwordlessLink sez:
"Butthurt"
I'd never heard that word, but now it is my favorite. So descriptive of the current situation too.
If you think I was trying to be mean by saying "Nope, they didn't do anything better than us.", you're wrong. I was simply answering Flip's question.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
AKA wrote:
All the frames get replaced with F's meaning pretty much every button and direction is pressed on the same frame. On Genesis games is seems to cause a crash due to some input overload bug.
Some combinations of savestate frames and ways to end the m64 don't make this happen for some reason, but I couldn't get it this time. Do you know a good way to avoid it?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
bkDJ wrote:
z0MG wrote:
m64 replaced
The game is paused one frame before the the ending begins.
Edit: apparently only with high res textures. nevermind, I guess.
There's a Mupen bug that makes it input random things a frame after the playback stops, including Start. This apparently only happens to some people, but I managed to avoid it the pause completely by obtaining the star with a normal jump, making him grab the star before the pause takes effect, so I would appreciate if someone could replace the current m64 with this: http://www.box.net/shared/mpyrglgdsg
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
We redid the final battle, and got the m64 replaced. It is now 8 frames faster than rikku and mr_roberts_z's. ;)
Edit: Strangely, it made the time .10 higher, even though the amount of input frames is 7 frames lower.
04:29 <DeHackEd> mario64 has a variable framerate. there's fewer frames, but longer movie..
04:29 <DeHackEd> but... still... normally we go by the wall clock time, treating 'frame' as being 1/60s at all times
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
gocha wrote:
A Comparison video made understanding details of improvements easier. According to the video, it seems that some improvements don't save time for some reason, actually (for example, bigger amount of Bowser's bounce in the final battle makes beginning of the last conversation be a few frames late.)
Note: I haven't compared these on Mupen64, so I don't know whether that's correct.
I enjoyed the submission very much anyway.
The video is not that accurate; it made the DDD skip look one frame slower, even though we know it's one frame faster.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
Flip wrote:
OK, looks like I wasnt paying too much attention here, took me quite a while to realise that there were 2 submissions. With the cross of improvements between the two movies, does this mean that there are still improvement to be made?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
ShadowWraith wrote:
Comicalflop wrote:
Kriole wrote:
51 frames of improvement is not worth a submission.
So Mr. Super Metroid TASer Kriole, who deals in minuscule frame improvements in rooms in SM, doesn't find 51 frames worth submitting in a hotly competed frame war? Explain that one to me please.
Way to generalise. Not all SM TASers are frame hunters.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
Silent_Slayers wrote:
Thanks to BrianRuleZ's discoveries (which you never credited him for)
Yep, I admit, we forgot to thank him for the wallkick in BitFS. He didn't find anything else, so it isn't plural. His trick didn't save the majority of the time.
We did thank him for helping out with the run, we just weren't specific.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
mr_roberts_z wrote:
z0MG wrote:
AngerFist wrote:
z0MG wrote:
It's a small improvement
Your submission was no different. A 51 frames improvement is significant knowing the length of this run is only 5 minutes and 32 seconds long. Which means, the shorter a movie is, the harder it is to improve it.
My run had just under 6 seconds of improvement, while this has just under 2. 51 frames is hardly worth a new submission if you're not gonna care about making the run watchable with the camera angles. I still think it should be published though, leave me alone..
Don't mind me pointing out that you expected your submission to be something like 2 seconds faster before you found your unanticipated improvements. Had you not found that extra stuff, I suppose you wouldn't have submitted, since it would've been hardly worth it?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
AngerFist wrote:
z0MG wrote:
It's a small improvement
Your submission was no different. A 51 frames improvement is significant knowing the length of this run is only 5 minutes and 32 seconds long. Which means, the shorter a movie is, the harder it is to improve it.
My run had just under 6 seconds of improvement, while this has just under 2. 51 frames is hardly worth a new submission if you're not gonna care about making the run watchable with the camera angles. I still think it should be published though, leave me alone..
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
AngerFist wrote:
z0MG wrote:
As for the run, poor camera angle choices. However, there were some nice improvements to make it a somewhat worthy submission.
What the heck do you mean by somewhat worthy?
It's a small improvement, and the entertainment is overall worse because of the camera angles.
I still think it should be published though, I was just stating my opinion..
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
Acheron86 wrote:
Just finished watching. Typical SM64 improvement, looks good.
I think the published run has better camera work, but this one isn't as bad as some people made it seem. It's still entertaining if you don't know about the previous runs.
I'm interested to hear the authors' explanation. Was it to switch things up or was it necessary for some improvements?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
snorlax wrote:
z0MG wrote:
mr_roberts_z wrote:
this is me wrote:
also falling into the fire against bowser #2 might be something that other people do not care about but it looked ugly to me
This was required.
[22:12] <mr_roberts_z> The position after he comes up makes Mario grab Bowser's tail closer to the bomb, so there's less distance Bowser has to fly.
It's obviously not neccesary to fall into the lava to get into the right position for that sideflip dive, and it's possible to grab Bowser equally close to the bomb with other methods for diving into the tail as well.
As for the run, poor camera angle choices. However, there were some nice improvements to make it a somewhat worthy submission.
It doesn't seem appropriate to include this word here.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
mr_roberts_z wrote:
this is me wrote:
also falling into the fire against bowser #2 might be something that other people do not care about but it looked ugly to me
This was required.
[22:12] <mr_roberts_z> The position after he comes up makes Mario grab Bowser's tail closer to the bomb, so there's less distance Bowser has to fly.
It's obviously not neccesary to fall into the lava to get into the right position for that sideflip dive, and it's possible to grab Bowser equally close to the bomb with other methods for diving into the tail as well.
As for the run, poor camera angle choices. However, there were some nice improvements to make it a somewhat worthy submission.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
Desynchs for me at the death warp outside Spirit Temple :/
Andy Olivera wrote:
Here's a new, perfectly synced AVI(449MB) to tide everyone over until the run gets published...
Update: Wow. I was expecting a dozen or two downloads, but 80+?! Unfortunately, that puts me within reach of my bandwidth limit for the month, so I'm going to have to remove the link. With any luck it should be published shortly, anyway, and we'll have a version that is TOTALLY synced up...
Can you please reupload it? I suggest Megaupload, using split archives.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
upthorn wrote:
Soulrivers wrote:
I would understand your vote if you didn't actually like the game, and you thought it shouldn't be published at all because the game sucks.
If that were the case, I'd have voted no. As opposed to meh.
But this? You don't notice a 5+ sec improvement in a 5:30 video. You vote "meh" because you didn't see the difference.
Yes. I didn't see any difference, so I don't care one way or another whether it's published, so I voted "meh". instead of "yes" or "no".
Are you saying that I misunderstood the poll choices, and "meh" should be reserved for runs that I have the utmost disrespect for?
CtrlAltDestroy wrote:
This movie is in frame wars now, so being un-entertained just because you have seen a previous version of the movie is... kinda biased.
Frame warring is ridiculous. People should put their efforst into making new material, not making minute changes to old material.
Basically, I hold the opinion on movie improvements that most people hold on additional TAS categories: If you can't see a significant difference from the old version, then it shouldn't be done. Think of how much unnecessary work the encoders have to devote to making each AVI that's published. Think of how much the queue gets clogged. Think of how much work the TASers are putting into making the same old wheels a tiny bit smoother when they could be working on the engine of a totally new car.
Granted, this is perhaps not the best of examples, since there is, appearantly, a difference that is visible to everyone but me, but dammit man, wouldn't you rather see something new?
Even though this discussion has ended, I'd like to add that some people like to compete in tool-assisted speedruns, and you have to respect that.
Even if not by much, this is an improvement to the run it obsoletes, both quality and entertainment wise, so why the hell shouldn't it be published? If you personally don't think there's enough improvement for it to be worth watching, no one's forcing you to watch! Many people enjoy watching it for the small improvements, and it makes the viewer experience slightly better for first time viewers. This goes for all frame warred movies.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
Comicalflop wrote:
I think that while this run was unorthodox and interesting, the need for a non-time based entertainment run heavily decreases when the current movie/s for the game are already chock full of entertaining material.
Agreed, and there's YouTube. SM64 TASing is a YouTube fad for whatever reason; there's millions of "freeruns", alternate star routes and glitch videos there.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 12/1/2007
Posts: 425
Bag of Magic Food wrote:
moozooh wrote:
If you want to make a casual TAS, it might be a good idea to not watch the published run, and instead try to make things on your own. Then, when you're finished, you can watch it and see where and how you make mistakes and such.
What really makes this a good idea is that you may find different methods for completing the game that the previous author never thought of. If you watched the old movie first, you're more likely to just follow along the same path.
I don't think that's a good idea. Watching the old movie first ensures that you don't miss any tricks or any frames to it, and you can check if the strats and moves you come up with save time - if you're gonna TAS a game, not watching the previous movie first is a huge handicap.
