If you can run it in a virtual machine you can use the 'take snapshot' ability to make savestates. Either record the footage externally and slice it by hand or have it recorded within the virtual machine as well (ouch!)
Alternatively, you can pummel the frame rate with the right tools, and get slow motion.
I don't get to write down my dreams often, I normally forget too much for it to be worth sharing, so here are some ones that I have:
(also, I wrote these for myself, so if any references need clarification let me know)
19th November 2010
11th January 2010
I've also dreamed about made-up BYOND games (BYOND is a platform for tile-based multiplayer games, look it up) (said tile based game was in a supersized mansion, it was a co-operative dungeon crawler/rpg type thing with your icon getting coloured to indicate status effects) and lots of roguelikes based off of Castle of the Winds, IVAN and angband/ToME, among many other things.
I also just realized that the cartoonish black and white look mentioned in that dream was probably based off of the Fancy Pants Adventure flash games, which would also explain the spiders.
I prefered it when you could see the description and a link to the artist's comments/forum topic/etc. It shows the kind of intelligence that's put behind each run, and what can be said about it, and will help catch people's attention - especially for ones like that really glitched soccer game, which without a description will make people think "WTF? Why a soccer game?'
My opinion is just use point.
Humans are good at, among other things, filling in detail where it is absent. HQx et all attempt to do this for the human, but lacking AI like techniques will always fall short in how much they can interpolate.
Besides, who watches TASes of video games at 8x normal size?
That said, HQx looks better than Scalex, at least for the provided screen shot.
It would be cumbersome. There's no notion of a frame in java, a key event can appear at any point during operation, and if it's multithreaded then threads can run in any order the OS decided.
The play around needed more tension. A lot of the time was spent just phasing back and forth through objects again and again - it's neat to show off, but once it's shown that it exists it would be best reserved for phasing in new ways/patterns or to escape/get into/out of danger.
I also agree with the person who said that each level should end with a mad dash to the exit, or at least the time near the flag pole should be minimized.
I do understand that making a speed run is tricky when you can't earn any points. It rules out power ups (which rules out breaking bricks), it rules out grabbing coins and hitting coin boxes, it rules out killing anything and kicking shells. Still, surely there's room to play creatively around dodging and misleading every enemy.
There was a run submitted for a game like this, for either the gameboy or the gameboy advance. I forget what the name was so I can't search for it.
EDIT: Found it: http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10137
Brute force will -never- be viable for anything but the shortest term tasks.
Much much more likely are programs that are goal-driven, with an awareness of how the program works and when they have achieved it. Then you give them a list of goals and they optimize it genetically.
This has already been done by Bisquit (MM bot that drops powerups, lunar pool bot that plays the whole freaking game, solomon key goal driven bot)
483 rerecords is very low for a movie of this length. Either the game is incredibly trivial to play or you're not trying as many possibilities out to see what's fastest as you could be.
Can someone explain to me what the relevancy is of file extensions for emulator replay files?
Bisqwit wrote:
Did you not also realize that on TASVideos site, that movie files are actually identified by their filename extension, and that by committing the extension .gz exclusively to one movie file format, you are in effect depriving any other emulator the right to use .gz to signify that the movie file is compressed?
Decision problems involving probability distributions are usually very hard to solve and, IIRC, no consensus has been reached yet.
An example that illustrates the non-triviality of these puzzles is the "Two envelopes paradox".
Suppose that you have to choose between two envelopes, one contains X dollars and the other 2X dollars. After choosing an envelope with A dollars, you're given the chance to switch to the other one. To see if it's worthy, you assume that there's 50% chance the other one will have A/2, and another 50% that it'll have 2A. Summing, your expected gain will be 5A/4, thus it's better to switch. However, since that's true for every value, switching before even choosing the envelope would rise your expected value, and this is absurd.
These problems introduce a concept called "expectation", which is hard to formalize in mathematics. By picking a large value, you may think "it's unlikely that the other envelope contains an even larger sum". Basically, in an infinite distribution, the probability of the numbers appearing is not the same. This may influence your players' problem.
I lack the mathematical background to offer a reasonable solution to this problem, I suggest that you look at other paradoxes of probability and decision theories and their proposed solutions and see if it helps you.
EDIT: Wow, it seems Tub posted something similar while I was writing, lol
It's not a paradox, it's like the 'case of the missing dollar' where mathematical concepts are misused to create an apparent contradiction.
I'd solve it something like this:
Pick an envelope. It either has X or 2X, so its expected value is 1.5X.
The other envelope will either have X or 2X, making its expected value also 1.5X.
The 'trick' employed is to consider the case of the two times your amount and 0.5x your amount being irrespective of what amount you picked. Imagine a problem where this actually happened: Two envelopes either had A or 2A in them. When you pick one, the other one updates to randomly have either 2x (your amount) or 0.5x (your amount). Now it WOULD be advantageous to switch. BUT in the case of this problem, if the other envelope offers 2x it's 2x of 1x, and if it offers 1x it's 1x of 2x, essentially cancelling it out.