Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
And it's starred now. Thanks!
I've ran some statistics over the Star tier and found it interesting that the guideline that 10% of moon runs get a star is also maintained over subcategories; for example, out of 493 moon platform games, 49 are starred. I suppose that's intentional? It certainly feels fitting.
For the sake of showing some numbers, the biggest differences I found were these. I'm not asking to change anything here, I just thought it'd be interesting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Warp wrote:
That's not what this sounds like: "We could have an entire program sitting in unitialized memory, and through memory corruption techniques maybe we could get the game to start executing at this point and completely take over the game"
Then I suggest you look at the rest of this post, and at the run that prompted this discussion (which was about initializing six bits of register), as well as the discussion right here where people point out that it's the runner's responsibility to explain how exactly their "trick" is possible in the first place.
Because this has every thing to do with speedrunning, and nothing with "designing your own ROM". Besides, by the current rules players can already design their own ROM, unless you'd wanted to claim that Battle Kid is somehow ineligible for TAS'ing?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Warp wrote:
If you want to run your own code in the console, then make your own ROM. If you want to modify the game's own code, then make a modified version. If you want to modify how the console works, then take the source code of the emulator and change it.
And none of the three has anything to do with what is being asked here.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
creaothceann wrote:
He could choose between using the (E) or the (U) versions of the game.
That's not what I mean. The map is not dependent on the version of the game cartridge, but on the voltage of the wall socket that you plug your console into.
Even in a TAS you can set the name/date and reboot the system, right?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Looking over the vault I can't find any games off-hand that don't match my suggested description above, other than Takeshi. Note that I'm basing this purely on run subtitles, I haven't watched all vault runs in the past morning :)
For example, there's this run labeled "pacifist", but the description notes that the pacifism doesn't hurt the speed any, so it still qualifies.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
creaothceann wrote:
I don't get what you are implying though. Even with semi-random behavior, you can't get 100% reliable sync...
I'm saying that a RAM map should be created, using values that were observed on hardware, by a function like this. This RAM map will then be "frozen" and used for all emulator versions and all emulator runs, with no additional randomness involved.
All right. Now suppose the following:
The US electric network runs on 110 volts, and a SNES plugged into the US network gives a RAM map that looks <so>. However, the European electric network runs on 220 volts, and a SNES plugged in there gives a RAM map that looks substantially different, even though the console is otherwise identical.
Then it would make perfect sense to me that a TAS'er could choose which of the two maps to use for any particular run, in the (admittedly rare) case where this affects gameplay. The key here is that (1) this act is possible in real life, and (2) the burden is on the TAS'er to explain how it is possible. Note that "possible" does not mean "likely". If it's something as simple as "this bit is usually 1 but if you boot up, 10% of the time it's going to be 0" then that's fine; if a TASer wants to start play with some complicated program preloaded in RAM, well then he's going to have a lot of explaining to do.
We have at least one run on the site that requires you to set your Wii Username to <something> or it won't sync, and we have at least one DOS run under construction that requires you to set your system date to <something> or it won't sync either. That's the same principle as here.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
As I understand it, "Any%" in the vault means to get to the ending as fast as possible, using any and all available tricks with no holds barred. For numerous games, there may be a run that shows off more of the game and/or follows the original gameplay more with a goal of "Any% but avoiding (this glitch)"; but such runs cannot be in the vault (since the goal isn't plain "any%" or "100%"), they go in Moons (or Star) if they're entertaining enough, and get rejected if they're not.
However, note that "Any%" with no holds barred runs may also be placed in Moons if they're entertaining enough. It's basically goes
(1) "Any%" or "100%" goes into Star/Moons if entertaining (and fits the other criteria of that tier), Vault if not.
(2) Any other goal, such as "avoid glitch X", "playaround", "Low%", goes into Star/Moons if entertaining (and fits the other criteria of that tier) and gets rejected if not (e.g. the "minimum score" and "minimum keypresses" Mario runs).
(3) A run in the Vault gets obsoleted by one that is faster, that's straightforward. For a run in Star/Moons, if a new glitch is found that is faster and equally entertaining, the new run obsoletes the old and also goes in Star/Moons. If a new glitch is found that is less entertaining (e.g. because it just garbles the screen two minutes in and pops in at the endgame) then this could result in two branches: the new run goes in Vault, and the old run remains where it is with the tag "Any% without (that glitch)". So there's room for both the "pretty" run and the "fastest" run.
I think this is the most straightforward and unambiguous interpretation of what the tiers mean. So it strikes me that the "no warp glitch" Takeshi run should be moved to Moon tier.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Derakon wrote:
...in fact, yes, that's the problem here. Functionally you're using a Game Genie to adjust memory to exactly your specifications. The fact that no Game Genie is actually present doesn't change that that's the effect that's being accomplished.
That depends entirely on what you're doing. If you can get the desired settings by adjusting the system clock (on systems that have one), or by turning the console off and on a dozen times, then you're clearly not using a game genie.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
To my mind, this is the same principle as games that act differently depending on the system clock. For instance, there are numerous games that make things harder for the player if played on Friday the 13th. Following our policy of TAS'ing games at the hardest difficulty rate, it would make sense to set the (emulated) system clock to Friday 13 for these games.
So yes, this should be fair game for TAS'ing.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
feos wrote:
I have no problems with calling "glitched" runs "any%" and the current "any%" ones that have the faster glitched versions something else, as long as the low-glitch versions are preserved if their entertainment value deserves separate publication.
I believe this is key, and this is also why the vault only allows Any% and 100% runs: "low-glitch versions are preserved for their entertainment value". They are: that's what moon tier is for. If a run shows off more of the game by not clipping through walls, not going out of bounds, and avoiding warp zones, then the run is judged on entertainment and eligible for moon tier if people like it.
But vault tier and any% are about reaching the end of the game using any and all tricks in the book, and regardless of how garbled ridiculous this looks in the video. And because of this, runs that exploit some glitch obsolete runs that don't use that glitch; as far as I've seen this is consistently applied.
That doesn't apply to runs who corrupt memory to execute an arbitrary program, but those are pretty rare. It does apply to any other glitch, because we can't objectively define a difference between a "high glitch" vs a "low glitch" run.
Personman wrote:
There are plenty of Vault examples too; that rpg that wins on the first frame comes to mind.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
feos wrote:
Suggestion taken. SoR2 now has more votes, but the ones from SoR3 are higher. Any thoughts which one deserves it more?
I think this is because the fandom generally considers SOR2 the superior game, whereas the run for SOR3 is the superior TAS. Looking over both videos, I believe the SOR3 run is most appealing because:
The third game has more varied content, ranging from super moves that can be used every few seconds (e.g. Zan's electrocution and Blaze's fireball), weapon-based super attacks (e.g. Blaze's sword blitz and Zan's bowling ball) and varied environmental hazards that kill enemies (e.g. the subway carts, falling barrels, and laser beams). As a result, it's more fast-paced overall.
The SOR3 run relies more on both characters acting in concert, whereas the SOR2 run often has one character (known game-breaker Max) do most of the work while the other character assists.
Hard mode on SOR3 (at least, on the American version, which is used here) is even more ridiculously hard than on SOR2.
The characters in the SOR3 run have full health bars all the time, indicating the superhuman skill here. Not the primary goal of the run but still impressive.
So I believe that of these two, SOR3 would be the best addition to Star Tier.
So if I understand correctly, that submission was rejected because it's slower than the work-in-progress in this thread, and the WIP in this thread has never been submitted and its author has disappeared.
Well, that's pretty sad for a game as (in)famous as this. Would it be ok to submit the WIPs from this thread on its author's behalf, since he already posted them on the forum here? Or if not, can we contact him somehow?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
I would like to suggest either Streets Of Rage 2 or Streets Of Rage 3 for Star tier. This is one of the most famous series of beat-em-ups, both runs control two players at the same time at a frankly ridiculous difficulty level, and have very good audience response.
That's an interesting distinction; it does make sense but it would require some cleaning up, because as near as I can tell the category tag "heavy glitch abuse" and the label "glitched" in a run's title are used interchangeably, and for both of these.
In the meantime, this Cheetahmen run clearly falls in the former category; it doesn't corrupt memory the way these other movies (or the famous Pokemon Pi Dance) do.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
gamer1989 wrote:
there going to be more tas for duke nukem and hocus pocus?
For that matter, Apogee / id software had lots of good platform games that were basically a cornerstone of the DOS market in those days. For example, Cosmo's Cosmic Adventure; Bio Menace; and Monster Bash. Considering most of the episodic games are basically the same game three times with different levels (except Commander Keen, which has more variation), I would prefer seeing one run of each series before we get to runs of each additional episode. $.02
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
feos wrote:
Can someone list the runs that skip half of the game at once and are still any%? I only can remember any%'s that skip some levels from the middle to the next level start. And glitched runs either skip from the middle of the game to its end, or break the gameplay hard enough to deserve a glitched category.
There are several "glitched" runs in the vault, such as Chrono Trigger, Legendary Stafy, Earthbound Zero, and Wizardry III; all of these bypass most or all of the game, e.g. the last one does so by glitching the final quest item into a shop, then simply buying it. The Chrono Trigger run was also ruled to obsolete this non-glitched run, since both are "any%" and therefore the same branch.
I'm not sure why "glitched" would be considered a separate goal. I would consider goals to be things like "any%", "100%", "pacifist", or "playaround", and each of these could be glitched or non-glitched. In addition to the Chrono Trigger run, it is generally the case that a run with the "heavy glitch abuse" tag will obsolete a run without the tag, instead of forming a separate branch; examples include Shining Soul and Spongebob.
So if this movie is glitched, it can't be vaulted (nor the feedback it got now is enough for Moons).
For what it's worth, it is likely that some or most of the negative feedback is either due to misunderstandings earlier in this thread, or predates Adelikat's post of evidence. After all, people are likely to vote when they first post in a thread, and cannot change it later.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
AnS wrote:
That's the point I was trying to convey since the first page of the topic: let's realize that this movie essentially starts from a savestate,
No, it clearly doesn't.
A savestate is a permutation of several kilobytes of console RAM, that is achieved by playing the game via the intent of the developers, and that is absolutely impossible to attain by powercycling, due to how the hardware works.
This run uses a permutation of six bits of cartridge registers that works by oversight of the developers and that has been proven to be achievable by powercycling. That is something utterly different from a savestate.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
adelikat wrote:
An owner of the game was kind enough to make a more thorough video demonstrating this glitch, here is video proof. This video shows it can (easily) be recreated by ONLY pushing the power button.
Here's a brief summary of the proof I'm offering:
1) As shown, this glitch can occur from simply powering-on the game. The only possible explanation of that behavior is some sort of variable being in an unknown state and used
1) messing with the initial RAM pattern (0000FFFF) has NO effect on this game. I tried, via scripting enough random combinations using this technique (all 0's, all 1's etc, then pure random patterns). I left a script running for some days and never once did the game do anything but start normally. This eliminates the NES's ram as the culplrit.
2) Debugging shows that the game runs a for loop to clear out the NES WRAM space, so it is expected that random ram initializations would not affect the game
3) The only other variables in play would be on the cart itself (these are mapper registers). This game have prg registers to control which part of the program to execute from. Messing with these values give you consistent results with the videos showing this glitch, including starting from level 5
4) There are 32 possible PRG register combinations, only one of which starts you at level 5 and in a playable state.
5) This movie uses that one combination and produces results IDENTICAL to video evidence
6) Videos evidence shows that this can be done from reset OR power, and that this is consistent with the theory that it is a random register issue
7) "How do we know this EXACT register state is possible?" It is KNOWN among EE people that registers can be in a random state. In this case is 6 bits, nobody has said anything other than it is likely and reasonable to assume all are possible states. Furthermore, the results produced are identical to video evidence, AND there is only 1 combination that yields this evidence. And if there wasn't more than one, who cares? If I put in 13 instead of 11 and they both produce this, the end video is identical.
I personally think that I've given more than enough evidence to suggest that this is the explanation of how this glitch is occurring and that the emulator is faithfully emulating this behavior. Can we move on from me defending the TAS itself? The implications of accepting this movie's premise (exploiting the initial hardware state) is a good debate and worth having, and I hope we will focus on that now, going forward. (Note: this post intentionally avoids this subject, but I do have a lot to say on the matter)
I find this compelling evidence, and feel the run should be accepted.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
I'm curious if this run will also sync in Flip Mode?
(VVVVVV has an alternative mode where you play the whole game upside down, but which is otherwise identical)
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
feos wrote:
Are you deliberately ignoring the point about the order a new movie is currently starred by? There are things that help the starman know it needs a star. Having ~100 votes was mentioned by adelikat in IRC many times, and it does work. Needing SOME requests from users to star it also is the necessary reason to star something.
In that case, I request to star it. So now the game has, in fact, "some requests from users" to that extent :)
Now I fully admit I'm not one of the rules-makers on this site, but it strikes me that unilaterally adding a new "guideline" to a wiki page and then using it in this thread the very next day is not a proper method. Is there any agreement to your four points? Because they strike me as contradictory to the rest of the page, as well as unworkable. In particular, your second point is redundant to the fourth, and "requesting star tier" is just not something people do in threads like these. Your third point of asking 100 votes is completely impractical for anything that's not an SNES or Genesis platform game. So by your new guideline, no new games can be starred ever.
So it strikes me that this Jetpack run does meet the normal (older, agreed-upon) criteria for star tier, so I think the star here is fitting, and those four new points that were added to the star page yesterday should be stricken.
