Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Thank you for that post, I think it's great to have discussion on what is or isn't a glitch, instead of reusing RTA's definition.
GMP wrote:
Swapping sides from guards and turning away from guards in mid-combat. Here is a section of the manual which mentions it - https://i.imgur.com/zk9CPfk.png
"Guard AI is pretty dumb"; sure, I can buy that this is not a glitch, but I'd like to check how much luck manip it requires.
"Walking on air". As I already mentioned, this is a standard mechanic in the series.
I believe this became a standard mechanic in the series because it was a glitch in the first game. From the level design (e.g. of level 12), the intent is that a running far jump requires a three-tile platform, and it is unintended that you can do it on a two-tile platform (by running in the other direction and "walk on air" to turn around for a running start). Several ports of POP1 don't allow this trick (e.g. [4158] NES Prince of Persia by Challenger in 16:16.06, [1193] Genesis Prince of Persia by Aqfaq in 19:03.48, [3523] PCECD Prince of Persia by Challenger in 05:14.31); therefore I believe this is not a standard mechanic in the first game.
"when you are off guard, a single sword blow can kill you", this exact same mechanic applies to enemies as well.
In your video around 14:10, attempting to attack someone "off guard" doesn't one-shot him. Even if that were an intentional mechanic, that you run up to Jafar from half a screen away, from his front? That should clearly "activate" him, and it's a glitch that it doesn't.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
GMP wrote:
The (offtopic) discussion about my NMG submission started here when Radiant pointed out that I used "arbitrary RTA Rules", for which I clarified I used "arbitrary RTA Rules" of a specific category. For any%, RTA rules don't lay any restrictions either. I hope this clears it up.
To clarify, in this thread I was initially responding to feos, who asked if the difference between the two runs is that one uses a Major Skip Glitch (by the TAS definition, which he linked).
Eien responded yes; and I wanted to clear up that no, the difference is actually that one run uses glitches by the RTA definition.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
feos wrote:
GMP wrote:
There isn't one "Major skip glitch", as eien mentioned. there are a lot of major glitches that are not to be used in the NMG run.
How do you distinguish major glitches from non-major?
Frankly I'd also like to know that; I asked the same in the earlier thread.
For instance, turning off chompers is easily doable in real time, barely noticeable, and saves 2-3 seconds in a single spot, yet is considered a "major glitch". On the other hand, turning away from guards in mid-combat is really hard in real time (because bad RNG can get you killed), very visible because it looks funny, saves a ton of time, and is considered "not a glitch".
...I honestly don't get why.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Great run! I know this game quite well and this had me laughing and going "wtf?!" several time. You definitely have my vote, at least as soon as you include the copyprot screen. That should be easy enough, no?
feos wrote:
Rather, I'd say that RTA rules somewhat-arbitrarily allow certain glitches but not other glitches; the other run follows RTA rules and this one does not. That makes this run "any%", and the other one probably fails to be different enough for a new branch.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
eien86 wrote:
- The copy protection screen does not count towards the IGT, therefore they serve no purpose other than wasting time in runs.
I get that from an RTA perspective, the copyprot screen is completely random and a waste of time; but from a TAS perspective it's something you can luck-manipulate so that it's always the closest potion. Personally, as a spectator, I would find that entertaining (you run up to some random potion and it just happens to be the right one? Huh :) )
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
While this is undoubtedly a classic, I find it a bit weird to play an emulated flash-based version in Linux. Isn't there a more authentic version that could be run?
Anyway this strikes me as vault material. Well done on the luck manip with those friggin' dwarves!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
I suppose that since we have a "minimum B presses" run (a.k.a. the walkathon) it makes sense to also have a "minimum A presses" run.
I must say I don't find the movie entertaining per se. But I agree that this is a technical achievement and worthy of publication.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Dacicus wrote:
According to several sources, at least one version of this game was available as a PC booter,
It was; that's the AGI0 (1984) version. However, that version doesn't use the white popup boxes to display game text, but has the text appear word-by-word at the bottom of the screen (similar to e.g. Zelda games). That strikes me as a substantial slowdown.
The most common version of KQ is the AGI2 version from 1987, which backports the engine from later games. The pulldown menus I think were first used in King's Quest III (AGI version 2.2, or maybe it was 2.4).
Anyway, yes vote.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
GMP wrote:
The reason they are considered a glitch is because even though they tend to look "normal" even compared to other intended mechanics, their execution is so precise and specific that it's obvious they aren't meant to happen at all.
I find it hard to believe that walking on air is meant to happen at all. So why isn't walking on air considered a glitch?
GMP wrote:
The logic here is, that animation is actually meant to avoid this damage apparently, as there is literally no use of it for anything else in the game, hence it actually might be an intended mechanic.
The crouch mechanic can be used to move underneath half-closed doors. Crouching to avoid damage from falling ceiling tiles (not to avoid being hit, but to avoid damage from being hit) doesn't sound like intended behavior to me. The manual, at least, suggests to avoid falling tiles by stepping out of the way, not by crouching.
I mean, I'm hoping for a better explanation of what counts as a glitch than "that's how speedrun.com has been doing it for years", because that doesn't really explain anything.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
I love this game and played the heck out of it when I was a kid, so this looks like a great run to me...
...but the goal strikes me as rather arbitrary. Why exactly is it that jumping through guards and turning off chompers are considered "a glitch", whereas walking on air, turning away from guards in mid-combat, and one-shotting Jafar are considered "not a glitch"? All of that appears more-or-less equally plausible in RTA conditions, and none of it is as weird as the various warp glitches.
And I'm a bit surprised this is only marginally faster than the speedrun.com record (18:50 vs 18:56).
Frankly I'd probably prefer a glitchful and/or no-damage run.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
CasualPokePlayer wrote:
Most of levels 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 seem to adapted over, mostly intact (with some things cut).
I've checked, and you are indeed correct on this one. I suppose the most memorable parts of Prehistorik2 are the later levels (because they're way harder, and accordingly I've spent much more time on them). Like, I was checking your run for that @&#$*( ice level and turns out it's (thankfully) not in the GB version.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
TASVideoAgent wrote:
This game is actually a port of Prehistorik 2, which was made for MS-DOS and Amstrad CPC. Even with the major cuts out from the original PC game, Prehistorik Man seems to still be a rather faithful port,
I'm curious what your source is on this. I've played a lot of Prehistorik 2 on the PC, and this GBA game has wildly different level layouts, bosses, items, and so forth. I fail to see how this can be considered a port instead of a sequel.
Anyway, it's a good run and I love this series, so yes vote.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
While I get what you're going for, I must say the "games without clear ending" rule is rather confusingly written as it stands now. If I understand correctly, the third point (all unique content + hardest difficulty) is intended as a strict subset of the second (all unique content, regardless of difficulty), but this isn't really clear from the wording. Imho.
Anyway, meh vote on entertainment. It's funny but not very long.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
That's a great game and I'd love to see it here!
Also, I'm surprised to hear that its gameplay depends on its visuals. That doesn't strike me as a normal way of handling it. You may be able to get a solution by posting on the Steam forums? I don't think they're very active in this case, but it's worth a shot.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Checking the history, I find it interesting that the run for "Tails in Sonic 1" was initially rejected for being too similar to "Knuckles in Sonic 1" (as detailed here). And that was before the discovery of several zip tricks that made the newer versions of those runs more similar to each other.
Considering the current Tails run uses heavy zipping, is there a case for this zipless submission to obsolete both Knuckles-with-zips and Tails-with-zips?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Memory wrote:
To the people that don't like "no zips", what about zips? Do you just not like this hack in general or would you prefer zips?
Speaking for myself, I do not like this category of hacks in general. The difference between the characters is not all that big in casual gameplay, the difference gets less discernible in TAS gameplay, and it essentially disappears when zipping is allowed.
I can imagine that for several (but not all) categories of S3&K, doing the same goal but with a different character would be downvoted as "not different enough to be entertaining", and the same principle applies here.
fsvgm777 wrote:
I'd much prefer seeing a zipless TAS for this hack instead of a zips TAS, and thus this TAS should obsolete the zips TAS we currently have published.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
dwangoAC wrote:
TASGiving was a charity livestream similar to a GDQ featuring TAS content with commentary that successfully raised $10k for National Alliance on Mental Illness. The main event site is at https://TASGiving.org and we're posting videos on my YouTube channel.
