Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
Language: Lua
while true do
gui.drawBox(mainmemory.read_u8(0x022F), mainmemory.read_u8(0x0228),mainmemory.read_u8(0x022B), mainmemory.read_u8(0x0224), "white")
emu.frameadvance();
end
Super messy code, but gets the job done. The order of the values matters, I.E you want to do something like Left, Bottom, Right, Top in order to get the box where you want it. White can be changed to any other color.
EDIT: The box seems to be a bit off, so you may want to substitute the addresses you found for some other potential addresses and see if you can get something closer.
EDIT2: That explains it. It's graphic data, not the hitbox. It's definitely using a different method of figuring out the hitboxes. I'll look into it, but I don't promise any results anytime soon. I'm super new to this too...
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
Download and install the latest prereqs. When loading the game, load the CUE file instead of the BIN, assuming you're using CUE/BIN instead of CCD or ISO or something.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
jlun2 wrote:
Thanks. Somewhat related, but can the interim build link be posted somewhere more noticeable? It's rather obscure at the moment. feos, are you able to edit the first post/contact some mod who can?
I made it stand out a bit more in the first post.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
A lot of games handle hitboxes differently, so you may have to do some deeper research to figure it out for a specific game.
The only way I really know about is via looking up the X/Y position for your character. The GBA Castlevania games, at the very least, store the corners of the hitbox in 4 separate addresses, so if you find those addresses (which would change alongside X/Y position) then you can draw lines between those points via a Lua script. But again, other games do it differently, so you'll have to look deeper into it.
There's a RAM map on Datacrystal, that could be a good start.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
grassini wrote:
i understand the site can't accept this run ,but at least you should consider the low quality of what has been accepted if these are the standards in the site instead.Nobody has anything to "lose" theoretically but this is the vault discussion all over again,people were discouraged from submitting or even making certain TASes of what is now accepted a vault run,because it wasn't interesting enough for people who gave zero cents about the game but we weren't really "losing' because the "boring" TASes weren't being made at all.
What is there of "low quality" that we need to reconsider? If any run passes a Judge, then it isn't low quality in tech. If any run makes it to Moons by passing the audience, then it isn't low quality in entertainment. Maybe one or two runs slipped through the cracks before we had rule changes and when we had a different staff of Judges, but in general there is nothing of universal "low quality" on the site.
If you mean in terms of entertainment, then as we've been saying this entire argument, entertainment is 100% subjective, which is why we actually use the audience voting system as an accurate measure of what everyone finds entertaining. What you think is low quality is different than what I think is low quality. It's different than what everyone else thinks is low quality.
I've never really liked a Metroid or Doom run, but even if I voted on them I would just be one single Meh vote in a sea of Yes votes, and ultimately my voting "contribution" would be ignored when it comes time to judge the overall entertainment value of the run. That's the way it works. When a run collects several Meh votes or No votes, then we have to listen to them, because this is a group of people agreeing that something is not entertaining. I may not enjoy these runs, but I would never deny that they are high quality. I would never actively fight/insult people based on what they think of a run's entertainment value. I would never just deny someone's opinion because they didn't like something that I did. That's what sociopaths do.
grassini wrote:
The fact is the random internet user will come to tasvideos,eventually look for a garou superplay or speedrun,and find nothing,even though we had it submitted here.That's the loss.
Let's be real. If someone wants to watch a Garou TAS, the first place they'll go is YouTube. I don't even think members of this site actually search the site itself to watch a particular TAS, and I'm basing this off the several suggestions we've gotten to refine/redo the site search "engine". Most people don't even watch TASes unless they're encoded anyway, it's just far easier to look on YouTube if there's one you really want to watch. This is also assuming that there are people out there who would actually find the site looking specifically for a Garou TAS, and would actually be so pissed off that we didn't have one published that they would leave and never return. I don't see that happening more than maybe once in the entire lifetime of the site. Most rational people would stick around and see what else we have to offer.
Plus, they'd find the submission if they looked here. So I don't understand your argument in two separate-but-equal ways.
grassini wrote:
On SpeedDemosArchive.the people who judge the runs are people who know the game thoroughly or if it's too obscure, at least casually.A lot of judging used to go slow for more obscure games because it's hard to find people familiar with the possibilities.If you don't know the game,you're not part of the decision.
This is a horrible way to go about judging the way that we do, and that boils down to one simple reason: SDA judges only technical quality. Experts on the game are more knowledgeable about whether or not a run is technically superior and/or legitimate, so it makes a lot of sense for them to pull out judges from the crowd.
We don't just judge on tech quality. We judge on entertainment value as well. If we pulled in fans of a game just to judge it, there is going to be inherent bias in their decision. We can't have inherently biased Judges, because that leads to bad decisions. And that's not to mention that our Judges need to have considerable knowledge of whether or not the TAS itself is top-tier quality.
Plus, the entire decision on whether or not a playaround is entertaining enough to make it is based on the audience reaction, which will absolutely include people who know the game and people who find it entertaining. This run has Yes votes, there are people in the thread who find it entertaining. However, there are also avid fighting game fans who did not find it entertaining. This should be telling enough, shouldn't it? An entire crowd of people can't all be wrong, unless they're at a Trump rally or a Klan meeting.
The most important people in determining the entertainment value of a playaround/game are actually the people who have no knowledge of the game whatsoever. I would give much more weight to a voter who says "I've never heard of this game, but this was such a great run. Yes!" as opposed to "I PLAY THIS GAME EVERY DAY AND IT IS THE BEST GAME AND YES I VOTE YES BECAUSE I LOVE THIS GAME". TASes should have universal audience appeal to make it to Moons, or to even make it onto the site in the first place in certain situations. Like I said, this run is perfect for a fighting game community, but when it's placed here, it's at the mercy of the TASing/speedrunning community as a whole. If you want everyone who watches the run to know about the game, find a Garou community and post it there.
So, with all this in mind, what you're asking is patently ridiculous. We can't possibly have a team that knows every game that gets submitted, and even if we have members of the community that ARE extremely knowledgeable, they likely haven't shown the proper amount of technical proficiency in their own TASes (if they've even made/attempted any) to warrant bringing them on to judge, and it makes no sense to even do things that way in the first place. SDA Judges are volunteers picked from the community who are known to have considerable knowledge of the specific games and runs they are judging. TASVideos Judges are a staff position, a position of minor power, a position that requires knowledge of TASing in general as opposed to specific games. The position itself isn't based on how much I know about Castlevania or how much Nach knows about Super Metroid or what Tompa knows about Legend of Zelda or what Maria knows about Pokemon. It's not about what Truncated knows about Doom or what Moth knows about Mega Man or what adelikat knows about killing his family. It's about what we all know about TASing over years of experience and producing runs of all different kinds. We have our own ideas about what's entertaining and what isn't, but we are not Judges of entertainment. You are. The rest of the audience is.
If that doesn't explain things, then I don't know what else to tell you.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
Thanks for the reference, that cleared things up for me.
Fairy glitch is okay for the new run. I'm just mixed up with so many category suggestions and "no OOB" played into about three of them, so I figured it was only part of L+R/scroll lock.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
grassini wrote:
Also,it's pretty clear it's not going for speed and so do our shitty playarounds like tekken3 so I guess what really matters to get a playaround here is if the game is known or not,besides some supposed standards.
No, what gets a playaround accepted is what the general audience thinks of it. The audience at large. The whole crowd, people who like fighters and people who don't like fighters alike. If you want your TASes to be universally accepted by the community, find a community of fighting game enthusiasts. This is TASVideos, not FightingGameVideos. I've made this argument to people signing up to defend Super Metroid "100% Map" as well. We as a community aren't going to find the same things entertaining.
A game being "known" may lead to more entertainment value, yes. That's a part of it. That's always been a part of it. But that's nowhere near the biggest reason for a game being entertaining. Remember Magician Lord? Most people had never heard of that game before the TAS came in, and it ended up being one of the best TASes the site's ever seen. Same with things like Ivy the Kiwi or most Japan/Europe-only games that never make it stateside. Point is, we're not that shallow on what we find entertaining. If a game is entertaining to watch, then it's entertaining to watch. If it's not entertaining, then it's not entertaining. No amount of arguing is going to change anyone's mind on what they find entertaining.
EDIT: #1801: Genisto's SNES Super Mario World "playaround" in 45:30.42
It's also entirely possible for a very, very, VERY well-known game to have a playaround rejected, as you can see here. So that should prove more than anything that the game itself has almost nothing to do with it.
And on the subject of other playarounds, the Tekken 3 run is not a "shitty playaround". It's well-paced, fun to watch, and it doesn't overstay its welcome at all. It's roughly a third of the length of this run, and gets about as much done as this run does. Any published fighting game playaround should be the standard that others hope to achieve, they're the ones that the entire community approves of.
What needs to be done in the face of this rejection, is to take the valid criticism received and put that into the making of another run, instead of just refusing/debating all criticism and trying to force us to like the run. Ironically, it's only making us hate it more, and making us lose more and more respect for you all.
By the way: We have nothing to lose from people not submitting fighting game playarounds here, so it's not as big of a threat as you're making it out to be. Telling that whole community not to submit here also won't be much of a big deal either, since there aren't even that many submitting here in the first place. We're not losing members that we don't already have, and if the current members are just going to be disruptive and insulting, then perhaps it's for the better of the site to have you all leave.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
For future reference, the "v1.3" is not necessary for the game name, and the branch could be condensed down to "all stories" instead of listing all three games in succession. I've made these changes.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
Noob, if you don't agree with our rules and want to leave the site, then leave the site. If you're only going to stick around to argue with and/or insult other users, then we may have to force you to leave ourselves.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
I would love to see Vectrex support someday, because I'm one of the five people that actually owned one, but I just don't know how viable any of the games are for TASing.
Not that that's going to stop me, though. Vectrex Uber Alles.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
We had a discussion on IRC earlier and something dawned on me:
"warp glitch" - L+R, scroll lock, OOB shenanigans
"any%" - encounter skip, major glitches/skips, but no OOB
"warpless" - same conditions as the published 45 minute run
This naming convention actually makes sense, not the weird "all crystals" "all crystals no major glitches" "all crystals except Billy" stuff that was being thrown about before. I still don't necessarily agree that the encounter skip run should be a new category, but at the very least I now understand what's being considered/suggested. This is acceptable assuming the audience takes the new run well when it's submitted.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Missing TASeditor's improvement: User movie #17133429435466638
(really just putting that there for my own personal reference when I get around to judging)
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
God I don't know what to say I don't think words can express how much joy I felt while watching that. Why did it even take me so long to watch it. Run of the year. Decade. Century. All time. Everything. Best thing ever created in history. What just happened. How can I know so much about a game but still have something surprise me at least once a minute? I'm shaking. No seriously.
Thank you all. Again. For the last run and now this one. And any new run in the future. Just... Thank you.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
Arc wrote:
Samsara wrote:
No, this is the "warp glitch" and "no warp glitch" scenario we're dealing with.
Exactly what we're dealing with here.
So you want the new glitched run to be rejected for being slower and using less warps than the current warp glitch run, okay.
Arc wrote:
Samsara wrote:
What you're arguing for is "any% no wrong warps" and "any% no wrong warps but slower and less glitchy".
Nope. Arguing for Warpless vs. Warps vs. Warps & Barrier Skip.
Warpless vs Warps vs Warps with a faster route, okay.
Arc wrote:
Samsara wrote:
What is the goal of the 45 minute run?
Warpless.
Samsara wrote:
What is the goal of the new glitched run?
Warps.
So the new glitched run is competing with the current warp glitch run, then, which means it will get rejected for not using all available skips. I mean, okay.
Arc wrote:
Samsara wrote:
Both of those runs are perfectly acceptable, because one skips damn near the entire game with a severe glitch and the other just plays the game "normally" using minor glitches.
Yep, that's why there's the Warps & Barrier Skip branch in addition to Warpless and Warps.
This isn't a "game end glitch", "warps" and "warpless" situation. This is "warps", "warpless", and "warps but slower and with less warps" now. In defending the goal of the run, you're just comparing it to a different run, and now the goals match there as well. I could just copy-paste any of my posts and replace all mentions of the 45 minute run with the warp glitch run and everything would still hold up.
SMB3 has "game end glitch", "warps" and "warpless", and that's perfectly acceptable. One skips the entire game using unintentional means, one skips the game using intentional means, and one doesn't skip the game. That's absolutely fine.
Z2, under this proposed plan, is going to be like this: One run skips the entire game using unintentional means, one run skips parts of the game using unintentional means, and the last run doesn't skip the game. This would be like us accepting an SMB3 run that uses ACE to skip to the final level instead of straight to the credits. It's arbitrarily excluding glitches that could be used to achieve your goal faster.
I just don't get why 100% isn't even being remotely considered. With this setup...
1. "warp glitch" with L+R and scroll lock and OOB
2. "warpless" under the same conditions it's in right now
3. "100%" with the new glitches and sequence breaks and such
...I really think that's the best possible solution to showcase everything possible in an entertaining way. There's no worrying about categories or routes with that. It's pretty much pre-accepted. There'd be tons of variety in each run that would make watching all 3 completely worth your time.
Why is this apparently such a bad solution?
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
Arc wrote:
The goal is not to complete the game with a different route. The different route is a consequence of having a different goal. The current branch, with a 12-year lineage, has always had the goal of completing the game without using out-of-bounds/warping. Glitch Town and the fairy glitch have been known for a long time, yet no one ever said that this branch was suboptimal for not using them. Nothing has changed; they aren't suddenly a part of this branch.
"The goal is not to complete the game with a different route."
"...the goal of completing the game without using out-of-bounds/warping"
That's completing the game with a different route.
A Link to the Past has two separate movies, and they are the exact same scenario that we are dealing with here. One has an out-of-bounds/warp glitch that completes the game in 2 minutes, and the other movie has the goal of not using out-of-bounds (and takes 76 minutes). It is not a mere "route difference." The 76-minute movie is not competing with the 2-minute movie.
No, this is the "warp glitch" and "no warp glitch" scenario we're dealing with. Both of those runs are perfectly acceptable, because one skips damn near the entire game with a severe glitch and the other just plays the game "normally" using minor glitches.
And how is the new Zelda II branch metaphysically different than the difference between the already existing and accepted no-OOB branch (45 min) and extremely broken scroll-lock branch (5 min)? Why doesn't the extremely broken version obsolete the long one? It shouldn't, and neither should the middle-ground branch.
That was not my argument at all, but thanks for misinterpreting it anyway. At no point have I ever said that the warp glitch run should obsolete any other run. I'm saying that this new category is literally just the no-OOB run with a different route and glitches.
To have an acceptable middle ground, the "least broken" run can't already be in the middle ground in and of itself. It uses glitches. It's a glitched run. This new run is going to be a glitched run as well, just with more glitches. Is there a point to having a heavily glitched run, a somewhat glitched run, and a minorly glitched run? No. Not at all. Is there a point to having a heavily glitched run, a slightly glitched run, and a completely glitchless run? Yes, absolutely.
Also, the way "routes are not categories" is phrased has some dire consequences. Doesn't that mean a "warps" run of Super Mario 1/2/3 obsoletes a warpless version? And I really need the existence of Super Metroid "reverse boss order" justified, then.
"warps" and "warpless" are entirely different goals. I don't get what's so hard to understand about that. "reverse boss order" is also an entirely different goal that shows off a significant amount of things you wouldn't normally see in a Super Metroid TAS, so it's perfectly acceptable. What you're arguing for is "any% no wrong warps" and "any% no wrong warps but slower and less glitchy".
The goal of a "warps" run is to complete the game as fast as possible under any circumstances by skipping huge chunks of it. The goal of a "warpless" run is to complete a larger chunk of the game as fast as possible without skipping huge chunks of it. The goal of a "100%" run is to complete everything in the game as fast as possible. The goal of "reverse boss order" is to defeat the bosses in the opposite of the intended order. Those are actual separate goals, those runs can all coexist just fine.
What is the goal of the 45 minute run? What is the goal of the new glitched run? Are they actually different enough to warrant separate publications? And no, "complete the game with more/less glitches" isn't an acceptable goal here. We already have that for the warp glitch run and the 45 minute run. It can't be used again.
link_7777 wrote:
Just a proposal here, but maybe a good way to lay out the categories would be like this:
Any% (this would be the current glitched movie)
Any% NMG (this yet unmade movie with L+R and scroll lock disallowed)
Any% NMG no Wrong Warps (this would fit Arc's current WIP)
Movies for 100% or 100% all keys may be worth considering, but may not be much more interesting than the three above. May be easier to have that argument later if someone tries to submit one.
That's exactly what Arc's arguing, isn't it? Where the latter two runs have the exact same goal but different glitches?
A movie for 100% would be perfectly acceptable. 100% under the same conditions as the 45 minute run wouldn't be that much longer and it would retain a lot of the same entertainment value. 100% under the new glitched conditions would show off said glitches and would be a weird, insane watch to see how broken the game can be even without the OOB L+R scroll lock madness. Both of these runs are perfectly safe and acceptable.
We can't have any% three times. Twice is fine for warps and warpless, but three is just completely arbitrary.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
Alright, I'll justify one of the No votes then.
To me, someone who generally doesn't enjoy fighting games, this pretty much looks the same as most of your other recent runs. There's nothing new in terms of execution compared to them, something which has been a problem even since the old Mortal Kombat runs, but at least the Mortal Kombat runs have enough characters/variety/glitches to always seem fresh. Some game-specific glitches, usually a hard crash that leads to a reset, some standard 2P action, showing off infinites... It just doesn't really appeal to me, and I'd assume most of those "unexplained" No votes feel the same way I do.
On top of that, I've never liked the pacing in these runs. Infinites are shown for far longer than they need to be: 5 seconds or 3-4 "rotations" is more than enough to show them off. The run should be an escalating showcase of crazier and crazier things, it shouldn't just be whatever you want at whatever time. The 2P stuff... I would honestly just remove the "normal" fights entirely. They just serve to lengthen the run with something that only fighting game fans would enjoy. I've never found them entertaining, personally. If a 2P fight is necessary to show off some ridiculous stuff, like in the Mortal Kombat runs, then yeah one or two can be thrown in, but the rest just seem like filler.
These kinds of runs are perfect for a specialized YouTube channel where everyone who subscribes is going to have the same knowledge/interest/opinion, but submitting here means they're subject to what the general audience thinks. As a whole, we're not exactly a fighting game savvy audience. We can't appreciate some of the things in the run, and because of that we can't appreciate the run as a whole. We're going in expecting an MK-style playaround where the game just completely falls apart, but all we get is just fights and occasional glitches, same as a lot of the other recent fighting game playarounds.
So no, I didn't find this entertaining. I haven't found a lot of these recent fighting game playarounds entertaining, in fact. I've always refused to vote because I always felt like these runs just weren't for me, which is absolutely true, but since you've been requesting explanations and lowkey insulting the site and userbase, I figured it was about time to break my silence.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
Arc wrote:
Wha? The least-broken category follows the same rules as the currently published movie, which has a 9.1 overall rating. And I'm going to submit it in about a week. Then the new, third-category movie that uses all of the minor gamebreaking glitches is going to be significantly different from this movie. Way shorter than the 43 minutes we were talking about earlier. The route will be totally different.
But is the end goal different? Or are the same things being done, just with a different route/glitches? If we simplify the categories down to what they achieve, this is what we'd end up getting as far as I can tell:
1. "any% using extremely game-breaking glitches"
2. "any% using somewhat game-breaking glitches" (new "all crystals")
3. "any% using minorly game-breaking glitches" ("least-broken category")
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but given all the information I've gathered in this thread so far, this is how I'm seeing it right now. As far as I'm concerned, one of the latter two needs a different goal. We've discussed this with the recent Wonderboy controversy: Routes are not categories. If two runs achieve the same goal with different routes/glitches, then they're competing, not cooperating.
I suggested 100% because not only is it a guaranteed acceptable category based on site rules, but it would also actually show off some significant extra portions of the game. A 100% run with the new glitches would be an insane watch, a worthy addition to the site alongside the other runs, and safe to submit and accept. Even if it was reversed, with a glitchless 100% and a more glitched "all crystals" run, it would still work really well with content and variety.
Again, if I'm wrong about any of this, please correct me.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
Just one question on my end: How viable is this in real time? Could an RTA runner use this exact strategy and duplicate the run with ease or is this a TAS-only 3 minute wait?
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2121)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2793
Location: Northern California
All this category discussion's making my head spin, but I guess the plan checks out on my end. I would prefer a more robust category than just "glitchless" as the third category though, something like "glitchless 100%" or whatever the equivalent would be for this game, so it would actually have some significant difference.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
