Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
The TAS you linked modified the audio files to get it to sync properly, but we require the game to be unmodified for publication. Basically, in terms of judging and encoding, we need to be able to just download the game and have it work immediately without needing to resort to changing file formats and making weird, specific changes just to ensure a slight degree of syncability.
Hopefully this doesn't discourage the creation of a new TAS. If anything, it should encourage you trying to find a way to make a run sync on a fresh, unmodified download.
EDIT: Just to be clear, if it syncs on the unmodified game but Hourglass doesn't pick up the sound, then that's fine. The only thing preventing it from publication is tinkering around with the game files itself.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
There's a bit of a minor issue with Yume Nikki that actually makes it unpublishable at the moment. From the movie description:
But that's just the Judge in me talking about site publication. If you want to just work on a new TAS for fun, go right ahead.
I don't know anything about the game, but I would start with figuring out exactly what you need out of the RNG when compared to the TAS itself. Are there any major timesaves that are RNG-dependent? Is bad RNG a matter of losing a few frames or would you be losing full seconds over it? You don't have to worry in the case of the former. If it's just simple things like enemy positions then it's pretty much negligible. I wouldn't tell anyone to find the perfect RNG if it only ends up saving a second or two. In case of the latter, though, I would just try to find the system time that leads to the biggest overall timesave, even if the rest of the RNG isn't perfect. Check as many as you can and go with the fastest one you find.
This isn't a situation where RNG can be easily controlled by in-game actions, so I would personally be more lax when it comes to judging "bad RNG". It's great that you're asking about it and worrying about the manipulation, but this is probably the one case on the site where it's not as big of a deal as it is anywhere else. Still a great habit to get into, though.
Sorry I can't be any more help than this. Good luck on the TAS!
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
User movie #29842683746592375
First area done exactly 60 frames faster. There seem to be a lot of weird stops in the submission, and jumping on top of the buildings also ends up being slower since you need to land more often, which loses a frame each time. This path most likely isn't the quickest, either.
I'd have to recommend redoing this and taking a much closer look at the jumping paths through each level to ensure they're the fastest.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
This is not an official site statement. Please refrain from speaking on behalf of the site, thank you in advance. Should we deem that this obviously avoidable crash bug is worthy of completely suspending TASing this hack, then we will make a statement on it ourselves.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
If everything's already in place, I might force myself to actually come back to this project and try to give it an optimization trial run. EDIT: Nevermind.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
For site submission? ...What? No. No, that's not okay at all. You don't get a free pass because you don't feel like dealing with RNG.
...How about I just say don't submit this run to the site at all? Do whatever you want in it, just don't submit it.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
At this point, who knows? "No slots" might add enough entertainment value to the run due to battles requiring actual strategy, and that could make it a solid Moon contender, but if using Slots is the fastest way to end battles, then a run that uses them is almost guaranteed to be accepted no matter what, even if it's to Vault.
As far as I'm concerned, if you're going to make and submit a run for any game that doesn't have a TAS yet, you might as well take the safest option possible. In this case, the safest option is using anything and everything that speeds up the run. Escaping from random battles, using Slots, whatever leads to the fastest overall result. As long as that run is optimized, it's guaranteed to be published. If people in the submission thread decide they want to see a "no slots" run, or a run that doesn't escape from any battles, then that's when you have the go-ahead to start making an optimized version intended for site submission.
Anyone can create any TAS they want at any time, but there are specific rules in place that prevent all of them from being publishable. All I said there is that if he intends to submit this run to the site in hopes of it getting published, the "no escapes" category is much too arbitrary to be accepted. I would much rather shoot something down now than shoot down the submission after weeks/months of work, all because of a single choice the author made.
No. Don't do this. That's not going to help it get published. "Possible improvements" are for when you have ideas after watching the completed run, or when you find improvements way back in the run and don't have the motivation to redo weeks of work to implement them, or when you find improvements in the earlier parts of the run but they end up leading to losses later down the road.
Intentionally not using things isn't a "possible improvement", it's a definite improvement that you're choosing not to use, which by itself is already grounds for rejection even before the category is factored in.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
Not at all, unfortunately. You just get 5.57 a few frames faster with the timing fix.
EDIT: Also, implementing the exploding car fix just seems to make the car constantly explode, but I'm just going to chalk that up to an error on my part.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
I could never properly dump the ISO, otherwise I would have at least started it back when I said I would. I may have to give it another shot at some point, just not anytime soon.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
Any particular reason for the low re-record count? Seems weird for it to be so low for such a long run with many things to manipulate, especially for 2 months of work.
I don't mean this as an accusation or anything, just curious.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
Link to video
45 frames faster without optimization. There are some other noticeably weird moments throughout the rest of the run that make me doubt its overall level of optimization, so I'll keep testing. 1-1 can be done about 10 frames faster too with a bit of heavy optimization but it's all lost on the Birdo frame rule, so I won't count that.
EDIT: Couple of further tests - Some easy optimization on 1-3 and 3-1 with potion throwing. Running off the ledge in 3-1 is actually faster than jumping off for some weird reason. 5-1 is just barely faster with Toad - managed to finish it 12 frames faster. Will keep testing up through the 5-3 warp and see where I end up. No longer necessary.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
Oh, right, forgot to post here. After a discussion on IRC, I decided not to go for the awful BS of optimizing in-game time with that pausing/timer RNG manipulation or whatever. Real time was a secondary goal of mine, and strangely enough after some testing from both me and Spikestuff, the submission is still the fastest real time run either of us could come up with. This is primarily due to the Body Attack Throw being ridiculously fast and guaranteed, with all other instant knockdown moves both being slower (about 20-40 frames slower, usually) and still requiring manipulation to be able to pull off properly, if you're even able to pull them off at all on Crazy difficulty: Throws will almost always get reversed or broken out of, Counters never seem to actually knock the opponent down, and Knockdown moves are easily dodged and have too long of a windup time to be viable.
So yeah, feel free to judge this.
EDIT:
The game is way too clunky for a playaround, and there's not enough variety to really make it any more entertaining than just <1 second throwdowns over and over again.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
Or you could try doing it again and be surprised at how much time you'll save. Trust me. You'll save time.
Even more of a reason not to submit here, aside from us not accepting ILs in the first place. If you're trying to make some sort of godly RTA run, stick it on Userfiles and hand it over to the respective community, but if you're actually trying to get a run published here, you want to optimize it to the same level as our current 100% run.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
https://youtu.be/b-G3I_jf7F0?t=1h53m34s
Current 100% TAS does this level like 6-7 seconds faster. Just saying.
EDIT: IL setting, right. Still could probably be improved by a couple seconds.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
The weirdest part of this is that due to the way the in-game timer actually increments, this isn't actually an improvement in terms of gameplay frames. Obviously, there needs to be more pausing and it pushes up the real time in doing so, but technically the actual length of the first fight in in-game frames is exactly the same. It would need to be somewhere around 0.900 to be an improvement of an in-game frame, but this is still improving the in-game timer... So, yeah, it's weird as hell.
If you don't understand what I just wrote, I don't either. It's an in-game time improvement regardless of the weird circumstances behind the timer.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player
(2120)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2792
Location: Northern California
[02:47:31] <Spikestuff> fuck a duck.
[02:47:31] * TotallyFerret has joined
[02:47:39] <Spikestuff> No, a duck not a Ferret
[02:47:50] <TotallyFerret> Ok.
[02:47:52] * TotallyFerret has quit (Client Quit)
[02:48:24] * FerretWarduck has joined
[02:48:52] <Samsara> should mention that Spikestuff was specifically looking to fuck a duck and you just made yourself eligible
[02:49:05] * FerretWarduck has quit (Client Quit)
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | Cohost