Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Hmm, then I guess by manipulating the countdown timer by adding lag to doors, making it display a '01 second higher without true time saver in the in-game framecount (in other words, you still finish Ceres at 3126 ingame frames), right?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
moozooh wrote:
This run shouldn't be compared to SMW small-only. In fact, a proper run for comparison's sake would include a suitless high% collectathon, kind of what the unassisted runners did with NBMB before the way to bypass Mother Brain and the statue was discovered.
Yet again a statement without any logic at all. I probably should get used to that in your case. Anyway, "Small only" SMW can't be compared to suitless conditions at all, because it neither gets in the situation where water slows you down so much as in SM when suitless, nor do you get extra trouble in heat rooms by losing energy constantly. It can't be compared to a RBO either, which is a run with very high equipment that is close to 100% runs condition overall. The "small only" run lacks the very important Cape Mario to fly through many levels much faster, so he has to take the difficult ground paths instead, just like this run has to, due to the lack of Speed Booster. The situation is very similar here. And the fact that both runs still beat the major bosses required to finish the game, excludes any NBMB comparisons as well.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Raiscan wrote:
I suppose in your ideal world there will be 100 runs of Super Metroid. Each one of course showing a different percentage of completion.
How can one be so ignorant, despite the percentage problem got cleared up a few pages back, is beyond me. Here again:
A 15-99% (except the any%) run is pointless, because it doesn't have a solid goal to rely on at all, and thus wouldn't deserve a own category ever.
Here are the only run modes with solid goals that would make a interesting and unique addition:
* Any% - due to the major difference both, real- and ingame oriented
* 100% - For obvious reasons, to show off everything the game has to offer
* Low% / 14% - due to it's uniqueness and the high difficulty because of the minimal equipment, making it a very suitable run for TAS conditions
* NBMB (glitched any%/low%) - due to it's unique tricks and the lowest completion time and item collection. Because of the NBMB conditons, this doesn't interfere with the true any% and the true low% (14%) runs though
* RBO/Suitless - due to being the most variative run form of all categories, and due to the extremely high difficulty, making it a very TAS suitable run form as well.
That's it. All other run forms in this game are pointless and wouldn't offer any difference to the 5 ones listed above, which are all very unique in itself. Hopefully this clears everything up now for you guys.
Truncated:
No, of course not. Though you can't deny that this run shows not only hard techs, but also nice looking ones that make the run very unique in the end result, which is exactly what this site is supposed to show, especially of a popular and well known game like this, to nevertheless surprise even the more game-experienced audience with them.
But for comparisons sake, what would be your reason for rejecting this run against the audience and the purpose of this site, other than the pointless category thing? Just curious.
Also, anybody mind to take position to Larkins question and the "small only" SMW run comparison?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
mmbossman wrote:
If this run showed something new and different to the general public that the previous 4 runs did, it would likely be given much more thought.
Thats's exactly what it does: showing something completely different than the 4 other runs do, and the general audience noticed it very well and appreciated it.
And despite it's a run mode first introduced in the speedrunning community, just like the ingame-oriented any% is (which nevertheless makes one of the most entertaining TASes on this site judging by the rating it received), it's a TAS that is just as entertaining due to being very unique in itself. And TASes mainly belong to a site like this.
And since you persist to be against this run because of the "artificial restrictions", at least stand to your point by addressing what the difference is between a "small only" SMW run and this one then? It got the exactly same "artificial challenge" that only slows you down in many levels due to not being able to fly with the help of Cape Mario or not allowing to ride Yoshi, and because of that even makes it impossible to clear a few other levels, making it not even a complete run in the end. It increases the game completion time because of that, provides less entertainment than the 96-exit run overall, and in the end doesn't even show any graphical reward to confirm that goal unlike in this situation with the 14% displaying. Yet it makes a good addition because of the small only restrictions since it shows otherwise never seen before techs and thus a unique run, and this is the exactly same case in a 14% run as well. So where is the difference between this two runs?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Time for more SSF2 art from my more recent archive.
SSF2 - Super Battle pwnage on max. difficulty with Vega
Once again without a single match loss. There are only 2 battle-round losses, both of which were pretty stupid and somewhat careless, but that's it. Other than that, every fight was dominated and finished in a as much variative way as I could show, by once again using every possible technique Vega has to offer. Vega is a very fast, if not the fastest, fighter in this game (therefore sometimes also called the "Spanish Ninja" btw.), with excellent air-navigation, which allowed me to overspeed most of the opponents and control the battles pretty well.
Often disliked because of his mask and the claw to get advantages in attack and defense compared to other fighters, he is nevertheless one of the best and most comfortable characters to fight with.
Definitely a quality playthrough that is a must see for those who like SSF2, and want to see some effective and handy Vega-techniques to dominate in unassisted fights.
Enjoy!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Aqfaq wrote:
Yes, actually it is a bit too hard to realize for me. Remember that there are not many people on Earth who know as much about Super Metroid as you do, so some things seem obvious to you, but are hard to realize for someone like me. I hope that is not too hard to realize for you.
I see what you mean of course. But as Larkin also said, the majority of people who will chose to watch this run will for sure be aware at least of the game itself, which will definitely make them notice and appreciate the new techs never seen before in this run. Just check the random YouTube comments on various SM TASes there for comparison. The people who watch such runs notice much more details in it than you might think they do.
Aqfaq wrote:
Saturn wrote:
Aqfaq wrote:
The question is about meaningful movie content. The case here was that the movie was considered not meaningful enough addition to the other movies.
By who, by one person who didn't even notice (as it seems) what's going on in the run due to not knowing the game very well by itself?
By who? Three judges, maybe? How many you need? If it is truly so, that even the judges didn't notice what was going on in the movie, then how could it be a good idea to publish such a movie?
Who are unfortunately all not much into SM to make a reasonable statement about that. They just can't recognize the true value of this run and the many hard techs that costed me alot of work to perform, since they never tried to do them on their own to understand that. It's that simple. As said above, this is a exception and not the case for the majority of the audience who would chose to watch this run.
If I'd be a judge but would have no clue about a particular game to make a reasonable decision, I better would leave it to somebody else who knows more about it. And if there is nobody, then I would at least consider all the comments the watcher, who actually know the game well enough, made, to make a as fair decision as possible. This is definitely not the case here, as the watchers got just ignored here, while the decision was made on a purely personal, uneducated (as it got even more clear by now), taste of the judge, with only the exception of the category problem, that I too agree is moot in a case like this.
Fabian wrote:
but saying the small only SMW run is more different to SMW96 than your run is to SM100% is, like, the least accurate statement ever written in the history of the internet.
I actually agree, thats a matter of opinion of course. But the fact that "small only" represents the exact same conditions in SMW like the 14% does in SM compared to the 96-exit/100% run, is still obvious and can't be denied.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Aqfaq wrote:
Saturn wrote:
14% runs exist since 2003 or even earlier
Saturn wrote:
I'm much more for pulling completely new runs with tricks never done before.
But maybe the old 14% runs used different routes and older techs that got massively obsoleted by the new, never seen before ones in this run? Maybe that was enough of a reason to call this a "completely new run" even though the run mode was the same? Probably too hard to realize.
Larkin wrote:
When Saturn makes mention of a "legal/legit" run, it's blatantly obvious to someone like me who isn't a hardcore follower of metroid to know what he's talking about.
Thank you very much, man. I already started to assume that some people here indeed lack some sort of common sense. Glad to see that it's not necessarliy the case.
Larkin wrote:
I strongly doubt he's calling other runs "Illegal" Its just being used as a convenient term.
Absolutely correct. Just a short term to make the watcher clear what he can expect of the run.
Aqfaq wrote:
The question is about meaningful movie content. The case here was that the movie was considered not meaningful enough addition to the other movies.
By who, by one person who didn't even notice (as it seems) what's going on in the run due to not knowing the game very well by itself?
Aqfaq wrote:
The 14% run is not miles different from the three other movies, which all avoid using the same glitch.
Saturn 2 days ago wrote:
It in fact shows reasonably different material in "almost every single room" in the whole 2nd half of the run due to the lack of Speed Booster, which forces you to use "completely" different strategies that you won't see in any other run to pass them.
One must truly be blind to not see the huge difference this run has compared to the other 3 who also fight every boss. The "small only" SMW run has far less difference to the "96 exit" run by Fabian, and a much less solid goal than this run, (I think the run is great btw, and makes a good addition - this is only brought up for those who don't get the point with the 14% category), yet it got published in the main section. It wasn't necessarily more entertaining than the 96-exit run, but it showed new techs you won't see in any other Mario run due to the limited conditions, which is exactly the same case here as well. What makes that run different from this 14%, other than the likely lower overall tech quality and the fact that SMW has one category less than SM then? Nothing as you see.
Truncated wrote:
If it makes you feel any better Saturn, I would also have rejected this movie if I had judged it.
For no valid reason, against the audience, and the purpose of this site to show unique and entertaining quality runs as well?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Unbelievable. Seriously mmbossman, you show absolutely no clue when it comes to Super Metroid runs: How can somebody judge a game when he isn't even aware of the most elementary things about it? Here again:
The run mode (this is not a goal, it's a run choice):
- A 14%, or glichless/legit low%.
(14% runs exist since 2003 or even earlier btw, so this name says everything to a at least a bit in SM speedrunning involved person aka. the majority of people who would watch this run)
My goals to accomplish this particular run choice (14%):
1. Fastest realtime, accomplished by avoiding the pause screen (except when entering it would still be faster for realtime - gravity jump VS slow IBJ). Door entrances are the exception here, since optimizig them for realtime would look sloppy and barely save time anyway (aka. a slight realtime speed tradeoff for entertainment and ingame time in rare cases, which is obvious again).
2. Despite goal 1, I aimed for lowest game clock completion to set a TAS record for this category, and managed to get it without any sacrifices in it.
And the other, obvious goals 99% of people who will watch the run will know after seeing the "14%" label:
3. No Boss skipping
4. because of goal 3 obvious again: No OOR glitching
So yeah, it satisfies multiple goals if you want to see it like that. Where is the problem with that?
To remind you, the other 2 runs (100% and realtime oriented any% by hero) published on this site have the exactly same goals to accomplish their run mode choice. But for some reason you didn't bring up that bullshit there and made the author think that he is writing to a 3 year old in the end. Strange, isn't it?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
mmbossman wrote:
The whole of my reasons are highlighted in red above, if you would like to provide arguments against them (as a whole), you are welcome.
Ok here you go:
1) Poor and semi-arbitrary goal choice
As solid goal choice as it can be. Beating the game with lowest amount of items in legal conditions (without OOR glitching to skip bosses and most of the game). You are probably one of the ~5% of people here who can't recognize this as a solid goal. The majority sure does and stated it in this thread several times.
2) inability to reach those goals (due to the aforementioned entertainment/speed tradeoffs)
As stated before, fully reached both goals I had: "To get the lowest possible completion time on the game clock, while still beating it without ever entering the pause screen except when unavoidable to increase entertainment and shorten the realtime count".
4) an inability for this run to provide reasonably different material from those movie already published.
Says one who isn't involved in SM as much as most people who would watch this run. It in fact shows reasonably different material in "almost every single room" in the whole 2nd half of the run due to the lack of Speed Booster, which forces you to use "completely" different strategies that you won't see in any other run to pass them.
3) an abundance of Super Metroid material already published
This is the only valid point we have against this category, as Baxter and Cpadolf stated as well. The question is whether it's strong enough to kill the other 3.
LagDotCom wrote:
The problem is that we have 4 amazing TASes on this game already. Oh well! Try improving one of the existing ones.
Waste of time if the run already uses a optimal route and all the optimal techs. I'm much more for pulling completely new runs with tricks never done before. Has much more sense.
mmbossman wrote:
I also noticed that nowhere in that description does it mention "low %", or "no OOB glitch". In which case I count 4 primary goals.
And what is written in the very first line of my submission then, extra bolded and big?
submission wrote:
Super Metroid 14% (aka. glitchless/legit Low%) TAS v1.1 by Saturn
And as said, the fact that I didn't mention "no OOR-glitching", is because I assumed it to be a obvious thing to 99,9% of people once they read this:
submission wrote:
"14% mode (beats the game with the least amount of items possible in legal conditions)"
Seems like I was wrong, so next time I will probably point every little and obvious detail about it, no matter how ridiculous it would look. Would that be better?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Baxter wrote:
It was accepted at the low% here, until we learned it wasn't the lowest percentage possible after all, which is what matters.
Look, the 6% run is a NBMB run that has his own goals. The fact that this run doesn't fight bosses and skips major parts of the game makes the %-number completely irrelevant. It could beat the game via a hacked sram trick with even 0% by triggering the Zebes escape sequence right at the beginning, and it still wouldn't count as a low%.
The classic low% beats the game just like any other any% / 100% does: without skipping bosses etc., and thus it's accepted as the official low% in the SM community. Ask anybody else there if you need a confirmation.
Baxter wrote:
A 15% run is equally solid and unique, and also equally arbitrary.
A 15% run collects one more item than necessary to legally beat (without skipping bosses and major parts of the game) the game with the lowest amount of items, thus it's not a solid goal, just like a 16-99% run (except the any%) is.
Baxter wrote:
Could you adress this as well?
If it would get rejected for a good reason not against the majority of the audience, and the obvious facts, then yes.
mmbossman wrote:
When coupled with the same amount running from room to room, plus more door transitions, I think that the 6% is more entertaining overall.
With what you are clearly in the minority as seen in the thread. Does it provide you the right to ignore the majority of the audience and just go by your personal tastes? I don't think this happened before here.
mmbossman wrote:
Your justification for the 14% run seems to be that it's legit simply because it can be done without the use of tools, and I don't believe that makes an interesting category for a TAS.
No, my justification for the 14% run being the legit low% is, once again, "because it doesn't skip 90% of the game and every single boss".
mmbossman wrote:
The fact that you later decide to call this omissions "entertainment/speed tradeoffs" shows me that you could not make up your mind as to which goals you really wanted to follow, so you figured that a combination of both would suffice.
My 2 main goals were to get the lowest possible completion time on the game clock, while still beating the game without ever entering the pause screen except when unavoidable to increase entertainment and shorten the realtime count. Both of which I have succeeded.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Baxter wrote:
I think some pretty valid reasons were given, and Bablo just stated them again: Bablo wrote:
1) There is already a low% TAS published.
2) Doesn't use glitches, except it does?
3) I don't see a reason to make a fifth category for Super Metoid TASes.
Are there any good arguments against this?
There are (repeating what was said many times before):
1. The 6% is a NBMB (no-boss-mini-boss) run that skips a major part of the game using gamebreaking glitches. It's not a true low% category as we know it from many other games because of that, while the 14% has a long history in the SM speedrun community, and is accepted as the official low% there.
2. It only uses minor glitches that "all" 3 other, legit runs currently published on this site (100%, and both any%s) do as well (mainly the Zebetite skip and the ghost through solid blocks tech as seen in WS). They can't be compared to "gamebreaking", major glitches that allow to skip most parts of the game, including bosses, and I'm really surprised that some people still don't get this huge and obvious difference.
3. The 14% category was a solid one that existed before the 6% TAS came out. It got obsoleted for no good reason by a run that aims for "completely" different goals, as stated in the first 2 points. Besides, the amount of categories doesn't matter as long as they present solid, unique goals, which the 14% one certainly does. It's in fact perfectly suited for TASes due to it's difficulty and therefore the many advanced techs it shows that you won't ever see in a unassisted run. The 6% category is of course unique in itself as well, so it also deserves it's place here. In the end it would only be better for this site the more unique runs with solid goals it can present, as it would get more audience because of that.
DarkKobold:
Look at point 3.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Xkeeper wrote:
I'm just going to come right out and suggest that this TAS's rejection is due to the author.
It's too obvious, yes. I actually thought that at least the judges on this site are already out of the age of not being able to judge something objectively, regardless of the author (as stated in the judge guidelines), but it seems I was wrong. New times, new rules, I guess.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Yeah Kej, the 0,0000323% chance was what you calculated me back in 2006 when I got 11 Supers from 12 in my old RBO run on the first attempt (as you all know I managed to get 12 of 12 in the 2nd as seen in the 3rd teaser).
For those who wonder, the reason I didn't got 12 in this run is because the last, 6th, drop of each pirate takes a while until appearing unlike the first 5, so I would have to sacrifice some time to get them. Luckily the 10 drops sufficed for a full Super restore anyway.
Kejardon wrote:
While I would like a run that didn't worry so much about speed and showed off instead, that's not the focus for this site. Even if only the minutes show at the end screen it's not as though the seconds and frames don't exist.
There were many situations where entertainment was prefered over speed, even on this site. My 2 SSF2 movies are a prime example of this. And of course the seconds and frames still exist, it's just that most people (like you, as you stated) won't care about them when watching the video anyway.
Cpadolf:
As you said, Phantoon, and the Elite Pirates (both of which I have already passed at the time hero released his new any% WIP on Snes9x 1.51) were the main reason I didn't want to restart just to save a few frames in the end. As said, there would be a high chance that I would lose time in the new run, simply because the manipulation level is so high, that adding lag only wouldn't guarant you a optimal time without forced slowdowns there.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Cardboard wrote:
Yeah of course. But telling people that they are way worse than you does not help the competition, it leaves a game in a situation where nobody gives a fuck.
I never said anybody is way worse or anything just because I knew a certain trick long ago (where is the problem with stating it how it is?), so no need to invent such stories.
Cpadolf wrote:
Well there is this, only labeled as "manipulates luck".
Where a bot was used to manipulate that luck (who can probaly test millions of variations in a second). It's somewhat different compared to analyzing every variation by hand like I had to.
Cpadolf wrote:
Well actually since you previously stated that you didn't bother to optimize doors for realtime this would not be a big problem, as pretty much all luck manipulation could be done through adding lag to doors (which most often is possible in just 1-2 frame increments). Spoofers and my new any% run does this and with about half the run done I think that every drop in the game (well very, very close to) has been perfect for ingame play.
Manipulating single-drops, as you should know, is much simplier. The Elite Pirates drop 5 ones in one turn each though. I hope it's clear that a 50% and a 0,0000323% chance to get the desired result is not the same here, and "only" adding lag to doors wouldn't help you that much because of that as well.
But I'm glad to hear you guys do well on the any% so far.
Cpadolf wrote:
Well we have Kriole and Taco, as far as I know they are still working on (or at least planning to finish) a RBO, with their own route and everything.
Let's hope they won't pull another moozooh, and actually finish that run then. Judging by the great TASing skills this 2 guys lately presented, there might be a chance they indeed manage to get it done as good that I wouldn't have to come up with my own work for this run.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Vykan12 wrote:
I do sympathize somewhat that there is that effect of tricks being discovered as you perform a run, but at some point you must’ve realized that the run was worth restarting because of the sheer frequency of tricks that had been discovered, making your run seem outdated and sloppy in some regards.
Just to remind, the most new tricks got discovered in 2008, while I basicly finished that run in 2007 (with the exception of the last few rooms during the Zebes escape). Exception are the few tricks hero presented in his any% WIP in the later half of 2007, and yes, I indeed considered to restart after them. The reason I didn't do it is because of the excellent luck I got until then, so even including the tricks in the restarted run, there would still be a good chance that I would end up being slower due to worse refill drops in the end, so I didn't bother.
Vykan12 wrote:
So you think you can find groundbreaking, never before seen improvements to Namespoofer’s RBO run?
His run was semi-serious, and the fact that you say stuff like TASing from scratch and original effort implies that you think Spoofer’s run was horrible and not worth any consideration when planning the route for a new RBO run and so forth.
No, that run was great and Spoofer deserves alot of respect for pulling something that hard off as a TAS newbie.
But you can't compare his run to a serious, legit RBO because it uses out of room glitches, Grapple Beam etc. As you all know, I would skip both, which will force many additional challenges that have yet to be performed.
Vykan12 wrote:
People have already disagreed with you that the 6% run is less entertaining than the 14% run.
It's actually the excact opposite, which you would know if you'd read this thread. The only person who disagreed on this is Tub.
Cardboard wrote:
One reason that people might not want to make Super Metroid-runs is because they are tired of hearing "I can do better, I found this in real time 7 years ago :-)". And no, I am not kidding.
Yes, that's what you have to expect on a popular game like this. The competition level is very high there, you just have to face it.
Cardboard wrote:
Also I think you should change "very high luck manipulation" into "manipulates luck".
Maybe I should give a better example then: Manipulating 10 out of 10 Supers from the Elite Pirates without entering the pause screen is a chance of "~0.0000323 %" according to Kejardon, which he should know best of us. If that's not a very high luck manipulation that in fact costed me almost a week to get without slowdowns, then I don't know what is.
Cardboard wrote:
And believe it or not, I haven't gotten around to even download this submission yet. And I doubt that I will.
That's up to you. If you want to miss something, don't do it.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
I see, the poor hater seem to focus on this few meaningless tricks missing at the very beginning (most of which I wasn't even aware of at the time I recorded it) instead on 90% of the new and ground breaking stuff nobody ever performed before that truly shaves off alot of time in this run, not to mention the fact that it would pwn moozooh's 14% TAS by "several minutes". How pitiful.
But anyway, there is still a yet not fully explored category left: The RBO run. Should I once again be the first to seriously TAS it from scratch knowing that fellow SM-TASer won't dare to do it on their own, just like it was with this run? And then receive similar shit for the true, original effort done on it? I just hope it won't continue this one-sided way where only one does the work while everybody else ends up copying it in the end.
Vykan12 wrote:
Bragging about his own run, constantly stating absolutes, comparing the level of entertainment of his own run to others, etc... although this should be mind numbingly obvious.
Since when does stating the facts about the run (which I should know best doing countless tests in both, route and strategies) being considered bragging? Sorry, I just wanted to let everybody know by how much this run is improvable at most. Didn't expect that some weirdos still have a problem with that...
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Comicalflop wrote:
Ignoring the problem/bad behavior only works for two things: Little toddlers and Birds.
Glad that we share the same opinion on this.
Kejardon wrote:
Except as you just said, everything afterward would change because of the RNG. Maybe it would be faster. Maybe it would be slower. But it almost certainly wouldn't be the same.
Of course it would have a different RNG and therefore different refill drops (most likely worse, so you'd even have to slow down to compensate them) etc. But aside of that, the run would still look identical, using the very same strategies and techs in the end.
Kejardon wrote:
IIRC, Saturn asked me if I had any ideas for making the wall jump work, I asked him if he tried turning around in mid-air as that lowers Samus's hit box immediately after a wall jump. He did that and it worked.
It still wasn't as simple as you think. Turning around is the key to make this trick possible, but even that way, you still require maximally optimized subpixel position in both directions (as low and as far away of the wall as possible) before making the final walljump to not hit the top platform. Definitely a TAS only trick because of that.
Kejardon wrote:
In order to make a later run look better, you sabotage your current run?
Not using the few new techs I was aware of doesn't mean I sabotaged anything. I already said that I think the old techs look cooler anyway, so this stylistic choices only add up to the entertainment level of the run. And since I still got the lowest possible completion time, it doesn't matter much anyway. Besides in the case of the OTES climb strategy, I used the new tech during the Zebes escape anyway, so instead of showing the same strategy 2 times, this choice gives alot more variety in that room again.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
I actually agree that in-game runs are not really necessary in the end. The only exception for this category is the any%, because it allows to collect the Plasma Beam and therefore makes the run more entertaining to watch overall, due to the much faster boss fights and more variety through the new items.
100% in-game is pointless, since the quicker boss fights and the high variety are still there, no matter of your aim. It doesn't make the any% in-game obsolete though, because it's much longer and with alot more interruptions.
14%/6% in-game is pointless as well, for the very same reasons as the 100%: no route change, equal variety and boss duration no matter what.
100% glitched and saves the animals is also pointless. The latter is obvious by itself (99,9% same run until the escape), the glitched is pointless due to the 6% run where it has the most solid purpose. It would also kind of destroy the meaning of a 100% run: to show off everything the game has to offer, which includes bosses in first place that would be partly skipped otherwise.
Just my opinion.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Regarding Hex-editing the run, as Cpadolf said, it's not possible. There is no way to change even a single frame anywhere in the game without causing massive desyncs due to completely different item drops and enemy behavior. What I meant with editing was the video (aka. AVI) file. It could be done without much effort, but the video wouldn't be legit that way, even though the result would look 100% the same like making another smv from scratch.
Twelvepack wrote:
Do you really need to repeat yourself from page 1 again? I think everything about this video was said there already.
Twelvepack wrote:
The date on the video says it was discovered a week shy of 2 years ago.
That's true, during my any% run which I can prove anytime I want by releasing the original smv (the Botwoon fight of that run was showed in the "Mixed Speed Demos" vid for exactly that reason to confirm the unique refills I got after the fight). Besides, if you would just look at the date I uploaded that video, you would already see that it was done 3 days before Taco presented that trick the first time, thus the proof is already clear for anybody who can read video descriptions.
Oh, and you can of course ask Kejardon as well. I informed him immediately after discovering that trick.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
Cpadolf:
This misinterpretation is unfortunately a side-effect when trying to tell things how they are. Instead of repeating the same mistake again and again, while also encouraging spongers who do nothing for years despite making big promises to do the same, how about proving anything I said wrong instead?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(209)
Joined: 2/18/2005
Posts: 1451
gia wrote:
just wonder why you didnt move around vs mother brain, that was the only boring part. Ridley had some of it but it finished soon after, I was hoping you'd start moving the last thirty seconds or so, what makes it completely necessary to stay in the corner?
I had no choice. Moving around in the MB fight would make you end up avoiding MBs shots in a much more difficult way, one that would require you to turn around several times to do that. And every turn-around delays your charge counter slightly, which means I wouldn't be able to shoot her as fast as possible. Standing in the corner is a save place that allows you to control the fight without any sacrifices in the shot frequency at all, so I had to do it that way to save time, especially since getting 0:27 was so close here.
derakon wrote:
There's a difference, though, between "An improvement was found mid-run that would require redoing a lot of work" and "I know there's a faster way to do this but I'm not going to use it because I don't want to tip my hand." Many of the possible improvements in this run are of the latter type, which is what's causing most of the argument
It's not. Due to the fact that this run is almost a year old, I wasn't aware of most improvements. They were found when this run was already done long time ago.
Twelvepack wrote:
finding 15 seconds in a movie that is a first version, and not exactly time tested is not a big deal, but in a game as thoroughly researched as super metroid it really is.
Yet another Mr. clueless we have here, it seems. I tell you what, if it wasn't for this run, nobody would get the low completion time this run does in both real and ingame, even with the few tricks included in the beginning. Most of the more complex strategies for sure wouldn't be as fast as they are here, and if the ones who are aware of SM-TASing would be honest to themself (this seems to be a common problem here), they wouldn't deny that as well.
And to remind you again, since most of the praised runs on this site got obsoleted by several minutes as time showed, this movie is surely of higher quality than most of them. I don't say that to praise myself or anything, I just try to open some people the eyes, who unfortunately aren't able to see that.
But whatever, if people don't approve the "original" work just because of the few stupid tricks I was unaware of, so be it. I guarantee you guys that any improvement attempt will end up to be a lame copy of this run based to 99% on my work in the end (thats what TASing is about nowadays, it seems), just with the mentioned tricks added. One could basicly just take a video of this run, and simply editing the new techs (that wouldn't make a difference in the completion time anyway) in the few rooms into it, to achieve the exact same result in the end.