Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1506)
Joined: 2/23/2022
Posts: 131
Location: MN
Thank you again for the work you are putting into this. I think it's important to remember that we have to double back in some levels and keep going in others.
If Waldo is left 100 and scroll is right 100, the total distance is 300 since when we get to Waldo we're now 200 away from the scroll.
If both are in the same direction then only the farthest one matters since we're picking the other one up along the way.
I'm glad you figured out how the variation lock outs actually work.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1506)
Joined: 2/23/2022
Posts: 131
Location: MN
link_7777 wrote:
Samsara wrote:
link_7777 wrote:
GJTASer2018 wrote:
The previous submission of this game was rejected for triviality, and I don't understand how this is supposed to improve anything. Voting No.
It is 3 frames faster, so clearly there is something non-trivial.
I can weigh in on my decision a little bit.
My usage of trivial didn't refer to the game's ability to be improved, it referred to the game itself. Even with a three frame improvement, nearly the entire running time is still menus with one 5 second section of shooting at the end. Over 99% of this run cannot be improved by virtue of it being all menuing, and if the last submission's comments are any indication, it would be 100% identical in an RTA run. It didn't quite feel right to me to publish a game where only <1% has any competition, especially when the shooting section doesn't look noticeably tool-assisted.
I do think it deserves a second look from a different eye, though. Game choice was always one of those things that felt a little too subjective for a single person to decide.
Thanks for the info from the rules side ThunderAxe31.
As for the game side, I think there is a misconception that since often menus are really easy to optimize when making a tas that it translates to them being trivial and easy to reproduce RTA. There are runners that are great at menuing, NESCardniality comes to mind. I compared this run with ShesChardcore's current record for this category (the menuing is probably reasonably good, I know Chard as someone that runs a lot of very short categories, so I think it is likely a bunch of them are heavy in menuing). From the end of the intro to the beginning of the fight is 12449 frames for Chard, 12248 for this run. This is a difference of over 3 seconds (keeping in mind that a large chunk of that time is just wait time).
I agree that the fight at the end is the main interesting part of the run, and it is quite short. I think the fight looks tool assisted compared to the current record, but part of that may be because I spent some time trying to optimize it. Admittedly it would probably look less tool assisted to a more casual observer.
Thanks for weighing in Samasara, and I'm glad you think it deserves a second look. I was initially going to mark this as unpublishable for TASMania, but I decided to revisit and look for an improvement. I know there have been rule changes and I figured if I could shave a few frames it could be revisited under a new submission.
I feel honored to be mentioned in the same breath as NEScardinality :p
From what I remember about this game, there may be something akin to frame rules. When I was running it I was able to get the same combat entry time with both good and not quite as good menuing. It's likely that the TAS is cleaner and buffers inputs more optimally than I did, enough to catch a faster window.
The other thought I had was that it could be possible to advance the game faster by sitting on a different, less laggy screen but I never explored that possibility.
The TAS combat is not trivial and very likely not human viable imo. There's a reason why RTA runners use the "magic pixel" at the top where the enemy can't hit you.
Also holding left when you start the game cuts out the long intro text.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1506)
Joined: 2/23/2022
Posts: 131
Location: MN
Thanks for doing the conversion. I was using an old version of bizhawk (which I have since upgraded to the latest) because I thought I had updated more recently than I had. I had also forgotten to change the core, which I have since done as well. Basically, sorry am noob but I'm working on it 😂
Scripting out all the different patterns sounds like a good idea and hopefully we can figure out how to access each one. The best level 2 is awesome but I've never been able to access it without the specific path of 4-1-3-2 and I believe the level 2 in my submission is the second best one, faster than the ones where the scroll is super far left.
There is also an "alternate god sock" in 5 that I've never encountered (Overswarm gets it in his Rta WR) which probably won't show up using the linear 1-2-3-4 path but the original god sock is probably just as fast.
Meshuggah: thanks for your original TAS and helping with this one! I hope you find something I might have missed!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1506)
Joined: 2/23/2022
Posts: 131
Location: MN
MESHUGGAH wrote:
Good job for your first TAS which improves another TAS!
So this game is a quest to TAS by sacrificing frames for:
- most optimal starting level (0 or N number of delays)
- most optimal Waldo location (0 or N number of delays)
- most optimal next level (0 or N number of frames to wait until the new selection is registered)
I guess will take a look at this inside an emu within the next days.
edit: ah, mistook this Waldo "2" TAS with the original Where's Waldo? TAS. In this case, I just moved on the sequel with the followings in mind.
I remember when I TASed this game while TASing 2 other games that day, I tested the "sacrifice N number of frames before starting first level" up to the point which the currently published TAS has (don't know exact value, maybe 7?) and +1. Then I TASed up to stage 3 and decided my selected number of frames delay was the best among them. But it's not, thanks for proving me wrong!
Obvious yes vote!
Thanks! The RTA Route is interesting as well. It can unlock a super fast level 2. Basically you pick normal, menu to level 4 quickly and hope you hit the frame window to get the best 4 pattern (scroll onscreen, Waldo top right) which is a time save over the "castle scroll." You then want right Waldo/right scroll in level 1. Then you menu again to level 3 to get the same pattern we do. Then you hope you hit a good frame for the godly level 2 pattern and get the "god sock" in 5. My RTA run on SRC showcases this route which is unfortunately not TAS friendly due to not getting the free menu to 4 before time starts. I did try it and it's just not good enough for TAS timing. I dunno why I put so much effort into this game haha
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1506)
Joined: 2/23/2022
Posts: 131
Location: MN
Hello! Not sure if this will ever be read but a potential time save exists for this run.
Turning sound off loads the encounters 1.2s faster and that's around 6 seconds with the 5 battles minus some frames to menu through the options.
I know that this would change the luck around and probably take another botting effort to recreate the encounters and such so even though it's low hanging fruit, I fully understand if it's not worth the effort to re-run. Great work either way!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1506)
Joined: 2/23/2022
Posts: 131
Location: MN
Hello. I wanted to chime in on the NES vs Vs discussion, specifically for the 100k points category (which I am interested in TASing or collaborating on with someone more experienced.) I currently hold the RTA WRs for NES 100k including a full game manip of Game B using minimal inputs (I actually don't ever flip the ball in the traditional way, I do one release flip downward and a couple holds) though the time can be considerably faster through intended means and I was mostly just showing off haha. Plus I just love me some Pinball.
For Rescuing Pauline I definitely agree that Vs can obsolete NES as they're similar enough for the most part. However there are numerous differences between the 2 versions when it comes to scoring and gameplay features.
The most obvious difference is that the bottom screen bumpers are worth 300 on Vs and 100 on NES. This might make the routes completely different. On NES you basically want the penguins as fast as possible and keep the ball on the top screen for the double points that they provide and hit the 1000 rollover a bunch of times. Penguins can be easily manipulated in game A, but IIRC game B can't use the same manip due to the ball speed difference and the movement of the slot stopper. For Vs it may be prudent to find a good path to the bottom screen and rack up the points with good shots and angles into the bumpers. On Vs, going into the Pauline exit hole (phrasing!) spits you to the bottom screen instead of rejecting you back out to the top like NES. You can also save the chicks twice in the bottom screen on Vs and get a ball save that deposits you directly into the bumpers after a short cutscene. This is not in the NES version but there could be an optimal time to trigger it to get maximum use out of the bumpers.
There are other minor differences like Pauline being worth fewer points in Vs and those points accrue in a separate score (like a "bonus" in real pinball.)
Anyway sorry for the rambling! I am just an NES Pinball enthusiast and I'm willing to help regardless of the decision on obsolescence.
