Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
WST wrote:
Hovewer, I don’t have a strong wish to give it a «Yes» vote, because the run is abusing a glitch which is not derived from the original games and probably introduced by the romhacker. In my humble opinion, such bugs should be reported to the hack’s developer instead of abusing to TAS the game.
Finally, absence of experience with this hack in particular (who the hell is this character?)
He's from Knuckles Chaotix.
And I agree with WST - somebody should contact E-122-Psi on the Sonic Retro forums about this bug. I would do it myself but I don't have an account.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I thought this run was very well optimized and I surprised myself to watch it through the end, so I'm voting Yes as far as entertainment goes.
That said, it is my humble opinion that there should not be a 2nd any% category that involves memory corruption, even though it already exists with the Red run. It seems pretty silly to me to have an extra 36 minutes of padding to trigger the exact same glitch as the save data corruption run, especially when 95% of it is RNG manipulation. I think a playaround would have been a much better choice than a speedrun considering what's different between this run and the fastest any% run.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Easy yes vote for me too!
By the way, I'm throwing an idea like that: How about a real-time TAS of Sonic too? It may sound counter-intuitive, but the movie could be as impressive and more entertaining if Sonic waited as much as possible before starting each level and maintain a low score afterwards to reduce the overall waiting time. And of course, it would be faster! :D
TASVideoAgent wrote:
My choice for a different ending lengthened the input file by 205 frames.
Can you elaborate on that? I'm not a Sonic connoisseur, and not only do I not understand the reasoning behind this decision, but I don't see anywhere in your comments where those 205 frames are located.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
The situation as I understand it:
- p4wn3r's run is faster
- p4wn3r's run is on a deprecated emulator
- Masterjun used the exact same strategy as p4wn3r
- Masterjun saved 2 frames because of extra lag
So, what to make of this?
Let's forget who to give credit to and just look at the raw data. If the preferred emulator is indeed more accurate than the deprecated one, then the answer's obvious: Masterjun's movie should replace p4wn3r's. In fact, I'd even go as far as saying that even without any improvements whatsoever, it should replace the old movie.
Now, the question then becomes if the 2 frames saved by Masterjun really is an improvement or just a result of resyncing to the new emulator. Well, since the exact same strategy was used (bruteforcing RNG), then it really is just resyncing and nothing else, so p4wn3r should still be credited as the author.
I think the best way around this problem is to reject this submission, and then add to the current publication this updated version. This way, both p4wn3r (the author) and Masterjun (the resyncer) can be credited appropriately for their respective work.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I'm not a legal expert, but I'm fairly certain that video game cutscenes are considered fair use under USA laws in the context of a speedrun. Blame the YouTube monkeys that automatically flag everything that matches their database.
In any case, the official encode should be complete, whether it's uploaded on YouTube or somewhere else.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
GameTrailers recently released their new PopFiction episode 35, and it's relevant to this discussion. Basically they take a Famicom and a NES-101, boot Super Mario Bros, swap the cartridges while the power is still on with Tennis or Family BASIC, reset, do stuff, swap back to Super Mario Bros, reset, and use the continue trick to access random worlds.
The reason it works is because the continue data is not initialized after a reset, and the way it checks if a reset was done is by comparing a test value in RAM. So basically, the same trick could be used with dirty RAM instead of cartridge swapping.
I think it's pretty cool that dirty RAM allows for something like this and I would definitely allow it (while keeping a separate clear RAM category as well). As for the cartridge swapping... well it's cool but unlike disc swapping I'm pretty sure it damages the cartridges and system on the long run so I wouldn't allow it even for a TAS.
zaphod77 wrote:
Streaming arbitrary data through a port. not okay, in my book. Controller port, reset, and power button only. Expansion bus on ps1 is NOT okay, for example (it's the gameshark port) But if there's an actual first party peripheral for that port, then it might be okay.
I didn't know you could use a cheating device on a PSX that exclusively used the extension port. That's very interesting. I agree that if it's possible to overwrite arbitrary addresses through such a port, it should not be allowed for use except when connected to official products. But as far as I know, that's the exception. I don't see why not use such a port otherwise (at least in its own category) if it's limited to a reserved section in memory.
zaphod77 wrote:
As for starting a run with dirty memory, if the time to get that state of dirty memory (done in the warped arkanoid run, for example) is counted in the time, then it's okay. Game over during the demo dirties memory, allowing a continue, hence the warp.
Sorry, but that's not what dirty memory means. It's when residual values are still in RAM at power on. The idea of timing how long it takes to create the dirty RAM is interesting, but I don't think that makes much sense. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think RAM can contain data even if it has never been used.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Braid is a fun game to speedrun, but speedruns for this game are not particularly entertaining to look at. Still, this one appears very well optimized overall and some of the tricks are quite interesting, so I'm voting Meh.
There's one big thing that I don't understand however. During the world 4 puzzle, once all the puzzle pieces are assembled, you wait for about 2 seconds before inserting the pieces properly into place. Why is that? It looks really sloppy.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Warp wrote:
I think there's still some misunderstanding left. I'm not talking about abusing luck or glitches in the game. I'm just talking about doing it via gameplay (rather than via external influence such as the reset or power buttons.)
If we continue with the football game metaphor, abusing luck in the game would be like in the football game a perfect player making a one-in-a-trillion shot from one end of the field to the other, which has just the right amount of spin and velocity, and bounces ten times from the ground, other players and goalposts, and might even fly 50 meters high at some point, and ends up in the opponents' goal through astronomically small chance. There's nothing wrong with that.
Zipping through a wall is like the ball suddenly quantum-teleporting through a player, a chance that's so astronomically small that it just doesn't happen normally.
Again, I'm not sure I follow your metaphor unfortunately. I'm really bad at interpreting metaphors.
But from what I understand, it appears that I misunderstood your previous explanation about what the various elements in your metaphor were representing. I thought you were doing a comment about banning emergent gameplay, not about banning non-game factors.
My last comment indeed does not quite make sense in that context. I thought you were more of an abstract gameplay purist than an emergent gameplay purist. :)
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I get your metaphor now, thanks for the explanation. Seems like I understood your position perfectly.
It makes sense to me, but it's a logic that can't be perfectly applied for TAS because you can bet for sure that the game design rules are different than how the game is programmed. For example, while a game designer can think in terms of probabilities, an algorithm cannot generate randomness, only simulate it. Hence, you can't ban luck manipulation, and yet you can't fully manipulate it either.
You could still use your common sense and guess what were the game designer's intentions, but there are limits (as I just mentioned), and it's open to interpretation (bug or feature). There is merit to at least try (glitchless categories), but you just can't make it a hard requirement. It's impossible.
And of course, even if it would be possible, it doesn't mean that the "abuse" way doesn't have merit too. It's just a different kind of entertainment. But I'm just repeating myself on that last one. :)
Now, how about we watch a good game of [1438] SNES International Superstar Soccer Deluxe "playaround" by Marcokarty in 15:24.38? :D
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Warp wrote:
I'm not sure I can agree with the sentiment that since the power button can be detected in some modern consoles, it has to be allowed in all consoles, even those where it simply just cuts the power to the machine and that's it.
My soft power button example was just an example, not a generalization. To give another example, I've seen a 360 game fail certification because of bad save data corruption handling after a power failure.
To clarify, my point was if a consoles is designed with a specific feature, software running on them must be designed to take that feature into consideration.
Warp wrote:
Well, the case where a player gets sick is right here in the rulebook. Since it's in the rulebook, making them sick a perfectly valid option, isn't it? Surely it wouldn't be there if it weren't a valid strategy, now would it?
Well, the game's rulebook might contain some section about what to do if a player gets sick during a game, but that's not really what we wanted to see. We wanted to see the game being actually played...
Not sure that's a really good example, considering sports competitions do have rules about not doing that sort of things without being disqualified. At least, well-designed ones.
That said, I see merit in both following the rules and abusing the rules. The entertainment value for each case is entirely subjective and game-dependent, so both categories should be allowed in my opinion.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Patashu wrote:
This is unlikely because it implies that some dev has to code the operation 'transfer memory card to another instance of dolphin running in parallel' and have it be sync-stable, TASable, etc. Given how often anyone would want to use this, is it worth not just the development time but the development burden (has to not break or break things in the future)?
No need to do something that complicated. Just make a separate movie file per console. Only thing to code in the emulator is a memory card replacement function. Of course a judge would need to check if the data matches, but that's it.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I love this question.
The way I see it is:
- All memory cards must start in their factory state, including spare ones.
- Having multiple consoles running in parallel is OK.
- Swapping memory cards with spare ones is OK.
- Formatting a memory card and/or copying data between memory cards is OK if done on any available console.
- Ejected memory card data can be moved from a console to another, starting from the frame the memory card was ejected.
- There should be full input provided for all consoles for verification.
Of course the final decision will go to a judge, but I believe it's the only possible way you could be allowed to do what you want to do.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Warp wrote:
SmashManiac wrote:
Now, for my own opinions:
- If something can be physically done to the console without opening it nor damaging it, it should be acceptable.
I'm honestly not trying to start the argument again, and I'm honestly being purely curious: Does that include using the power button and pulling and reconnecting the power plug?
Yes. Allow me to elaborate, since I forgot to do so earlier.
Indeed, with the exception of restoring a state prior to a power off or interrupt, such actions are rarely taken into consideration during the game design process. On this regard, I find your position perfectly valid and reasonable, and worthy of a separate category in my opinion.
However, it is possible to do such actions, and the hardware has been designed for that. Not only that, but proper handling of those actions are literally requirements for licensed games. (For example, I've seen a Wii game fail certification because the power button triggered a save before power off.) Therefore, even if the game was not designed around those actions, the software does, and since the published game is the software, then it's the only reliable reference for the game's rules too, including the handling of the hardware's power.
I hope my position is more clear now! :)
EEssentia wrote:
SmashManiac wrote:
- Pretty sure N64 crooked cartridge can be emulated. I mean, why not? It's just electrical wires not connecting properly.
I'm pretty sure it can't. Emulation isn't about mimicking the electrical properties of a system.
Besides, electrical circuits are extremely hard to emulate properly. When you start using a system in a way it was never designed to be used, anything can happen.
I'm not an electronics expert, but I know the N64 was designed so that a cartridge could be temporarily removed from the system, even up to 10 seconds on early revisions (hence why Rare attempted Stop 'n' Swop for Banjo-Kazooie). Because of that, I believe the electronics must have been designed to accommodate cartridges that aren't inserted property while powered on too, since that case can very easily happen during a swap. I don't see how it could have worked otherwise. If I'm right, I would have thought that simply forcing some bits to 0 while emulating a read or write operation would have done the job.
Whether doing so is a form of hacking or not is another matter entirely. But even if it isn't, it's not sufficient reason to allow crooked cartridge for me since it does not resolve whether or not doing so causes damage to the hardware or cartridge. And even if it doesn't, the N64 user documentation clearly states in bold letters to always make sure that the power is off before inserting or removing a cartridge, so just for that I would not allow crooked cartridge.
feos wrote:
I apologize for turning this thread into a flamewar. Partially it concerned my judging decision about latest SMW glitched, and I needed to figure out if this decision was fair. If community didn't mostly agree that the traits SMW gitched has are legit from TAS point, it would prove my decision was wrong, so I needed to find out why and how that mistake was made by me. I see that no mistake was made though..
Thanks for apologizing. I understand now why you felt so concerned about this thread. Getting the pulse of the community for such rules and rulings was the primary reason I created it, since nobody appeared to have done so in the past except in submission threads. I'm happy that it had the desired effect on this regard. And yes, you can stop worrying. :)
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I didn't expect this topic to become a battlefield of personal attacks. I am quite disappointed by some of the reactions here, especially on Warp's perfectly reasonable opinion on what constitutes valid input. I want this topic to be constructive, so please keep it so.
That said, let's get back on topic. Just going to clarify some points I've seen so far:
- I was indeed thinking about [2380] SNES Super Mario World "game end glitch" by Masterjun in 01:39.74 when referring to non-existent buttons.
- I never thought of packet spoofing, but that is also a good question for online games.
- Disc swapping with the wrong games can indeed be useful: http://www.gametrailers.com/full-episodes/6e5hv2/pop-fiction-episode-05---the-phoenix-down-that-failed
- Pretty sure N64 crooked cartridge can be emulated. I mean, why not? It's just electrical wires not connecting properly.
- By normal game's objective, I'm talking about the goal of the game, say rescuing the princess in Mario games.
- About that L+R video on real hardware, please take into consideration a case where such a thing isn't possible. Besides, as far as I know, that video could be fake.
So far I'm seeing people that are OK if pretty much anything goes and some that much prefer pure gameplay, and I think it's good to separate categories for this very reason. What I'm interested in is your personal opinion on what you feel should be allowed or not.
Now, for my own opinions:
- If something can be physically done to the console without opening it nor damaging it, it should be acceptable.
- If a signal can be sent through any kind of available port. it should be valid input.
- Components that are in an undefined state at power on should be allowed to be at any defined state before starting a TAS.
- Beating the game should mean getting the machine to reach a predefined state. What that state is is game-dependent, but should have at least one of the following criteria: beating the last level, executing the end state and/or getting game completion evidence on the save data.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Recently I've seen many submissions on TASVideos that challenges the very principles of common sense and defies whether or not something done in a run should be allowed or not.
I know some of the stuff below have long since been resolved here and others not, even though they are not explicitly stated in the rules. In any case, I was wondering what your various personal opinions are about whether the following should be allowed in a TAS:
- Pressing Up+Down or Left+Right on controllers that don't normally allow it
- Pressing buttons that don't exist on normal controllers but that are still read through the controller port
- Streaming arbitrary data through an external port
- Partially disconnecting a cartridge
- Swapping discs when not prompted
- Swapping discs with a completely different game
- Witnessing the ending without completing the normal game's objective
- Getting a game beaten state in memory but without witnessing the normal ending
- Resetting during a save operation
- Starting a run with dirty memory (excluding save data)
That's all I can think for now. I'm going to give my own opinion later on those topics, but I wanted to see a few replies first to avoid any bias from me.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I re-read the submission notes and now I understand most of it. That's some crazy and interesting stuff!
Masterjun wrote:
The music doesn't freeze (it runs on another processor).
There's a SFX stuck in a loop though. Personally I don't care but apparently some do.
Masterjun wrote:
This movie also shows that a custom controller with 16 buttons can be created, since executing the STP requires extra button 0, 2 and 3.
Masterjun, you always impress me in how you always push the boundaries of possibilities. I mean, we're going to need custom controllers that have useless buttons to make speedruns now? What's next, reading data from the EXT port? :)
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Ilari wrote:
SmashManiac wrote:
I realized after posting that the current method requires 5 controllers (according to bahamete, can't confirm),
Actually, 4 (1-1, 1-2, 2-1 and 2-2). But getting 1-2 actually requires 8 controllers to be present.
I assume you mean 8 controller ports, as in you would need 2 multitaps if you were to reproduce this with normal SNES controllers? Wow, that's epic, especially when considering there's not a single licensed game that even supports multitap on controller 1...
I realized after posting that the current method requires 5 controllers (according to bahamete, can't confirm), so I don't think it's possible in its current form because of that. If it was possible to tweak it to make it happen it would be awesome though. :D
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Saw the movie, didn't understand a single thing. Read the comments, didn't understand a single thing either. Yes vote. :)
I wonder, can this input be used in the Masterpiece demo included in Super Smash Bros. Brawl? The time limit is 1:30 2:00 and it starts at the beginning of Yoshi's Island 2, so the input time fits.
Spikestuff wrote:
WAIT A SEC. THIS SHOWS THE CREDITS INSTEAD OF "THE END" SCREEN!?
