Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Nach wrote:
feos wrote:
Nach: Would you consider a movie as improvement, if it is slower by the amount of frames in the submission, but reaches the credits faster?
Recall the argument of the four ways to end a movie.
I'd want to hear from the players and views of this particular game, and see which type of goal they prefer.
In a perfect world, I would say that the time it takes to reach the end state is what matters first, and then ending input at a point where extra input cannot change this outcome second. In reality however defining what exactly is the end state is not trivial and testing for extra input is a NP problem. The only reliable way to measure the length of an arbitrary TAS is by the length of its input, even if it means delaying the actual game end. There has been multiple precedents of this (Monopoly just to name one), so I don't see why Battletoads should be judged differently.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
AnS wrote:
To make the movie sync with any other FCEUX (except 2.1.5), authors of the movie should add 1 blank frame at the end of the movie, and then ask admins to replace the file.
Wait what? Why would the authors need to artificially add an extra input frame when it's just a matter of fixing a simple emulator bug?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Hmm... it indeed uses the same glitch as DarkKobold mentioned, and many publications have been obsoleted because of this.
On the other end, it is also true that feos and MESHUGGAH did not corrupt the memory in their run, at least not in the sense of manipulating it.
Quoting from the SMW discussion:
adelikat wrote:
I'm fine with this being a new category as long as we can have a clear line as to what constitutes this category vs the any%. The difference here is ram corruption from what the 'experts' have told me. This is probably going to be clear cut enough, though I suspect there will be at least one TAS that challenges this potential gray line.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I liked how this horrible game resulted in interesting counter-intuitive strategies. Not the best run ever, but it appears very well optimized and I remained entertained throughout the entire run with the exception of the pirate slaying part. Yes vote overall.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Now THAT is a speedrun! Yes vote!
I believe this is another case where a new branch should be created because of memory corruption. See [1945] SNES Super Mario World "game end glitch" by Masterjun in 02:36.40 for reference.
By the way, is there a way to kill Zitz on the way without losing time? It would make the "final battle" shorter after the end of input.
@Radiant: The jump to stage 3 is achieved through a normal warp.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Radiant wrote:
And yes, I think route planning makes for a valid TAS.
Nothing wrong with route planning for TASing, but that's all there is to it here, and it's not a complex route either. With the exception of frame perfection, the technical quality of this particular TAS is extremely low in my opinion because of this. A similar point was recently discussed in Post #323143 about the controversial rejection of #3667: mtvf1's GBA MegaMan Battle Chip Challenge "no code" in 2:41:48.80.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
"You are in a Cooridor"? :/
So the only difference between this run and a normal walkthrough is that you can press arrow keys so quickly that you can dodge monsters? That makes the entire game a travelling salesman problem. I really don't think a solution to such a problem is worth publication, not to mention that it goes way too fast to follow the chosen path at normal speed.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Just noticed that this run was rejected. I'm surprised considering I was the only "no" voter, but I do think it was the right decision considering TASVideos's mission.
That said, I'm in the opinion that TASVideos would benefit in having a collection of best times/scores in addition to the high-quality publications so that runs like this one can find its proper audience in the TAS community.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
mtvf1 wrote:
Though this game is not popular as other megaman battle network games. Since 3 months, no one said this game is bad choice. If more persons suggested this, I would give up to tas this game. http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12004
Do you know I use luck manipulation to keep all my attack can hit enemies? And must use sword chips to delet their recovery chips; keep enemies use least chips and favorable chips for me; control the more power of Meteor-chips; try my best to avoid enemies' attack, and must get the important chips from enemies. In most cases, I must manipulate luck for next 3 or more battles. So this tas luck manipulation is not as easy as you said.
Yes I did notice all that since I have beaten the game myself. In fact, I actually like this game despite its low difficulty and extremely sluggish speed. As I said, this run is without a doubt a great technical achievement. What I'm saying is that it would be much more enjoyable for me as a mathematical paper as I can't appreciate your hard work by simply watching the slow and predictable output. Maybe if I thought it was a hard game to begin with I would have a different opinion, but that's not the case here.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
While this is a great technical achievement, the movie itself is long and boring. I couldn't stand watching beyond ClassD. Even when skimming through FractalFusion's encode, the same strategies were used constantly, making the whole thing very repetitive.
This game is just not well suited for TAS in my opinion. The reason is because the entire gameplay of Mega Man: Battle Chip Challenge is building your deck to take advantage of luck and then watching luck unfold. Luck manipulation is then almost equivalent to cheating in this game, since battles become extremely predictable. As for the speed element, the game is just too slow in general. Voting no for bad game choice.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I can't believe I missed the original thread! But yeah, most of its content seems pretty obsolete. As for the Nico run, I haven't done any research for current records yet, so thanks for the link!
There's definitely something wrong with 2-2 worth investigating. I can crash this level very easily on my original Game Boy while jumping off the spring, but not on my Super Game Boy. I don't think I can watch jimsfriend's demo considering how old the VBM file is though, but it shouldn't be a problem considering how I can easily reproduce the bug myself. I can probably handle the debugging part too, but without knowledge of the GB hardware architecture it's going to be hard by myself to understand what's going on.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I was considering the possibility of doing a Donkey Kong '94 TAS in the future. However I was wondering about the following:
- Currently, VBA-rerecording is the only acceptable emulator to use for submission. However, I'm not familiar with the accuracy of the SGB emulation of VBA, and since this game is so dependent on the Super Game Boy capabilities, I was wondering if lsnes wouldn't be a better emulator choice for this particular game.
- There's a spring in stage 2-2 that crashes the game on the Game Boy if you jump on it in a specific way, but not on the Super Game Boy. I haven't found any documentation about this bug, so I was wondering if anybody more familiar with the Game Boy hardware architecture could help me debug why this occurs and maybe find together some crazy exploit that could be used to break the game.
- I'm not sure whether to do an overall best time (like most Mario TAS) or per-level best times (like most Sonic TAS). The reason is because the total time left for every set of 4 stages is rounded up to the hundred to determine the number of 1-ups you get, and every 1-up gained that way loses time, so it may be possible to lose some frames during levels to avoid a 1-up time loss. I have a very small incline for best overall time since I don't think people usually compare individual level times for this game, but I wanted everybody's opinion on the matter.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Voting no for being incomplete, for bad goal and for entertainment.
Incomplete because the glitched password was also used to skip 8 levels.
Bad goal because on one hand the password is used for penalties (low max HP, dash upgrade skip) but on the other hand it is also used for gain as well (all sub-weapons, all sub-tanks).
Bad goal also because a no damage, no dash run would have been an even more severe restriction (and would have prevented the long wait on the title screen at the same time).
Entertainment because while showcasing a low max HP and using sub-weapons on the intro level are pretty cool, the penalties granted with the glitched password did not add significant value to the run compared to the normal TAS.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Taunts and EX moves were introduced in Second Impact and red parries in 3rd Strike, so the rose kill against Gill was impossible. But this makes me wonder again why you didn't pick 3rd Strike. Besides, Second Impact only has 1 more opponent and 3rd Strike 4 more opponents including the optional fight against Q.
Filling up the SA gauge to use X.C.O.P.Y. indeed takes time, but even then you can just wait for the next round to use it, so it would be about half Twelve and half everybody else.
As for character swapping in the middle of a playthrough without losing a match, I think it's possible through VS play but it requires the first player to immediately rematch against the second player to avoid losing its progress. If I'm correct, each character swap would require 2 VS matches. A separate "VS exhibition" category would probably be better though.
I watched the encode and I'm voting no for the following reasons:
- Game is not on the hardest difficulty.
- Only shows off Dudley's target combos.
- Almost every round looked identical.
- No super-human abilities showcased.
- Missing moves present from 3rd Strike.
Speaking of which, I noticed that the re-record count (1925) is pretty low compared to the average published TAS. I think an entertaining Street Fighter III TAS would require a lot more time investment than your current attempt unfortunately.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I won't vote for now because I haven't seen the movie, but your reasoning to pick New Generation over the much more popular 3rd Strike seems very strange to me. With 3rd Strike you could have just picked Twelve with the X.C.O.P.Y. Super Art the and show a huge variety of combinations from plenty of different characters.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Mitjitsu wrote:
I have just one question, why didn't you manipulate the rock in Kakariko to drop a blue rupee?
It's in the author's comments: you need to be an adult to do so.
Also, obvious yes vote. The only thing that bothers me is why signed the run with "SL". Not a big deal, but I'm pretty sure you lost a few frames by doing so.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
sonicpacker wrote:
SmashManiac wrote:
First, it just collects 70 stars instead of 120, so the run feels incomplete.
That's because the minimum amount to beat the game without a major break (BLJing) is 70 stars. It's not some random number.
I know. All I'm saying is, I wished I could have seen all 120 stars, not just the required subset to finish the game. I'm pretty sure if this run is published that a 120 stars version will obsolete it right away.
sonicpacker wrote:
SmashManiac wrote:
As far as I know, BLJ is not a bug that destroys normal gameplay, so this run just feels like a step backwards for me.
Heh, you'd be surprised what it can destroy. Trust me.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I really feel bad because there's obviously a lot of work in this run and there's so many authors involved, but I've got to vote no. First, it just collects 70 stars instead of 120, so the run feels incomplete. But most importantly, I don't see the pertinence of a BLJless category, especially when I compare it to the currently-published 120 stars run which barely uses BLJ inside levels. They're way too similar.
As far as I know, BLJ is not a bug that destroys normal gameplay, so this run just feels like a step backwards for me. I could be wrong though, and if I am, I'd like to see a run on TASVideos that completely abuses BLJ to collect all the stars in the game. Until then, I'm sticking to my no vote.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
Interesting idea, but it's much more fun to attempt to figure out how to achieve the minimum than seeing it. Meh vote.
That said, it would be interesting to have a separate website that would hold such records, just like the challenges in Portal.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(12)
Joined: 6/17/2006
Posts: 501
I know this is an April Fools submission, but I actually like the idea, since it isn't as straightforward as "beating the game". I think it could spawn a brand new and original run category for many games. Voting yes!
