Are you asking why I didn't make multiple identical posts repeatedly restating my argument against its publication when there was nobody engaging what I had said except the author making smarmy posts about not being able to please everyone?
I would hope the answer to that would have been self-evident.
Edit:
And maybe that's the core problem here. This issue was brought up and went completely ignored by everyone except the author, whose only explanation was "The previous extremely suboptimal rejected run did it," and that was it.
What's wrong with me, dude is trying to make a point and getting 'hilarious' pictures and "checkmate" back in response.
And if you're going to cite entertainment as a reason for its acceptance over a run that completes the entire game, then why did you put it in the Vault where "Entertainment value has little to no significance"?
Should I add "lol i win" and a hilarious picture of a cat now, or would you find that condescending?
Shadow Dragon is not comparable. It has the exact same stages with the exact same sets of enemies on all difficulties. The difference is that they have higher stats. That characteristic of a higher difficulty has always been a noted exception and has never been in question or debate, and is absolutely not what is happening here. The difference between the difficulties does not include skipping 30% of the game.
And using the standards of acceptance from literally the dawn of the site as precedent is absolutely questionable. There were not particularly defined rules or standards at all then, so you're appealing to literally nothing.
If you actually want to debate this any further, stow the smug bullshit. It's not cute. It's grating.
I disagree with the reasons given for the verdict.
The difference in Gunstar Heroes is almost entirely the usual changes in difficulty. Fewer enemies, weapons do more damage, etc. In this game, you basically skip 3 out of 10 stages. Gunstar Heroes also changes in plot and dialogue (such as it is for an action game like that) between difficulties. That run on easy was also accepted over a decade ago, so I question its relevance since the site and the standards have changed a lot since then. Was "always play on hardest" even a rule back then?
Furthermore, the majority of the votes were before it was pointed out that so much of the game was skipped by it being on the easiest difficulty, and I'm more than willing to bet that most people still are ignorant of that. I don't see the logic in using audience ignorance of the game and its mechanics as a justification for player ignorance.
And it seems really weird to me to put it in the Vault with the knowledge that the run that would obsolete it will be significantly slower than it due to actually having to play the entire game, not just 70% of it.
You shouldn't just beat the overall time, but all the internal times, or be able to explain that you were slower in one spot because it gained more time somewhere else.
It's not like that 2.5 year old easily Googled run was a secret, or the basic mechanic of picking up projectiles to use.
Both failing to check for existing runs and not being aware of core game mechanics don't reflect that much effort went into this, even if you did inadvertently end up slightly faster.
Front page of TASVideos on Featured Moviehttp://i.imgur.com/dK0dI3F.png
Just to Note: It is a random bug, because DK2 didn't show it.
Another one had "[module:frames|amount=...Read More" didn't pay attention because I was just trying to loop back.
Anyways. When I finally looped right back around the 0 seconds still appeared on the screen for that game.
I've also noticed that Gimmick and Megaman 2's cut off in the middle of a word instead of at a space like it should.
Wasn't ?4 accessible with some set of requirements including sitting on a tile and everybody being at level 10 of their secret classes?
A.) I'm almost certain that's impossible without cheating (limited amount of exp available for non-healer units), and B.) Nobody's ever been able to confirm that, so it's up there with the rumors of ways to bring Aerith/Leo back from the dead or pushing a truck to get Mew.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that anything you get when you use the level select code (items, levels, etc), you carry over, so soft resetting doing that (and getting a bunch of powerful items from it as well as levels) and then proceeding with that save data would give you a bunch of extra stuff you shouldn't technically have.
I don't think it's vital or needed myself as it's not part of the main game and only accessible by cheat. I'd file it under the same category as Ogre Battle's Dragon's Haven map (single stage, only accessible only by code, game ends immediately after clearing it).
Congratulations for completing the run. I've already seen you're dedicated Megadrive RPG speedrunner and your works are always fascinating.
About the branch, I think it's good to leave it blank and note on the description that the run completes secret stages as well as the main senario. Some published runs here did that too.
jlun2 wrote:
andypanther wrote:
Sounds like an example where it would be okay to use a cheat to access something otherwise unavailable. Especially if that level would make for a fantastic TAS!
Uh...sounds like its a cheat device more than an ingame cheat code. Some clarification would be nice.
It is an in-game cheat code. From here, it says: At the load screen of the game. Highlight the save you want to play and press left, right, start, c.
I didn't play this game so I don't know if the player can carry the party to this secret mission.
You select the save and then enter a code that lets you choose any stage. That save's data is then used for the stage you chose. The ?4 stage in question is accessible ONLY from this menu and no other way.
You say the comparison is useful, but if this is accepted, then what's the comparison for obsoletion? We can't compare times because harder difficulties are obviously going to take much longer, so what? Best guess? First run on hard automatically obsoletes this? All runs for this game must be on easy and thereby not play a significant chunk of the game? A branch for easy and a branch for hard?
Those are all terrible ideas, particularly if done in the interest of accommodating a fairly unremarkable run that was apparently done in a week or two.
Just because there was one obvious reason to reject the previous run doesn't mean there might not be more. Playing on the difficulty that makes you actually beat all of the stages seems like a total no-brainer.
And why would you care about comparing your times to something that was clearly so suboptimal?
I bet this is the kind of game where difficulty == more enemy health
Perhaps, although there's only really one boss that'd be a part of that. Like Tompa said though, easy mode skips a massive chunk of the game.
Here's a playthrough on hard. Compare the first stage alone. It goes through 3 or 4 screens whereas on easy, there's only 1.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWfgUCTcV-E
Furthermore, the fish level is auto-win on easy. If you die there, instead of losing a life and having to do it again, you're just sent to the next level. You also need to collect 25 pieces of wood on hard (fewer on normal) in the whale instead of, uh... zero on easy. Enemies on the balloon stage don't attack at all, etc etc.
http://www.gamefaqs.com/genesis/586386-disneys-pinocchio/faqs/9356
And here's a list of some other things.
I can't imagine easy is an acceptable difficulty. Shouldn't that have been looked into before you started?
I think he means that the remaining stock means you could have used them more often than you did and possibly saved more time.
I don't know about saving much more time since again, it's a bloody easy game to begin with (the last boss's safe spot on HARD is "mash fire in the middle of the screen in front of its weak spot" for fuck's sake) and I would expect a decent player to be able to get pretty damn close playing in real time, but it certainly doesn't scream "well-planned" to end the game with half your stock.
And here's a comparison to show how little difference there is to casual play, even in the "turn invincible at will and tackle bosses" strategy, which not immediately doing that is where most of the time on this run is gained.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex3ZOIvj4Qo
It's a bad game for speed running and far too trivial for even 100% kills to make it entertaining.
Still an absurdly easy game, made even more so by beating so many bosses just by using the Arrow Flash (ship becomes invincible and collision deals damage to enemy) and parking yourself on top of their hitbox. Ending with six in reserve sort of seems like poor planning, but on the other hand, the game showers you with them and you can hold up to 16, so... Again, not really much here besides the constant spastic movement that stands out as a TAS.
…why is it sloppy if it’s done to be faster? Blocked super also avoids the hit lag, hits that are not necessary to kill are better whiffed or blocked, probably. Just sounds like you can’t understand the intelligent reason behind actions and count them as sloppy.
Because I find the assumption that he needed to manipulate the AI using attacks only a couple times, and that both of them were required to be slow heavy attacks on completely thin air nowhere near the opponent, to be ridiculous.
Even if on purpose, it looks sloppy to whiff like that and the lack of them in the other parts I watched (admittedly, I skipped around, so it wasn't comprehensive) makes it especially stand out. I'm pretty sure that I saw one super that was half blocked as well.
But mostly, I'm sure it's the obvious lack of picking a clear goal that's going to get this rejected.
For Arcade version, it don't have loading time, it'll help faster in real time. (maybe only need under 10 minutes for beat game)
This game allow both get damage in same time. I was try take damge for save time at start round but got slower because my character got stun. That's why I think best way for save time need take damage at last hit by a single hit only. My strategy and luck manipulation can't do that. I'm show my idea for who want try in future
Yes, make speed TAS for fighting game alway boring. I was try change attack style in every rounds but must still fast as possible for reduce little boring
So what was the goal then? Speed except where you got bored?
Anyway:
3:35 misposition yourself so half the super is whiffing
9:05 whiffed (heavy) attack
12:37 whiffed (heavy) attack
I understand your point Tangent, but...
"certain strategies which are impossible in regular play, but that's absolutely nothing like what is considered high level play."
Why an "impossible strategy in regular play" isn't considered as a high level play?
Mainly it's because high level play against AIs doesn't exist. It's common knowledge that the AIs are full of exploitable behavior even in regular play, so relying on cheap/cheesy moves that take advantage of how poor they are, especially doing one move over and over again, is 'scrub' play that anybody is capable of, not expert.
Or like in the football example, the primary goal of the game isn't speed, so strategies dedicated to finishing quickly are nonsensical.
Speed oriented fighting game TASes look worse than regular play and are accomplished mostly through endurance, not ingenuity.
Hmm, perhaps. To me it depends on the game, though. Maybe we need more fighting game speed TASes that rely on precise glitches to get through the game really fast...
*remembers Mortal Kombat 4 (GBC)*
...or maybe not.
It's not only fighting games. Sports games are a good example as well. You could certainly finish most faster or slower by adopting certain strategies which are impossible in regular play, but that's absolutely nothing like what is considered high level play.
For example, in a football game, you could always rush so the clock never stops, then manipulate defensive penalties for automatic first downs so the AI never gets the ball to stop the clock either. Then score at the last second. You'd finish the game much faster than regular play, but that's nothing even close to what high level play looks like.
Or in a soccer game, pass it back and forth so there are no stoppages for goals.
I disagree with your (plural your) assertion that the existence of subjectivity is a flaw or that subjectivity is inherantly a negative that needs to be eliminated. I also find the remark that I'd agree with you if I'd just stop being willfully ignorant condescending.
I'll even go so far as to say that you're overblowing the amount of subjectivity there is. There are clearly common standards the community agrees on as to what is entertaining and what is not. It's not truly objective, but no judgement of anything in media is. Inter-subjective standards work just fine.
Warp,
I find the distinction broadly useful and I believe it will only become moreso as more runs are created. There are far more godawful games than good ones. And even many good ones can make for fairly hideous TASes. I don't personally agree with some of the choices, but I'm not the center of the world, so I just carry on regardless.
Yes, let's continue trusting the poll results, where 14 people voted that the flawed system is absolutely perfect without even bothering to post their flawed reasoning. Let's just ignore the valid points brought up in the thread by the people who actually give enough of a damn to express an opinion on the matter.
You sure like to say flawed, don't you?
I have no problem with the current system and I've seen nothing here that makes me reconsider that. The only reason to change I've seen so far is that some people feel like their feelings are hurt because their TASes of poor/uninteresting games don't get as much attention as more famous games or more entertaining TASes.
There's always going to be subjectivity in judging. There's always going to be changing standards and audience reception making one year's boring the next year's entertaining and vice versa. There's always going to be some kind of tagging or filtering separating runs people enjoy from ones people do not, ones for iconic games people know and love from ones that are little more than footnotes. Whether it's a tag that says "This is entertaining than other runs", or a little icon that's somewhat shinier than other icons, or what, that's not going to change and we'll just be right back here the next time someone's feelings are hurt because they didn't get what they wanted.
I've also noticed that Gimmick and Megaman 2's cut off in the middle of a word instead of at a space like it should.
http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=390376#390376
Looks like something's not being handled correctly within the search results.
Firefox 31.2
