I've long been a proponent of changing the question to "Which tier does this belong to?" "Moon / Vault / Reject" since the current question doesn't distinguish between the latter two categories and is all but worthless for improvements. Alas.
There's one way this will fall apart; for obscure games that didn't managed to gather much viewers, and end up having barely any comments or votes.
That's a very good point. After verification, the old run had 94% Yes votes but only a 5.5 rating. Assuming the audience has similar tastes, that's a pretty big gap between the average and the aggregate statistics.
It looks like we're in a situation similar to the difference between a movie's Metascore and Tomatometer - same reviews, different measure of overall satisfaction, wildly different results. I'm not sure which statistic is the best one to determine Moons qualification, but if it is the average rating, then it might be worth considering using a different voting question during submission to avoid bias.
It's been suggested many a times before. The problem's most easily seen in particularly insipid Atari games when someone declares a frame war and it goes from mostly no to mostly yes. I think the reasoning usually given is that a lot of things depend on the votes being the way that they are and it's be a pain to change them, but voting's been pretty useless ever since the vault was introduced as culture is still firmly focused on the old question of "Should this be published?"
I've long been a proponent of changing the question to "Which tier does this belong to?" "Moon / Vault / Reject" since the current question doesn't distinguish between the latter two categories and is all but worthless for improvements. Alas.
The text of the submission really needs to be changed, since this run is not under 5 minutes anymore. Could you also put a small explanation there about why the credits glitch from the last submission is not used? (There were a fair number of posts in the old thread to sift through to figure it out.)
When you actually beat the game, you can press start and it goes into a Second Quest mode that moves the items you need to find to different places. There's also music for the win screen normally. The glitch brings up the win screen, but when you press start, it sends you back to the title, not into the second quest. It also doesn't play the ending music. It's a glitch that calls up the game won screen without doing any of the other game won routines.
tl;dr
It's not the same state you reach by actually beating the game.
If I recall correctly, Arc or FODA figured out this kind of way to trigger the credits around the time of the last published run. There was some discussion in the forums that ultimately rejected this kind of ending for looking sloppy. I guess standards about input endings have changed enough, though, in the last years.
It's a pretty good-looking improvement of a pretty mediocre game. It is annoying how many lives you have to lose, though, to get the Game Over.
I thought it was more acceptable now because this game will be vaulted regardless based on the current movie's rating anyways. :P
Well, this only displays the ending screen. The actual ending has its own music and when you press start goes into a second quest. Pokemon had a similar situation. It looped continuously on ending screens, but didn't actually reach the standard completed state, and that was ruled as being not a valid ending. I'm almost certain something like this has come up with a couple other games too (like, they were supposed to create save data but didn't, I think?), but which ones escape me at the moment.
If I recall correctly, Arc or FODA figured out this kind of way to trigger the credits around the time of the last published run. There was some discussion in the forums that ultimately rejected this kind of ending for looking sloppy. I guess standards about input endings have changed enough, though, in the last years.
It's a pretty good-looking improvement of a pretty mediocre game. It is annoying how many lives you have to lose, though, to get the Game Over.
Having looked it up (10 years ago!), it was months after it was already published and only a couple people commented on it. I notice that it doesn't play the ending music. Is it actually going to the ending, or just putting up a screen from it. You can glitch through walls and walk to a Boy and his Blob's ending credit screen for example, but that didn't count as the ending.
Oh, also from that thread
You don't even get the ending music, and you go back to the title screen instead of starting the 2nd quest.
So it doesn't seem like it's the actual ending. Just displaying a screen from it erroneously.
I'm of the opinion that a few corner boosts are nowhere near enough to make it stand out from regular play, but that was brought up last time too and seems a little late to do anything about it now.
But mostly just want to note the continued issue of an overwhelmingly negative response becoming a positive one simply because it's an improvement.
Okay, after checking a few non TAS runs, I think I understand what he's trying to say.
This is meant as a form of 100% run (all bosses defeated), whereras the one I linked is an any% because it skips bosses.
HOWEVER, he does use the same glitch that enables skipping.
From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Si2Ip3upZMc
It's got a really neat glitch on the Casino Night boss, where if you exit the arena super quickly after beating him, the bosses kinda glitch out after that for a while. It opens the doors as soon as some bosses start, allowing you to leave as soon as the bosses appear. However, if you do that some of the earlier bosses, this will softlock the game, as the doors will not open for later bosses even after you beat them. As a result, the bosses you skip are Mystic Cave, Star Light, and Metropolis. Oil Ocean also freaks out, hard, and actually becomes harder and slower, as the period of time he is available to hit decreases, so instead of being able to 8-0 the best you can manage is 5-3
So he's using that glitch, just not using it effectively.
Either way, I fail to see that it adds anything not already in the other Sonic games, and 100% definitely isn't a meaningful category here.
If you watch the two videos side by side, it's very obvious where you're losing time. I suggest Youtube Doubler.
When you start the boss skipping trick, he beats a boss quickly that you skip, putting him about 5-10 seconds behind, but then by the very next boss, you're already behind him again because it took you a ridiculously long time to beat it for whatever reason (not familiar with the trick/mechanics of the trick).
And as others have said, I don't think this hack is really worthwhile or adds anything that's not already covered by other runs.
Why did you play only the easiest level?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvQ17Z5lI6I
Edit: Upon further checking, the difference between 1,2 and 3,4 is one player vs two. So still, 1/2 is obviously the shorter and easier of the two choices.
[MOD EDIT: Removing link to information source as it also contained ROM links. --Mothrayas]
Isn't WarioWare the same length no matter what you do? This on the other hand requires manipulation of the other people, at least in hockey and snowball fight from what I could tell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xA6EI476AzA
Additional info: Robotnik's Revenge is a hack that's just a boss rush mode. So you're using game genie codes on a hack that make it easier.
And still don't beat all existing records.
This is kind of a mess.
According to adelikat every game on the AppleII is bad for TASing. Ultimate Challenge: get an AppleII run to Moons.
Prince of Persia.
The problem is that almost everything that was on the Apple II that was decent was ported to bigger and better things, and things that have been TAS-able for a long time, especially C64. When it comes to exclusives, there's... Cavern Creatures maybe?
The problem with river failure is all (or nearly all) your food tends to go with them. So I still have a food issue after their murder, I mean accident.
Someone drowning is an unlikely event, losing your food is a likely event. And manipulation sucks. However, I didn't fully consider this, I'll admit. Might be worth looking into.
Also, congrats for making an even more laughably horrible plan of family sacrifice for the sake of frames.
A couple things that occurred to me.
If your goal is to kill family members as efficiently as possible, you should be drowning them, not starving them.
And on that note, since the failure event for river crossings happens when you reach the halfway point, isn't it faster to fail and take the resource/family member hit instead of successfully cross the rivers?
Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q5M4_2eXdA&t=#14m19s
Banker/Carpenter/Farmer are clear and direct analogs to difficulties, simply with names appropriate to the game setting. Winning with the easiest and foregoing any kind of resource management because of it isn't impressive at all.
It also sounds like the game doesn't even allow much event manipulation, so aside from the initial seed, the remaining 8 and a half minutes seems to be trivial, especially with next to no resource management needed due to the Banker choice.
I believe it would be more fitting to reach world 2 by playing through world 1.
henke37 wrote:
Please explain the choice to skip to world 2. To me, someone who doesn't play the game, it sounds like randomly jumping ahead in the game.
World 1 ends with a credit roll and return to the title screen.
http://tasvideos.org/3949S.html
There is no version of the game (that I'm aware of) where you play stages 1-8 in order.
Condemnation of your behavior and attitude is not an endorsement or defense for theirs. It's not the black and white, us vs them situation that you're trying to make it out to be.
If you don't want a toxic environment, then don't do things that contribute to making one.
Then let me rephrase.
Between the two of you, you went into a Youtube comments section, called everybody "entitled jackasses", "brainless assholes", and said "I'm waiting for the kids to react to this crap TAS I did," and you in particular pitched a martyrdom fit.
And then he/you coming back here to bitch about the comments there not being nice enough, and calling me a shitposter for pointing out that he's kicking the nest. What did the two of you expect would happen? Engaging in the same behavior you're complaining about would cow people into line?
