There's not a "reading more into the rule than there is"
From the about one thousand runs currently published, in how many would you estimate that this rule would affect their route (or anything for that matter)? One?
Yes, I think you are reading more to it than there really is.
This video argues that Applejack's and Rainbow Dash's elements of harmony (honesty and loyalty) would actually make a lot more sense swapped around. In other words, if it were AJ whose element is loyalty and RD whose element is honesty, because that would fit a lot better their personalities and their behavior during the series.
I think that's an excellent point.
Gameplay time: A game where there are two routes, one of which takes longer to get to the final boss but which turns the final boss into a slow autoscroller that can be completed with no input (and cannot be completed faster no matter what), one of which gets there faster but has to actually fight the boss (thus requiring more input).
I really think you are reading more to the rule than there is.
The rule just answers the question "at which frame is it ok for me to end the input file?" It says absolutely nothing about what route to choose or what the length of the run should be. It's not intended to dictate things like those.
And even if it were, if there's one game in a million where it makes a difference, then we can perfectly well make a special exception for that one game. I see no problem.
I honestly cannot understand what your point is.
We accept submissions as currently-best-known records even though we know perfectly well that the vast majority of them are not 100% optimal. We do not require for them to be provably optimal, just that a reasonable effort has been made by the author to get as close to it as possible, and that there's no obvious flaw that can be pointed out. This principle is sensible and practical.
I see absolutely no reason why the exact same principle couldn't be applied to "end the input where no further input can make the game end faster."
I think it's a pity that there will probably never be a good AAA game based on MLP:FiM (that would be targeted to all ages and genders, much like the show itself.)
On the other hand, it's understandable from a pragmatic point of view. Little girls are a real niche market in the video game industry. There are tons of bronies out there (and most of them play videogames), but ultimately not so many as to justify the budget for a full-blown AAA game. (There's also the good possibility that the game would flop completely, especially if the same people who make the show are not involved in its development.)
Gameplay time disadvantages: Requires brute-forcing to prove validity of movie
I wouldn't say this would be a requirement. Giving the verification some leeway is perfectly reasonable IMO. In other words, if nobody can come up with further input that would end the game faster using a reasonable amount of work, the submission can be considered acceptable (in this regard.) Or even more generally: Unless someone can point out how the game could be ended faster (by appending keypresses to the file), then it's acceptable.
I don't think there's any need to be as strict as you suggest.
I wish they made a full-blown AAA game from MLP:FiM. Perhaps something similar to Naruto: Rise of a Ninja in concept and game mechanics (but with even more story and character development.) I would definitely buy that.
You have to understand that along with those costs you also need to pay your staff for a longer duration of work, or even hire new staff that is already familiar with the platform. Time = Money. You can't simply say, "Just throw a devkit at me, I'll port this within a week, no need for testing".
Look at the best indie games out there. Do you think they had millions of dollars to develop them?
Not to belittle your efforts in any way, as it's really an admirable work to make a TAS of so many games with one input, but nevertheless I really wish people made more 2-game TASes rather than million-game TASes. (And the 2 games should be chosen as to mazimize the amount of visual synchronization between the two games. The clearer it is visually that the same input is controlling both games, the better.)
The problem with million-game TASes is that they are chaotic and extremely difficult to follow. A 2-game TAS, on the other hand, can be really awesome to watch, if well done.
Devkits, approval procedures and licensing costs money for consoles.
I don't see how any of those could cost anywhere near a million dollars. (And this even assuming that they are not making any kind of profit from the PC version.)
A nesbot built inside a regular NES gamepad would be awesome. (Naturally it would have to have an extra USB port of something similar for it to be programmed, but other than that it could look identical to a NES gamepad.) You would simply connect it to the NES normally and it would play the game by itself.
Extra bonus if it could be used as a regular gamepad as well (perhaps there could be a switch to select which mode it is in.)
Is that really so? Because if it is, I would have to raise an objection. It would be like saying that Vault doesn't allow 100% completions (if any% is faster.)
But this is not 100%, it's "uses suboptimal character" category.
Yes, and? What's the rationale in accepting one goal but not the other?
Delete "Peach only" and use the best characters, becaue Vault doesn't allow suboptimal characters.
Is that really so? Because if it is, I would have to raise an objection. It would be like saying that Vault doesn't allow 100% completions (if any% is faster.)
Just because Vault is a collection of speed records doesn't mean that there can't be alternative goals or limitations imposed in the run (within rational limits, of course) IMO.
I voted yes because this is most certainly not one of the most boring runs ever published. However, I have to question the rationale behind the self-imposed "challenge" of using Peach only.
Applying a grandfather clause to the NES version is ok (ie. there has always been a Peach-only version of the NES version, so it's an acceptable sub-category forever.) However, is it sensible to expand that clause to a remake? Does a Peach-only run add enough variation to make it justified to have a run with such a semi-arbitrary limitation?
That being said, if the general consensus is that this is ok, I won't have any problem with it.
For the record, it turned out that the author modified the frame count in the VBM header in both movies (which is why those only showed up as 1 minute long). I've fixed both movies.
Why did he do so? Was it some kind of attempt at deception/cheating? If yes, perhaps there should be some consequences.
