If I set it to zero what happens exactly? Does it get listed in least rerecords per second?
The routine which generates the rerecord statistics list specifically ignores movies with zero rerecords, for this exact purpose (if I remember correctly; it has been quite many years since I wrote it, but I remember some past movies having their rerecord count zeroed because of this). In other words, a value of zero means "unknown amount of rerecords" and gets ignored.
Since this movie has a bogus rerecord count, could some admin please zero the count in the database so that it doesn't mess up the movie statistics page? (It doesn't have to be zeroed in the movie file, just in the database, as the movie statistics page reads the value from the latter.)
Of course given how long it has taken for the bogus rerecord count of Bonk's Revenge to have been zeroed (it still isn't, regardless of my repeated pleas), I'm not expecting this one will be either.
If such bogus rerecord counts are not zeroed in the database as a matter of "we don't really care" admin policy, maybe it would be better to just remove the rerecord stats from the movie statistics page because the bogus entries are messing them up. Those stats can be simply commented out by any editor, so I could do it myself.
edit: oh ok, I get the problem, it's about making a face end facing upwards... Let me think :)
edit#2: ok, I got it. I'm making a 3D for you.
Actually that's not exactly what I meant. I accept your answer as correct, according to the letter of my question (it does do what I asked), although not according to its spirit (I made some assumptions in my question which I didn't state explicitly), but I admit my fault: I should have been more precise. Ok, let me write more precisely what I meant:
Is it possible to construct a die with an odd number of faces so that each face is planar (in other words, the die is a polyhedron), each face has a number on it, and getting any of the numbers (by throwing the die normally) has equal probability?
(If it's not, why not?)
Also I think that two types of stars may be more trouble than it's worth. After all, the list of starred movies isn't especially long, so newcomers can browse the list and select with ease the games they are familiar with.
for example a classic depth-first tree search has very low RAM cost
The problem with a depth-first search solution (with a minimal amount of RAM usage) is that finding the optimal solution may take a very, very long time. What is worse, when you find a solution, there's no way of knowing if it is the optimal solution (you can only know if it's better than the solutions you have found so far during the search). Basically you have to try all possible permutations before you can be sure that you have found the optimal solution. In typical puzzles that's an O(n!)-time approach, so for puzzles with just a couple of dozen states you may have to wait until the Sun explodes before your algorithm has checked all possible permutations.
A breadth-first solution is better in that the first solution you find is also the optimal one. Its problem is that it may require a huge amount of RAM. (Of course a breadth-first solution may also take a humongous amount of time, but at least it doesn't have to check all possible permutations, only all permutations of paths at most as long as the optimal solution.)
With most puzzle solvers it's best to devise some kind of heuristic approach (preferably one which gives the optimal solution for sure, although that's not always possible).
I agree with those values being distracting. They might be interesting to the person making the run, but don't tell much to the casual viewer. They are too large and change too rapidly, making it basically annoying visual noise.
A graphical input view (preferably one which looks like the buttons of the real console) could have worked a lot better.
Geometry problem:
Is it possible to construct a die with an odd number of faces (and at least 3 of them) so that the probability of each face (when the die is thrown normally) is the same?
Don't do that! You don't want to disable your firewall simply because your browser is not sending referrers.
Instead, configure your firewall to allow sending referrers (to tasvideos.org, if it allows doing it on a per-site basis). Or if it's your browser which is not sending referrers, configure it to send them (again, to tasvideos.org if you have a plugin which allows doing it on a per-site basis).
Warp: fair enough. The Final Fantasy series mostly bothers me in the ways that it hasn't advanced since the 80's. Square's found a set of tropes that makes it games that people buy, and it's iteratively improving those tropes instead of looking for new ones. Which is fine for people like you who like it, but I see them occasionally make gems like Einhänder and wonder what they'd be capable of if they just tried.
Maybe the purposely want to use the same mold for all FF games, and try different approaches with unrelated RPGs. They do have some games which are quite different, such as Valkyrie Profile (although it might be that in this case Square Enix is acting only as the publisher rather than the developer).
* Linedancing as a metaphor for combat stopped being able to hold my interest years ago. So no Final Fantasy, please. RPGs with interesting combat mechanics are fine, though.
* Games with lots of grinding or very slow-moving gameplay are going to lose my interest.
That's a shame because I really think Chrono Cross and Final Fantasy IX are some of the best games for the PS1 (both technically and in content). You (in plural) are free to disagree, but that's my honest opinion.
I have always wondered: Isn't it frustrating beyond belief to be making a speedrun (a regular unassisted one), everything is going just superb, you are going to make a huge record time, and then... you die or, in this case, stumble across a game-breaking bug which stops your attempt?
I can imagine I would get so frustrated that I think I couldn't even try it.
While I tend to enjoy most of these nerdy critic guys, I don't really watch any of them consistently. I used to watch Yahtzee (Zero Punctuation), but his rather coarse humor eventually got on my nerves (the same reason I don't watch AVGN) and he seemed to be rehashing many of the same points most of the time.
Then I warmly recommend the Nostalgia Critic reviews, if you haven't seen them. They are not based on foul language (although sometimes a bit might be used).
I have watched all the Critic's reviews and I'm an avid follower. (I check the site almost every day to see if a new video has come out.)
Like others, while I like the AVGN videos a lot, I have to admit that the Critic is maybe a bit better. His one video game review was quite enjoyable. (Somehow he succeeds in making the reviews interesting even though they are very long, often over 10 minutes.)
Also I remember in 1991 I was playing The Chessmaster (SNES) and for some reason one time the brown King made 8 copies of itself on all adjacent spaces.
Now that would make an interesting chess variant...
Maybe not a "glitch" per se, but more of a design oversight, but in FF5 you can land the airship directly on top of a cave entrance, after which the game becomes unwinnable because you can't enter the airship anymore. If you try to enter the airship, you end up entering the cave, and when you exit the cave you appear at the tile one below the cave entrance/airship, so you are stuck.
Same goes for maps. I shouldn't have to refer to a notebook when playing a video game.
The computer building and showing the map as you go may be a huge convenience, but there just was something cool about drawing the map yourself. It was a bit like a side-hobby while playing.
In fact, I would say that the game giving everything to you without any work from your part (besides simply advancing in the game) could be considered boring, if not even detrimental to mental acuity. It becomes mindless shooting.
Having to draw the map yourself with pencil and paper, however, gives you more to do, requires you to pay more attention as well as training your spatial cognition capabilities, and sometimes might even require imagination and creativity (especially if the map is more complicated than a strict 2D grid of rooms, all of the same size). I'd bet it's also physically good because you will be doing something else with your hands than pressing buttons for hours and hours.
I think it's sad that there aren't any such games anymore. Advances in technology make people lazier, even to the point where they actually consider it a bad thing if you were forced to do something else than press buttons for hours.
In a triangle with side lengths 0, these line segments are undefined, therefore that is not a triangle.
zero-length line segments are very well defined. Lines are usually defined as a set of points, and a set with only one point can be a valid line. For example, any line can be expressed as the set of points satisfying this formula:
v1 + t*v2 with v1, v2 being vectors and 0 <= t <= 1
For a zero-length line segment, v2 is the null vector. Works like a charm.
Except that the mathematical definition of line segment requires for v2 to be non-zero. See for example http://planetmath.org/encyclopedia/LineSegment.html
(It makes sense because allowing v2 to be zero would make lines and line segments unusable for most geometry proofs.)
An equilateral triangle is defined by all sides being equal in length. So it's an equilateral triangle.
I think that the mathematical definition of a triangle contains the requirement that the three points must not be collinear. The three points being at the same place makes them collinear.
I think that this is a beautiful practical demonstration of the difference between rational and irrational numbers, something which might otherwise feel like a rather abstract distinction.
(Now, if someone could come up with an equally beautiful example of the difference between algebraic and transcendental numbers...)
