Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
If you have any photo editing software on your computer, it is a simple marquee box/shrink situation. I'm going to go out on a crazy wild limb here and assume you have MSPAINT, which is the simplest editor out there.
If you have Photoshop/GIMP, you can resize the image using one of the toolbars really easily.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
DemonStrate wrote:
I was looking over the TAS/Speedrun Wiki thing of what you guys are generally going by for the run. Sorry, this is a bit off topic, but why dont i see the Water Temple on there? Do you not need to get anything from it for the 'rainbow bridge' to work?
How about you read the thread? This was talked about in the first few pages.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Warp: Let's settle this with a coin-toss. Heads: I win. Tails: you lose.
I think that speed is subordinate to entertainment, and I'm trying to tell you that speed isn't the main focus of these movies in and of itself, but part of a main focus, which is entertainment. I'm not saying speed isn't a very important part of what we do here; I'm saying that speed plays a role in an even bigger pizza.
As for the exceptions: I don't understand how you can say that we are a site focusing _,.-~*'`mainly`'*~-.,_ on speed, and yet we host a bunch of movies that do not focus on speed. dan_ said that he counted something like 13 non-speed oriented movies on the site, which means that 13/300+ movies aren't conforming to what you claim the site focuses on. Therefore, I don't see why these movies aren't considered a different set of demonstrations on the site. If we host a movie that is 10% slower than optimal because it shows off some cool stuff, why don't we host a speedrun that is 20% slower but shows the skill of a runner? I don't see how you can have a site called 'Tool Assisted Speedruns' and host a bunch of non-speed oriented movies. It's like making a site called "All Things Purple" and having a lot of blue all around.
e:
Truncated: Can Warp and I tie our left hands to eachother, and then tuck in our right arms and have a no-hiding elbow fight? That would be rad. Also, we should set the elbows on fire and cover the other person's face in a thin layer of wax, so that every successful hit creates a pool of hot wax to add to the fun. Wheeee!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Chances are, the bottom 10 movies could be a 'this is what you should avoid' to all future submitters.
I must say that I really like how I can qualify how my opinion compares to others on these runs, but it also confuses me how some people can like game Y over game X, and vice versa. Internet, why can't you just agree with me?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
I unfortunately deleted the avi that was uploaded. Sorry.
FODA: You can check your IRC logs, if you save them. Or you can ask around in IRC for someone that has all their logs from last week, and ask them to search around 2am-5am PST on each day for a rapidshare link.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Warp wrote:
Don't be silly. There's nothing in the term "TAS" that would exclude putting constraints on a specific run. Even though a constraint is put in a run to make it more entertaining, its main goal is still speed and it's still done tool-assisted, hence it's a TAS.
By your classification the 100% Quake speedrun is not a speedrun.
By my classification, every movie that isn't played as fast as possible under certain constraints should be rejected. A 100% movie is still completed as quickly as possible while collecting 100%. The Castlevania 3 Sypha only route is done as fast as possible, even though the Alucard route is officially faster. The SF2 movies on this site would be rejected for not using the ultimate fastest attack combo with Zangief in every fight. However, they were instead accepted, since they sacrifice unecessary speed for a very necessary bump in entertainment. That is the difference.
SMB runs have been obsoleted by runs which are only a few frames faster even though the new ones do not add *anything* to the run (besides those few frames of extra speed).
And a lot of people had a huge argument over it. I'm not saying that movies shouldn't be accepted just because they are a few frames faster: I'm saying that there are cases for and against the idea that speed is the main goal here, and so making a claim that we should call our movies 'tool assisted speedruns' is an incorrect label.
For the record, it is pretty impressive to squeeze 13 frames out of such an already optimised movie. When the whole argument between Sleepz and Phil took place, I took a third party stance because a) Phil showed his skills by finding an improvement and using it, b) the difference was almost so unnoticeable that it almost seemed not worth submitting, and c) everyone in that thread came off as an elitist prick, and I lost respect for almost all who posted in that thread.
It's not a question of "is it more entertaining?" but a question of "is this game so popular that it's ok to screw up the original runner by allowing someone else to obsolete his movie by 1 frame?" Surely if someone posted an AnN run which was 2000 frames faster it would obsolete the current one regardless of whether it's more "entertaining" or not.
If entertainment was the main goal, then an AnN movie which was *slower* than the current one, but more "entertaining", could perfectly obsolete the current one. However, I don't see that ever happening. Why? Because speed is, after all, the main issue.
On a tangent: we don't "screw up the original runner" because this site isn't a pissing contest, and no one should feel like they own the rights to run certain games. Egos have no place here.
On topic: No, because otherwise the Gradius movies on the site should be obsoleted by faster submissions. However, Bisqwit has already stated that he isn't so sure that this is the best idea, since it isn't going to be any more entertaining than the original.
If it was a difference of 2000 frames, then yes, it should be obsoleted. However, if it was 2000 frames of nothing but standing around instead of passing the time doing entertaining things, a lot of people would complain/vote 'meh', because who wants to watch a boring movie, even if it's faster? If it was the difference between a XXX2 frame movie that was jaw droppingly cool versus an XXX0 that was faster but too boring to watch, I don't think it would be obsoleted. I do think that someone would eventually make the improvement with the necessary cool tricks, and that would end in obsoletion/evolution.
No, a couple of exceptions do not make the rule false. They are just exceptions.
Right, but a couple of exceptions definitely stand to contest naming these movies as 'speedruns'. If we start hosting even ONE nonspeedrun on a speedrun website, then what is next?
The Rygar -movie- has been granted a special exception: It's *not* necessary to provide input for the final ending screen to change (it requires a button to be pressed) even though the rules say that in all submitted movies all the necessary input has to be included in order to get to the ending of the game. Does this exception make that rule false? Of course not. It's just one exception.
I don't understand why this exception was given: the movie should be completed as per the rules of the submission queue. Otherwise, we shouldn't turn back other submissions that don't complete themselves.
An equally interesting exception to your theory is the SMW 100% completion run. Viper7 added a few seconds of input to his movie just so that Mario would dance during the credits. Should this be obsoleted by a clone movie that ends as soon as Bowser dies, or do you agree that entertainment trumps speed just as often as speed seems to trump entertainment?
Furthermore, it seems like the term TAS is being 'officially' interpreted as 'Tool-assisted superplay', which is acceptable by my argument. I still think the verbal term 'TAS' sounds terrible, but that's just me.[/b]
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Omega wrote:
Like I said before, I believe that entertainment is indeed the ultimate goal, but that speed is simply the only real way to achieve it.
I agree with this. Entertainment is the main focus of these runs, and we admit that speed is one of the most entertaining aspects of the submissions. A movie that is super fast but in no way entertaining would probably be looked down upon, which is why we have the guidelines state that we shouldn't bother running a game that no one will watch.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Warp wrote:
What is true is that we do not aim *only* to speed but *also* to entertainment. However, the latter is just a *secondary* objective.
So you're saying that, if someone found a way to glitch SMB3 to go straight from startup to endgame sequence, it should obsolete the current run? We keep having this debate about time v entertainment, and the consensus always seems to be 'speed is a form of entertainment, and so we assume that if a movie is faster, it is probably more entertaining.' The problem with your argument is that 'TAS' means that all movies are focused entirely on speed. However, this site is not all speed inclusive, and so to accept 'TAS' as a term for these movies would call for the instant rejection of all non-fastest movies.
Also, for the record, there have been a lot of movies that have been rejected despite being faster. IIRC, Atlantis No Nazo can be beaten by one frame, as many have shown, and yet we haven't accepted it because it adds nothing to the entertainment value of the run. As soon as one faster movie is rejected due to being less entertaining, it sets a precedent that refutes the term 'TAS'. So long as one movie is not as optimal as possible, or so long as a faster movie can not obsolete a slower movie, then the term speedrun is not universal, and therefore should not be applied to these runs.
So nyeh.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
AKA wrote:
I've downloaded the latest version of the run and it desyncs once the sword has been collected. I have both Euro and USA versions 1.1.. It's strange Mario 16 min and current 120 star run, runs perfectly.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Very nice work, nitsuja. My only concern so far is whether you could manipulate the Migen Jr fight. Last time I played against him, I would always take a punch in order to make him do a shorter second combo. Any thoughts?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
IMPblackbelt wrote:
zomg... That's a LOT of skipped stuff. o.o;
How do you do the Fire Temple without the hammer? And... how do you skip half of the rest of that crap? O.o
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
I don't know how I feel about this run. It seems well played and all that jazz, but the game seems really repetetive for the first half of it. Once you get the double jump and dive moves, it picks up a bit, but not by much.
I did like the Sabretooth 'instances', and you showed off some cool maneuvers later in the game. However, I was never really impressed enough to think that I would want to see this again.
Maybe it's just me? Dunno, but I'll give this a meh.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
I'm going to vote meh on this as well. Although it looks like you had good planning and procedure, I wasn't really impressed with the game itself. I watched the whole thing at 200%, only stopping at the first and last boss. Even with it going twice as fast, I wasn't really interested. Also, I think the movie paused a frame before the credits rolled on my computer, so I had to unpause it myself.
Would have voted no, but the title screen was too funny to turn this down completely. Meh vote.
