I dain't get no 404 neither.
That file listing is a pain though - doesn't show the whole filename even though the whole line only takes about about half my browser width... Had to mouseover to find the file.
Wasn't "mandatory" at my school, but professors could count attendance into a grade, give a pop quiz if few people showed up, etc. Normally if the professor was late by more than about 10 minutes everyone would leave and assume that the professor wouldn't do anything - normally they would just apologize about being late but the occasional professor would give a 'pop quiz' and just fail everybody on it - bastards.
That's the problem ... when I use "save as" I name the save file, say, rayman2 for example, and when I use "load as" it doesn't show up at all in the folder I saved it in.
you need to have the filename end with .m64 I believe.
You blew up the hostages! Poor hostages...
Besides the lag and the awful 'turning' animation in the mine cart level, this run was very enjoyable and it looked optimized.
Yes vote.
You can use binary to represent any finitely representable number whatsoever - not just integers. Repeating decimals are still a problem using normal encodings (0.000110011... is the binary equivalent of 1/10), but you can always use something like Binary Encoded Decimal to help alleviate that problem. The IEEE Floating Point standard (and others as well) even reserves room for encoding NANs and Infinity in binary. For 32 bit numbers:
0 11111111 00000000000000000000000 = Infinity
1 11111111 00000000000000000000000 = -Infinity
0 11111111 00000100000000000000000 = NaN (right bits just can't be all 0's - doesn't matter)
The problem with IEEE floating point numbers is that you don't necessarily get 7 significant digits, as seen with binary 1/10 where you can't even get 1 decimal digit significant. You do have 23 binary significant digits though if you don't mind thinking like that :p
Voted meh - Looked like it was played perfectly (assuming no major new finds), but there just wasn't enough variety for way too much of the game. The teleporting is interesting, but it just comes too late in the game.
If a run isn't optimal because of a trick that was discovered after the run had already been completed, that's okay because it was out of the author's control. If someone were dedicated enough to do an improved run, the old run would be obsoleted by a new one that incorporates all tricks. The decision to remake a run would be based on the amount of time the new trick(s) would actually save relative to the length of the whole run and the time needed to produce it.
The web skip has been discovered before this run has been completed, should it be redone then so that it is included?
mwl wrote:
I firmly believe that "entertainment" is a terrible criterion to be included within speedrunning guidelines. "Entertainment" is a very subjective evaluation, whereas speed isn't. I personally think that backwalking adds to the run's entertainment because of the unpredictability factor, but there are other people who may think otherwise.
This site's published movies do, IMO, need to be entertaining - most poeple would rather watch a 10 minute entertaining run through a game showcasing a lot of neat glitches and mindboggling skill than watch a 2 minute run that uses a glitch to skip immediately to the final boss and finish with 30s of credits. That 2 minute run can be submitted on this site and is still completely accessible for everyone to download and view in the emulator, but hiding the entertaining run behind the crazy shortcut run on the site would be a poor choice - the published run would be ranked lower than the rejected/obsoleted 10 minute run could have had. That being said, I still think forward backwalking is okay to do or not do - entertainment value goes up, but speed goes down when it doesn't have to. I'm sure that decision won't affect this particular movie getting published with either decision.
Just my 2 cents. And guano, you have done a terriffic job with this movie and the last - amazing dedication to perfection. Good job! And same goes to everyone else finding glitches and planning routes.
web skip should be used as it is quicker and adds to the entertainment/skill of the tas.
forward backwalking could be argued either way as it is a little slower but adds to the entertainment. The time difference/entertainment difference with it is about equal in my eyes so it would be fine either way to me.
EDIT: I actually don't mind if the web skip isn't done either if it means less frustration on guano's part - redoing a run on a game this tedious is, I'm sure, not much fun. With only a couple seconds of difference, I don't see the run not being published because the webskip wasn't done, although doing it would be better.
Very entertaining run and game. Loved every bit of it.
I'm sure that there is still room for improvement, but I couldn't tell you where - this just looks like one of those games that will never be perfect - lose 2 seconds here and you gain 3 seconds later kind of thing. Definite yes vote and I can't wait to see someone attempt an improvement.
