Posts for c-square


Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Nice job! Good work improving an already insanely fast TAS. Yes vote for sure.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
I seeing there's no argument over the quality of this submission. General consensus is that it is well done and easily falls within the standards we expect to see on this site. I think where people are struggling is deciding what the publication branch would be. I concur with what some have already said. While it may make sense to separate frame-perfect input tricks to a separate category in an RTA forum, on this site frame perfection is the standard, not the exception. The only time we allow a branch that avoids "glitches" in a TAS is when it produces a markedly different run, requiring different strategies and resulting in a different end-product. Good examples that come to mind are the zipless mega man 2 and BLJ-less Mario 64 runs. I don't feel the glitches avoided in this run fall into the run-altering category I cited above (with the exception of Practice mode, which I'll discuss in a minute). In TAS-philosophy, glitches are there to be exploited, and it doesn't feel like there's a good reason not to exploit them here. In conclusion, DOS Prince of Persia is an iconic game from its time, and it would be a benefit to this site to have a run published here. In my opinion, this submission certainly shows off superhuman play, and definitely meets the bar of quality we expect. I propose that we accept this run as our first submission on the any% branch, with the understanding that any future submission that utilizes "glitches" to materially improve the run would then obsolete this one. [Note: In regards to the Practice mode skip, I doubt that will be accepted here, as it would have the exact same content as a full run, just minus the first few levels. Those currently working on the "glitched" run would be wise to take this into account before going too far.]
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Welcome to TASVideos, GMP! I love seeing the old DOS games get TASsed, and this is certainly one of the most famous ones. Thanks for all your hard work putting it together. I finally got to watch it, and it looks very well done. Yes vote from me for both entertainment and publication. I'm looking forward to the any% w/glitches run!
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
First, I want to say this was very enjoyable to watch, and it's clear how much hard work went into optimizing this. Definite yes for inclusion on this site. That said, if this gets accepted, I strongly believe the judgement notes on #3556: Brandon's NES Super Mario Bros. "minimum button presses" in 05:48.04 need to be revisited/amended, particularly this part:
DarkKobold wrote:
No one playing SMB counts the number of times they press a button while playing the game, or the number of jumps they make, and etc. These super technical categories don't really fit with the aims of the site.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Wow! I was not expecting this. Great improvement and absolute yes vote! I tried all sorts of things to beat that frame rule, but never could get it. Glad to see you guys finally figured out a way to do it. Because of the frame rule, I have a feeling this is now totally optimized. The only way to squeeze another second out of this would be to cut down a bunch of typing, and I can't see where that could happened. Thanks, davidtki, you've made my day!
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Yes, I found it entertaining. No, I don't think its publishable.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
MUGG wrote:
Does the emulator remain stable if I edit memory on it in Cheat Engine?
Hi MUGG, I've tried using a memory manager with JPC-rr without any success. That said, I haven't spent too much time on it, so it's certainly possible it works. Let us know if you succeed. Alternatively, there's a forum topic where we've posted some useful lua scripts for memory watching and altering.
Post subject: Re: #6556: willbobsled's PSX X-COM: UFO Defense in 14:44.04
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
YES!!! This has been a dream TAS of mine for years. Thank you so much for doing this one, it was great to watch.
willbobsled wrote:
DOS and PSX each provide some good arguments to be considered the preferred TAS platform...
Except that JPC-rr would have been insanely annoying to TAS this on. Glad you chose the PSX version. Congrats on a great first submission, willbobsled!
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
That was amazing! Thanks for making it. And, fsvgm777, yes the input dancing definitely added a lot to the entertainment. It should be included in the official encode!
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
All I have to say is " APMXNMJEYPU"! ;) Awesome run on a very difficult game. I grew up on the C64 version too, and I could never get very far. I love the early input end and how the wind blows him to the last bomb.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
As you point out in the comments of your video, there's a faster pacifist run, and it's no damage as well. It's amazing, and I'd love it if it was submitted at TASvideos! Link to video
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
I like how everyone was happy that you got all the pieces. :) Quick and fun. If it qualifies for publication, I vote yes. Unfortunately, I don't know if single minigames can be published.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Merged TASScript 2.0 code in with JPC-rr 11.8, and published a JPC-rr 11.9 candidate. More on this at the JPC-rr development thread.
Post subject: JPC-rr v11.9-alpha
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
I've finally found some time to merge my TASScript and mouse changes into the v11.8 code base, and have created an Alpha version for what I propose will be JPC-rr v11.9. You can download it and try it here, and I'd appreciate it if people could take it for a test run and let me know if you find any issues. Unfortunately, I know nothing about git, so I'm hoping someone else will be able to update the JPC-rr git repository with this new build. I also looked into the Mice Maze error and unfortunately I wasn't able to fix it. On the surface it looks like for Mice Maze to work, you need to have JPC-rr be in "protected mode", but I have no idea how you'd get that going. Another consideration in general is that JPC-rr is built off of version 1 of JPC. The latest version of JPC is v2.4, and it's likely several emulation issues have been resolved in the newest build. If someone wants to upgrade v11.9-alpha to use JPC v2.4, I think that would make a good candidate for a new major version (JPC-rr v12). Let me know if you have any questions.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
I appreciate all the hard work that went into this. I do, however, have concerns about coding a new game for TASVideos. All the games displayed at TASVideos are independent, historical artifacts created by others for people to play. The goal of the site is to showcase superhuman play, or breaking games that already exist. Even though this is a recreation of a preexisting dos game, my understanding is that the TI83 code was created specifically for this TAS. If that's the case, then there's no baseline from which we can deem it is 'authentic'. I liken it to coding a Mario clone on the C64 just to TAS it. How can others get a copy of that game except to write the same code? IMO, games here should be from a pre-existing artifact, either a cartridge, rom, or even a publication of code in a book or magazine. Creating a game just to TAS it opens the door too wide for anything to be submitted and published. EDIT: We'd also have to revisit what an "improvement" means. From what I can tell, any change of code that speeds up the game itself would be considered an improvement, which is completely different than any other submission on this site (AFAIK)
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Wow! I'm really excited someone decided to do this game. I've long considered doing the DOS version (if I ever get any time to TAS again), so it's a real treat to see your run pop up here. This looks optimal, but there's little variety between the battles. I'll still vote yes, though, as I think it's short enough not to get too drawn out. I really think a showcase of all the ships would make a great future TAS, using one for each battle (sacrificing it after winning to allow for switching). There could be two TASes, one for each side. Anyhoo, good work on this one and I hope we get to see more Star Control love in the future!
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
ajfirecracker wrote:
In order to damage my feet optimally...
Ha ha! Words you'll only ever find at TASVideos. Great run, absolute yes vote!
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Lizstar wrote:
Also, c-square, I just think I fully realized what you meant. I posted at 3 in the morning last night and today I was playing it casually and realized that the hit score is things hit while in super form, NOT life left. So yeah, LOTS of time could be saved by not goofing around after getting the super nut and destroying things. Whoops!
It looks like there might be opportunities on most levels to avoid hitting things after obtaining the super nut.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Nice job! I've got a couple questions: For level 5, would it make sense to maximize the damage you take on your way out to the super nut so you don't have to wait as long to die? Also, for all levels, would you be able to get lower hit bonuses to save a few frames at the end of the levels when they count them up?
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Nice analysis! Good work. :)
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Thanks, I missed that part about Woof. If you find that you can’t save any time with the feature, then you can remove mention of it in your objectives, as you’re not avoiding anything that could be of benefit.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
I hate to do this, because it looks like a lot of work went into this run, but since the "Special Parent Feature" is part of the game manual, I feel it should be used in an Any % run if it can make the run faster. Of course, there's the argument that this would defeat the purpose of playing at the hardest difficulty, but I think our vault rules would favor both hardest difficulty and using all the possible game controls listed in the manual.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
Thanks again. Voted no for entertainment, but I think this makes a good addition to the vault. Leaving it up to the judge as to whether the lower difficulty setting is appropriate.
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
LeHulk wrote:
c-square wrote:
First question that comes to mind is, why normal difficulty? What's the gain from not choosing a harder difficulty, and is it enough to justify the choice?
There's also Expert difficulty which is basically the same game with different patterns. It would be pretty much the same thing but a few seconds slower.
Thanks for the quick answer, LeHulk. Is it just different patterns, or are there more things you need to find? If the former, what would then account for the additional seconds?
Active player, Experienced Forum User, Published Author (372)
Joined: 9/25/2011
Posts: 652
First question that comes to mind is, why normal difficulty? What's the gain from not choosing a harder difficulty, and is it enough to justify the choice?