Posts for dunnius


1 2 3 4
13 14
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
I too feel the ratings are unfair, especially the technical ratings, which I feel are completely bogus. The bigger problem is that I think nobody knows what the rating values mean, or at least not very consistently. This is not helped by having so many numbers. Since I don't know, I do not rate movies. The system needs an overhaul to make it more consistent, and more understandable.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Then ignore the forums and focus on TASing. This is basically what I do.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Very nice, and a very large improvement. I like the sword swinging to the music during Tanzra. This reminds me that I need to get back to work on ActRaiser 1.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Game: MSX Metal Gear Up to exiting Building 3 after getting the oxygen tank. (I've been stuck in the desert of RNG scorpions for a long time, so I figure a new WIP should be posted) Author: dunnius video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muf9OkkOq6I
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Hâthor wrote:
I've starting working on 100%, I just get the bow (about 40 minutes of gameplay). But I'm not fully satisfied of my work, it's more like a "superplay" than a TAS (it's really far from the amazing WIP of the any%). I'll try to render a video of it, if someone is interested in.
It doesn't matter if it ends up being a test TAS to prove the concept and demonstrate what the route looks like, but it is really important to have it done for reference, and we would like to see it because it is awesome even if not fully optimized. The route could change somewhat after completion, but sometimes they only way to see improvements is to have a completed TAS to analyze.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Mothrayas brought up some good points regarding moons. I agree with the statement: "Moons seem too diluted and I'd like to see them go back to "notable publications" rather than 60% of publications." So I propose the following, which is a modification of the previously proposed. It has 3 main categories (no longer tiers) based on main goal, using flags for ID and filtering, and then moons and stars as concurrent categories and flags to the main categories. This way moons goes back marking runs that are important instead of only entertaining, and it solves the problem of low rated moons and high rated vault. Here are the categories: 1) Speed as a primary goal over entertainment. This is any%, 100%, game end glitch, probably in-game timer, and perhaps low% (I see it as a harder any%, but speed is still the primary goal.) The poll question would be: "Is this run optimized sufficiently to be published?" 2) Entertainment as a primary goal over speed. This is not moons; that is addressed later. This is the playarounds and other non-speed TASes that are considered entertaining. The poll question would be: "Is this run entertaining enough to be published?" 3) Runs that are not speed focused and not necessarily entertaining, but are interesting enough for publication. This is the proposed "demo/board games" category. This is for demostrating something interesting not shown in other TAses for the game, which includes some of the existing Gruefood delight, and board games that are not trivial (they should be interesting.) The rules for being published here need to be somewhat strict because this is not a dumpster. This is not a category for submission, rather this would be decided by the judge(s) if a TAS does not make it into the other categories.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
This is the sort of TAS, when optimized, would be a good candidate for the proposed "demo" from the Vault Tier Discussion thread. This is impressive and shows a variety of glitches not normally seen otherwise thanks to the limitation, but is not entertaining enough for "moons", unfortunately because of the limitation.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Spikestuff wrote:
Samsara wrote:
Anty-Lemon wrote:
Hi
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Something along the lines of "R&D" could be a good name for the demo category. I prefer "category" instead of "tier" because I don't consider one category to be superior over another (except stars, of course), and I would rather have them noted as different groups. The categories need a slight redefinition to reduce subjectivity. Without giving names to the categories, here is how I would define them:
    The speedrun category is for TASes that have speed as the main goal rather than entertainment. (Clearly defined any% and 100%) The entertainment category is for TASes that have entertainment as the main goal rather than speed, and are deemed entertaining. There should not be any mixing between this and speedrun, which is what the current system does. The star category is for TASes that are the best on the site. (This will remain the same) This could work as a concurrent category so that it is easy to tell what type of starred TAS it is. The demo category is for runs that are interesting technical achievements (but not trivial or simplistic), but are not deemed entertaining enough to be in that category, and do not fit in the speedrun category. There are a number of rejected TASes that can fit in this category, most notably the gruefood delight.
As for the chess example about early mates, it depends on how it is accomplished. I could make a 2-player version, but it would not be any real accomplishment, nor would beating up a simplistic engine. But if someone could get a notable engine to get an early mate (or at least relatively quick in terms of number of moves), that would be very impressive, but not entertaining because of the long waiting.
Post subject: MSX Metal Gear WIP #2
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
direct link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obq3sbOK4IQ Game: MSX Metal Gear Up to Building 2, Floor 2 geting to the rocket launcher. Author: dunnius
Post subject: Re: A tier for board games?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
feos wrote:
Samsara wrote:
If a new tier is going to be considered specifically for non-entertaining board games, couldn't we use that as an excuse to change the tiering system altogether? I could see non-entertaining board games being part of a new tier as long as there's more substance to it than just that, like the oft-proposed Demo tier, but having a tier dedicated specifically to just board game TASes makes absolutely no sense to me.
I agree with all of this.
I also agree with that. This gives more support for the Demo category.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
VC = Virtually Cheating At least this is the case for consoles/games where there is a noticeable reduction in lag, like Ocarina of Time, and probably most N64 games.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
jlun2 wrote:
dunnius wrote:
From what I've heard, SNES9X 1.52 and 1.53 emulate lag better than 1.51, but unfortunately there is no lua support for them, so they can't be used for TASing if you need to use lua scripts. If I ever get around to improving ActRaiser, I may end up having to go backwards a version (1.52->1.51) so that I can use lua.
Or you can use BizHawk/lsnes for that.
Bizhawk won't work on Linux, and LSnes is probably still too slow making lua botting impossible.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
From what I've heard, SNES9X 1.52 and 1.53 emulate lag better than 1.51, but unfortunately there is no lua support for them, so they can't be used for TASing if you need to use lua scripts. If I ever get around to improving ActRaiser, I may end up having to go backwards a version (1.52->1.51) so that I can use lua.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Yoshi's tongue grew three sizes that day, long enough to lick Baby Bowser who was many levels away. This was enough to set Luigi free, despite the fact that Mario was on a crying spree.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Aqfaq wrote:
Nach wrote:
How about on first instance of harassment based on gender, we're terminating the offending user in question?
My gender was marked as "genderless", but ALAKTORN referred to me as a guy. That is offensive. Maybe can has termination, plz? ^__^
That's why we have the option to show gender. I would have made the same mistake, but now I won't. BTW, I love your avatar image.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
feos wrote:
dunnius wrote:
Speaking of naming for the proposed, what if the category now known as Moons was named Superplay, and Vault named Speedrun? This is a play off of the 'S' in TAS being known as either, and each applies to the category.
Speedrunning (tool-assisted) is also superplaying.
Yes, but Tool Assisted Speedrun is what it was referred to first, IIRC. Superplay was used later because of the playarounds. So titles refer to what the primary goal for each category is.
jlun2 wrote:
feos wrote:
The thread as it is shows one thing: there can not ever be clear criteria for the Demo tier. However, if the poll becomes "should it be published?" with consideration for the logic I proposed ITT, it may become possible to vote like this: - Yes, it should be published as a technically impressive concept demo. This way, all the unimpressive demos will still be dumped, and the worthy ones will be published. Borders of technical impressiveness are not clear either though.
The problem would be too many silent voters, and even then, given it's a tool-assisted run of some sort, chances are something as "simple" as playing a minigame would be technically impressive. No idea where to draw the line for that. Edit: Or dying lol.
When typing my post I thought about how it would be subjective. But I think for this it would be best to handle this the same way as Stars, which uses a Starman to decide. I guess this would be a "Demoman", but I'm sure we can come up with a better name for this (and probably the category too).
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
mamuuuut wrote:
oO the legendary desync which appear once a millennium...
Quick! Throw a master ball at it!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Decisions are not made quickly, which is fine because nothing should ever be done in haste. Regarding the Final Fantasy 1 "console verification" TAS, I understand why it was rejected since it does not fit in any tier in the current system. It is a shame though because of its technical achievement. That got me thinking about Gruefood Delight, where the TAS is now. In the proposed system, it would have been rejected as well, but what if we added another category that would replace the vault tier? It could be named something along the lines of Demo, and would be the best of the Gruefood Delight. It would be TAses that demonstrate something technical, interesting, important, etc, but don't fit in the main categories. This way they can still be published, but get "vaulted". This kind of "vaulting" makes more sense than how it is done now. Speaking of naming for the proposed, what if the category now known as Moons was named Superplay, and Vault named Speedrun? This is a play off of the 'S' in TAS being known as either, and each applies to the category.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
submission text wrote:
Armed with a new glitch, he finishes over [in under] two minutes faster than his previous attempt.
Fixed it for you.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Zidanax and my ActRaiser TAS is commentated: http://tasvideos.org/1747M.html Ah, just found this from clicking on the tag: http://tasvideos.org/Commentaries.html
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
I'm getting old. I'm 38 now.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
As I mentioned in IRC, I am willing to do a frame by frame comparison to find out where the desync occurs. My guess about what is happening is that the RNG is sometimes updated multiple times on a frame and there could be a difference in the number of times it is updated. The reason I guess that is that Jim moves after the screen transitions, so there is not a difference of lag frames in that case. (There might be lag frames in transitions later on particularly the screen with the dragon, but I am not 100% certain). If there is a difference of RNG, then I can figure out what the RNG should be since I know how it operates since it is simple. That will help reduce the emulator inaccuracy.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
I was doing a google search for Final Fantasy 6 information, and one of the links was the movie page or submission notes(I can't remember) for the run that is about to be obsoleted. I watched the TAS and followed the site from then on.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
I'd say only use the Black/White Yoshis if they are faster for that level. Also, good stuff, Bobmario511!
1 2 3 4
13 14