What, you just go in GDT, get some nuts and sticks, clip through the web, get to Gohma, kill her, leave and come back, ganondoor, glitch to the bottom floor, and you're done? That sounds like a major timesaver.
So apparently when GlitchesAndStuff tries to live up to his name, he's so good at it that he finds a second potential timesaver in GDT:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlCVn_JdcMc
O_O
well what about random chests then? They're permanently opened. It'll always be possible to find loopholes in any 100% definition, so I think an exhaustive list, however arbitrary, is the best only option (unfortunately).
If you want, we can just provide an exhaustive list of every single item that needs to be obtained, then define the goal as obtaining all of those, and ending the game.
...Which is what Grunz was trying to do.
The reason why we can't have a simple definition like in the MST is because, by its very nature, the 100% run is completely arbitrary. Opening a 5-rupee chest and opening a heart container chest makes no difference to the % completion, since it's one more chest open. However, it makes a huge difference in terms of our arbitrary concept of 100%. So yes, an exhaustive list seems to be the only option besides simply getting everything.
Also, sorry if I offended you, Slowking, but I really did think that you meant by "allowing heart duplication". If you want I'll edit that part out. And the "super-RBA" doesn't seem like a strawman, more like a reductio ad absurdum.
- Max out the menu by legally obtaining all items without any corrupted items in there.
I still disagree with that one. Either you can write stuff to your menu or you can't. If you don't want it, ban the glitch that allows it. No weird arbitrary middle ground please.
Why not? Have this in your definition, and you can get all the things you could by banning RBA, only getting to make it more fun by RBAing non-essential items, such as bombchus.
Slowking wrote:
But still, what does max out the menu mean? Only the stuff you can see at the end of the game (dungeons have their sub-menu, after all), and does that include the map?
Dungeon stuff shouldn't be included. It can only be seen in that particular dungeon. Thus it's obviously not important to the whole games state.
Again, if we go down that path we would have to open all the chests in dungeons and all that crap. That is a rabbit hole we don't want to go down, imo.
That is in your opinion, though. I'm sure many people would not feel a 100% run is complete without that. Also, why not define full dungeons in the same way that IL runs define full dungeons?
If we allow RBA and heart piece duplication, which I think we should, Epona could be skipped.
But that would defeat the entire purpose and bring us back to the "super-RBA" example! You say you want to avoid those cans of worms, but if you bring that example in, then why not duplicate all 36 heart pieces? RBA the upgrades? heck, why not RBA all possible obtainable items and duplicate all 100 skulltullas? If we allow heart duplication to skip Epona, all those questions arise. In fact, I think the idea of attempting to "skip Epona" is exactly what goes against the spirit of a 100% run in the first place!
For example magic beans. If you have to remove cutscene triggers, you have to plant all the beans to get 100%. Again, it opens a whole can of worm if we require anything outside of the menu.
I don't think that's a problem. We can simply delay on getting the beans until after getting bugs, and we're right there to plant them.
As for me, I vote EEssentia's definition, including both Epona and the cow (could be gotten right after Epona with little route change)
I like this idea and I agree, but it may be stretching the definition of 100% too far: if you get all dungeon chests, why not all keys? Open all locked doors? I'm not sure to what extent to take this, and how much harder it will make it for the people who do the TASing, since with every new requirement a whole new set of complications arises.
I love it when a revolutionary new technique is discovered which causes everyone to go silent.
On another note, to rephrase what Slowking wrote, afaik MTA is atm working on a MQ MST TAS WIP
-just wanting to put more initialisms out there
...okay, back to lurking.
How exactly do you define "no major glitches"? What if a seemingly minor glitch used in a published, "low glitched" run was found to lead to a major, game-breaking route? =P
You mean like wrong warping/cutscene skipping? hard to say, but if it were up to me I'd say consider "no major glitches" as "no RBA, BA, or wrong-warping to a cutscene", at least for now. When a new glitch is found, I'd say deal with it when the time comes. Meanwhile, let's just worry about the current glitches. And yes, I know this is all open to interpretation, this is just my opinion.
EDIT: thinking it through, BA is required for WW, so just say no BA or RBA, and again, when a new glitch is found, deal with it when the time comes.
In my opinion, there should be 5 categories: Low% (debatable whether or not that should be split up), any% no major glitches, any% glitched, MST or All Quests, and 100%. Which ones are done, that's up to the TASers, but those should be the categories.
I know I'm just a lurker, but I have an opinion on the categories: Can't Any% RBA and the new strategy be combined, while saving a new spot for Any% no RBA? That would sound reasonable, since the wrong warp to the end credits breaks the game about as much as RBA does. And no, I don't see TASVideos changing its structure anytime soon nor do I think it should.
