Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
That's what I meant. Just let's recap and have an actual list we all could agree on.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Aran Jaeger wrote:
Since I've in the past been told to be hard to understand at times, I introduced bold and italic writing styles (aswell as an attempt to structure my post further) this time for the purpose of making my points more clear to the reader.
This is the reason why I was able to read the whole post, and I have a lot to respond with. It helped immensely! I have one more suggested, and it's no less important. Split your sentences as often as possible. You will know it can't be split further if it just stops being proper English. But as long as it retains the meaning, keep splitting. No one on earth will complain if you write in short sentences all the same thoughts you're writing in huge ones. But otherwise, it's a big problem. Not a lot of people can keep in mind ideas that keep arriving indefinitely with no end to expect, within a single sentence. Most just give up if the sentence is too long. Note that you lose literally nothing, you can freely address as many different subjects as you want. But now with a bonus that others can follow if you are interested.
Now let's focus on your points.
Aran Jaeger wrote:
On the Starman Guidelines page ( http://tasvideos.org/StarmanGuidelines.html ), under the therein so-called Qualities of starred movies section, regarding the topic of entertainment listed in there, one can find the following 2 factorsspecifically for entertainment, no less nor else mentioned:
[...]
Hence my logical take from this is:
If suggestions from this page meant for starred movies display any guidelines on how a movie preferably should be like, and if one strives to abide by this for decisions made for a TAS,
then as long as these 2 listed factors do not or do estimatedly not sufficiently much contradict other factors listed in there, which expliclty would be
[...]
(aswell as potentially further unmentioned factors), the act of choosing to incorporate Superjumps as extension of the set of glitches meant for turning the game into something never before see, aswell as for the purpose of enhancing the fast paceis under the above assumption of lack of intrinsic contradiction to be seen as strictly positive bonus on the side of factors relevant for entertainment of a movie, provided one goes by these and only these guidelines for this aspect. Furthermore, alongside the entertainment aspect, the technical aspect, and the aspect of looking too impossible to be real, one can also find the following point in the section Qualities of starred movies (which, mind you, is also marked as bold and as consequence makes it seem to be at least on a comparable level of importance as the previously mentioned aspects):
[...]
And regarding this, it was and is our viewpoint that the introduction of Superjumps and other (frequently X-Ray related) exploits would greatly benefit towards the innovativity aswell as unexpectedness of various contents of the 100% movie, and at very least more so than any alternative in which some or all of these exploits would have been foregone, i.e. we thought the movie then would contain more expected and considered/anticipated choices for room traversal & routes and would contain less innovative material. For example without G-mode, one would have had (at least up to current knowledge) to enter Lower Norfair at the usual entrance and the route would almost certainly lead out of Lower Norfair at its usual exit, and Maridia would have had to be entered from a more common access point, too; and a significant amount of room movement likely would have been much closer to long known approaches for these rooms from past movies. Therefore I'm highly confident in our choice in this matter having been the most conform to the above guidelines among the known options we had, and I must say I would be surprised if the general TASing audience would have a contrary view on this matter.
Facit: This circumstance is either rather to be seen as "user error'' than as TAS decision error, or if anything, those that complain about it should talk to TASVideos' staff about the guidelines rather than arguing over 1 specific TAS case in which those guidelines' consequences are apparent and in use!
The primary trait of entertainment is subjectivity. Of course there can be guidelines that reveal what our audience happens to like in general. There can be examples of what we want to see in movies, what entertains us as history has shown. But on the other hand, there are always people who just happen to dislike whatever the majority of the audience likes. For example, I hate Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, and a bunch of other really popular franchises. My taste here contradicts one of the majority of our audience. There are franchises I like (Battletoads) and also ones I'm indifferent about (Sonic). Other people feel in infinity of different ways. Even things Starman Guidelines try to encourage won't make some people happy if it's used in a game they don't like, or in a movie branch they don't like.
The goal of our site is hearing people out when it's possible to incorporate their opinions into global policies. So the policy here is that if there are problems with a movie's entertainment value, it won't be starred. There's no automation here, no formal cutoff to bypass. Every star is given based on both general feedback and actual qualities of the movie. Several people complaining about new tricks involved that damage entertainment for them, will be heard out, and I'll look closely into this movie to decide whether it's still worth a star.
Aran Jaeger wrote:
I'm not sure why you are repeatedly calling the SM 100% branch a ''legacy category'', moozooh, when it according to the Movie Class Guidelines ( http://tasvideos.org/MovieClassGuidelines.html ) is just a normal and frequently occuring real-time optimized 100% completion category movie with an attributed set of so-called time-saving techniques usage/avoidance consisting of heavy luck manipulation, heavy glitch abuse, takes damage to save time, and foregoes major skip glitch, turning this movie into a that way classified movie according to TASVideos' definitions; instead of e.g. being chosen to be the same except substituting the attributed heavy glitch abuse with foregoes time-saving glitches, and if you would like to see an optimized real-time optimized 100% completion category movie with heavy luck manipulation, foregoes time-saving glitches, takes damage to save time, and foregoes major skip glitch attributed to it, then I don't know if or when such a movie might be made, nor to what extent the foregoing of certain glitches would be applied in it, but I'd estimate that a future in which one would go this path, there likely would a lot of debating occur when TASes start beating each other by loosening up the restrictions that correspond to the foregoing of time-saving glitches, and might even end up running back to the current situation eventually at which we are now.
This is an important remark.
On one hand, indeed we could prefer avoiding some heavily distracting glitch for some category that's overly glitched, to allow more people appreciate the outcome. Lots of people enjoy movies with speed/entertainment trade-offs that forgo glitches that got old.
But on the other hand, for a highly competitive category that we even accept to Vault if we have to (since we care about legitimate speed records), there should be solid rules for the most productive competition. It becomes really hard to assess improvements if they are constantly being compromised in order to make the result a bit more appealing.
Avoiding one single instance of some really heavy glitch is easy to handle. Avoiding a hundred of instances of minor glitches would make it impossible to meaningfully compare anything to anything else in terms of optimality. Note that we shouldn't think of it as the only glitch that makes it bad now. In the future there will definitely be glitches that will make it even worse! Such things tend to get more and more complicated over time, because there's no limit to creativity.
The only solution really is making a movie that avoids some of these glitches as a part of another category entirely. For any unvaultable goal (anything other than any% and 100%), it makes sense to avoid as many glitches as one pleases, as long as the audience happens to get and like the result.
Aran Jaeger wrote:
Regarding the major skip glitch definition,
[...]
, according to Sniq, without the Superjumps, the TAS would finish at a time around 1:04 or 1:05, but would still beat the previous 100% TAS. Most of the time means at least half of the time and at most at all times, and it refers to either the new movie or to the previous movie that it is compared to. And it makes little sense to measure the amount of time that a new TAS spends in sections that it skips due to the nature of a skip spending little to no time in those sections, whereas measuring in the previous TAS how much time it spends in skipped sections does make more sense. So if one qualifies superjumping through a room as ''skipping part, or let's say even all of the game (for the section affected by a Superjump)'', then in this context, one is meant to take a current fastest movie and check for all time periods in there that correspond to (with Superjumps) skipped sections in the new TAS and then add up those time periods from the previous TAS and compare this accumulated time that corresponds to skipped sections with the previous TAS's total time to see if it is at least 1/2 of it, is how I understand this definition. Now, half of Cpadolf's TAS in 1:08:15.74 would be about 34:07 which according to Sniq's estimate on time saved due to Superjumps (of which there are in total 23 in use, by the way) would be a large multiple of about 8.5 to 11 times the actual amount of time (namely 3 to 4 minutes, going by 1:08 - 1:05 = 3 min, and 1:08 - 1:04 = 4 min) that is skipped from the previous TAS (since 8.5*4=34, and 11*3=33). So maybe it is just the fascination coming with the Superjumps, aswell to parts the difficulty of estimating how much of a difference they actually make together, that is the source of the resulting big discrepancy between the perceived influence and the actual influence, and I doubt a further 100% TAS using Superjumps could apply them in about 10 times larger magnitude of effect to get closer to this borderline set by the definition of major skip glitch.
Back when we introduced this movie class, we had these figures to incorporate into its meaning: SDA's notion of "major skips", our notion "game breaking glitches", and the amount of time that those categories use to save compared to the fastest movie without that technique. The latter introduced one Masterjun - one order of magnitude cut from the previous movie time.
Jokes aside, it was clear that we needed to address that the glitch is major and that it skips a lot. So the term is "major skip glitch", and as you can see, after all it doesn't have to corrupt too much - it just has to be an abused bug, and to result in a major skip. How much it corrupts is subjective, how much that damages entertainment is subjective. But when majority of the old route is skipped by a single glitch, it's clearly a major skip glitch. And most of the time it's published as a separate branch. That way with SM we have any% that uses the major skip glitch, and the branchless movie that avoids it, feeling closer to traditional idea of any%. The time difference between them is major, the gameplay difference is major, and the latter is very entertaining, so we can have both published.
With a 100% movie that uses glitches corrupting graphics, we can't also have a 100% branch that doesn't. They would be too similar in too many ways. But as I said, nothing prevents avoiding those glitches in unvaultable branches. So everyone can have something that pleases them the most. Unfortunately, it's impossible to constantly remain entertaining for everyone if the knowledge base on a game is quickly evolving.
Aran Jaeger wrote:
Habreno wrote:
And if this isn't supposed to be NMG, then why not use spacetime + duping expansions + escape warp to make it faster? (for the record, that is a rhetorical question, since I know this is NMG)
I think I understand what you mean, and I think the short answer to this would be:
Because the addition/incorporation of spacetime + duping expansions + escape warp would satisfy the criteria stated in the Movie Class Guidelines for the definition of major skip glitch, namely it would satisfy and fall under the following:
Movie Class Guidelines wrote:
Major skip glitch
Such movies have a glitch (or a combination of glitches) that allows to skip major portions of the game without satisfying the in-game requirements. Most of the time more than half of the game is skipped, compared to the fastest movie that avoids this technique. Glitches involved are also quite elaborate and often include memory corruption.
It would circumvent (by repeated, quick item-duping and collecting) the (under usual circumstances existing) in-game requirement of travelling to every individual item pick-up (in order to also collect all individual 100 items, including ''100%'' being shown at the end, as opposed to only achieving the latter), and likely would most of the time skip more than half of the game, compared to the fastest movie that avoids this technique. And as consequence of this, ''major skip glitch'' would be attributed to it, and then from the prevailing branch diversity perspective, in which (as far as I know) minimal overlap/similarity between movies for different branches but of the same game is wished, it probably would come quite close to the ACE TAS (by effectively being the same, except adding a long loop of item acquisition to it in the middle), which could cause a branch overlap conflict there.
Full completion criteria must be reached through in-game actions only.
Arbitrary code execution (ACE) is not allowed for any full-completion category for the Vault. Arbitrary code execution of ROM data, and memory corruption tricks to write to arbitrary memory are also not allowed.
If a game has a progress counter, it must be filled by actions that increment the counter in gameplay. Modifying the progress counter through ACE or memory corruption is not allowed.
If full completion is counted by obtaining a set of items, these items must be collected through in-game methods. Using memory corruption to place items into an inventory is not counted towards full completion.
If full completion is counted by fulfilling a set of flags, these flags must be set through in-game mechanisms. Using memory corruption to set completion state flags is not allowed.
If a progress counter is filled by collecting a set of items or fulfilling a set of flags, all individual components of this set must be collected or fulfilled. Collecting or fulfilling the same component multiple times to inflate the progress counter is not counted towards full completion.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
A new movie may involve emulation accuracy improvements.
Always ensure the new movie has gameplay improvements. If the new timesavers can be applied to the old movie, they count as improvements. If new timesavers only become possible due to accuracy improvements, they are also valid. But if the only difference is in slightly different timing of otherwise identical events, it's not an improvement, but only a resynchronization.
I still see no reason not to use a faster core, but it's up to you.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Matslo123 wrote:
Even though you can't collect all weapons, I still think that you should collect the ones that you can (meaning that banana gun would have to be collected). Again, this category is all the collectables you can get within a single run.
Yeah I agree now.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
It only says that probably all nanoweapons should be collected, but how does this cover this page http://www.remar.se/daniel/ijiguide_weapons.php
I've been told you can only have something like 17 of those. And even then, cracked weapons aren't present as collectable items.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Thanks for your patience and dedication! We don't often have to invent a brand new full completion definition, and our requirements are quite tight, so when there are people that have the energy to go all the way with us, it's very rewarding. Because then this definition can be reused by other communities and individuals due to its qualities we all participate in crystallizing.
So how many weapons will be collectable this way?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Woops, I didn't notice you've changed the branch. I've been talking about "all items" for quite a while. To be fair, "collectables" sounds kinda ambiguous to me. It feels like an arbitrary middle ground between unlockables and items. How do we clearly and unambiguously define a collectable? The definition should be easy to apply and see if an object belongs or not.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Full completion means there's nothing more to gain within the criteria. You can't get all weapons, and you can't get all nano/armor/health pickups. It means their collection can't be full. You can't collect 100% of them. So they can't be required for full completion.
Whatever else you collect in addition to fully collectable ones, can be a speed/entertainment trade-off. It just has to actually increase entertainment. Which means it doesn't have to cost too much time. This is a subjective balance.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
I'm asking questions that help to find out which items fit our site's definitions of full completion, and which don't. If you can't collect all health, armor, and ammunition items, we can't include them in "all items", since it'd obviously be not "all", but "most". "Most items" can't be clearly and objectively defined, as new tricks or route solutions may lead to collecting more in future. So "most items" won't work as full completion.
My definition suggestions were a part of brainstorming while not knowing the game well. The result is that we can just apply the rule I quoted and see what fits, and whether it's bad or good to include.
From your definition suggestion above, we boil it down to these:
All posters, ribbons, supercharges
Trapmine
All armor and jump upgrades
Yukabacera’s scrambler
Weapons can't be a part of it since you can't collect them all in one playthrough.
Even then, is there anything else we're forgetting?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
What about the rest of the post? We still have items that don't require several playthroughs and whose amount is known for sure to address.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Okay, please read the whole post. If that aspect sound bad regardless, what about items that don't respawn during one playthrough?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Thanks for participating guys! Here's our set of defining principles for any full completion category:
Full Completion Rules wrote:
A clear consensus is required on what constitutes full-completion.
Some games reward the player for something internally defined as maximum completion goal.
Sometime full completion requirements are explicitly mentioned in the game instructions.
Full completion can only consist of optional one-time, irreversible, or otherwise strictly limited accomplishments that can be objectively measured and maximized.
Conditions that are imposed unofficially by players are only eligible if they originate from fundamental game-play features.
Community agreement is required when defining newly invented full completion goals, or if existing definitions need to be revised.
We don't require beating the game several times; even if there are games strictly defining 100% as such, I don't remember a single game where the community agreed that it should be a part of the full completion definition.
Not being able to collect something twice at all, even after reboot, would be a clear aspect, but if it's not feasible, we may agree to require items that don't respawn in a sector.
The amount of sectors is known and limited, so if you play each sector once, the amount of such items should also be known and limited. Though it could be a bit hard to objectively tell what this amount is. Especially given the fact some things are really hard to accidentally spawn, or randomly guess how to get. Daniel describes how to get them, but how can we know that there's nothing more, like maybe he forgot something? Or maybe something can be spawned by abusing a bug? We don't allow using bugs to increase your completion points, as the linked rule tells after the part I quoted.
So let's define it like that: items that don't respawn per sector, don't require several playthroughs, and whose amount is known for sure. How many of those can we count now? If some category of items has items that don't fit, we better exclude the whole category. For example, if we define weapons as items, and can't collect all weapons, we can't name the goal "all items".
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Let's go through what the author lists as "items", since it's the only connection to this goal.
Ribbons, Supercharges, and Posters are present in each sector this movie plays through, one of which per sector. Their overall counts are known, they can all be collected in one playthrough. To all Ribbons Iji reacts with a certain monologue as I've been told, and Posters are directly available in the in-game menu, and you're informed when you have them all collected. Those are the only items Daniel describes in the game guide in details.
Armor upgrades are available in several sectors, and you can't collect them all, only 3 of them, which makes the rest disappear. If you collect them, how much time would that add?
Jump upgrades I think you do collect, but I don't remember if you collect both or just one, or whether getting both makes the jump higher than just one. Do you get both? If not, how much time would that add?
Trapmine can very well be collected once and for all, how much time would it require?
What about Nano, Health, Armor, and Nano overload? Is their count per sector limited? Do they respawn? How many of them are there per sector? How much extra time would they require?
What about Weapons and Ammunition in that regard too?
Also overall, which of all these items persist across reboot, as in, recorded in the game save file? Which of them reappear after reboot?
This is all important to know because there's no explanation anywhere why exactly the 3 item types are picked and no other item type is required. If we want to define full completion for now and future, this info should be documented and discussed. Having a community definition already in place does play a role, but there's just a single run of "all items" at speedrun.com, so there's no way we could blindly rely on that as their community definition.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
moozooh wrote:
the game tracks your progress with two of them (the posters and the ribbons).
Matslo123 wrote:
The reason I only chose these is because they are tracked by the game (in the ingame and main menu).
I can only see Poster viewer in the main menu and nothing else related to those item types in either main or in-game menu. How are they tracked exactly?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Coleco is good since gameplay actually matters there.
And please post your updated movie.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
I provided a few hints here, subscribing to all reads should be quite possible:
https://github.com/mamedev/mame/issues/3649#issuecomment-491249964
See if you can make it pass the address (and value if needed) over to lua. Hook without arguments works, I tested on exec.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Nice discovery, but the movie is kinda weird.
The glitch makes the movie consist of holding Down for some seconds and then Up for some seconds, repeated 9 times.
You can start holding Down way before it's needed.
You can release Down way after it's not needed anymore.
You can release Up way after it's not needed anymore.
The only gimmick is in a 1-2 frame window when you need to start holding Up while still holding Down.
This is obviously trivial to TAS, like in Duck Hunt where all you need is finding the first frame to shoot and the spot to aim. Then you can be sure that within the existing knowledge base you will always be getting a frame perfect movie. In theory, a new glitch could be found that would make the movie even faster. Overall there are quite a few more possibilities in this game than in Duck Hunt, so in the end it can be considered not as trivial, though borderline. I think it's passable.
As for the starting level, due to the glitch all the unique content and all the difficulty changes have been rendered irrelevant and don't affect gameplay in any way. I made this movie pick option 3, adjusted every level's Up/Down glitch by a single frame, and the movie completed level 9 without problems. In the ports without this glitch, gameplay differences actually play a role, but not here.
Since this game does loop at level 9 which is still the hardest, it can be considered a valid ending point for a movie. If the game kept incrementing the level count indefinitely, we'd likely accept a movie that only plays through the first loop, because difficulty and new content are irrelevant here (provided they are indeed irrelevant in every future loop too). But this movie's ending point is fine.
What I would prefer tho is starting from level 3. As I already tested it syncs just fine after a few trivial adjustments, so there's no technical problem with that.
DrD2k9, do you have thoughts on that?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
ThunderAxe31, when judging this movie, please verify the cyclecount and suggested movie time that originates from it. Also there's another movie that needs to be verified on the same subject, I think it'd be handy to do check both at once.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Anyway, we can't have as many branches as speedrun.com does. The more branches we publish, the more overlapping content they have. Some games may allow lots of vastly different branches, but for most games it maxes out at 2-3. Of course it doesn't mean most games we publish TASes for have 3 branches, people don't tend to push every game so hard. But still, after 3 (and especially more) it becomes really hard to invent something unique and stunning. Things unavoidably start to overlap.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
As posted here, we have a proper fix for bizhawk's N64 video where x264 would die during timebase calculation for the primary (or any dedupped) encode. It happens because bizhawk outputs inconsistently timed dupulicate frames (whereas real N64 outputs at consistent half framerate), and x264 is incapable of making it look sane. But if we tell it exactly what timebase it is, the problem goes away. And we know that, it's N64 framerate reversed! 60000/1001 fps -> 1001/60000 timebase.
So to actually fix dedupped encoding, add this argument to the x264 command: --timebase 1001/60000
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
Looks nice!
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11269
Location: RU
As for the run itself, I found it quite boring. I'm not a fan of SMS games in general due to their relative simplicity, and this one wasn't bad, but the lack of music and specially the desert pausing killed it for me. The only good part in the end was wall-clipping, but it was way too rare. Voted No.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
