Posts for moozooh

1 2
104 105 106
229 230
Posted: 9/25/2008 7:20 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
IST wrote:
I've been to it before. Most of the archives are direct ripoffs of another rom site's archives, not even bothering to rename them.
Hmm? I've been under impression that ZD was the one others tried to rip off, at least before the hiatus. It was THE emulation site back in the day.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/23/2008 10:51 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
chaosv1 wrote:
If you didn't like what you saw then you should say so
Right, that's what it asks in the poll, now doesn't it. Also note that it was pointed out many times before, by Bisqwit himself at one or more points in time, that "vote after watching" doesn't mean "vote after watching the entire movie". You don't have to sit through a movie you don't like, and you don't have to do that to tell the others you didn't like it. OoT isn't a unique little snowflake which one should treat with more respect that all the other games in regards to voting and stuff. Hope that helps.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/20/2008 2:31 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Wraps the caret back to the beginning of the string?
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/15/2008 7:58 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Oh, my bad. However, it was still without the "right" control scheme, so that doesn't change anything.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/13/2008 12:01 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
The reason why it would make sense to store dipswitch settings in the movie file is that they can be modified "offline" (that is, wihout even loading the game). I expect many TASes to modify the switch configuration to set a higher difficulty or something else like that, since arcade games usually don't have ingame menu for obvious reasons, and sometimes that involves resetting the game upon modifying them (which would bring reset recording into equation, which is, to my experience, pretty useless in arcade emulation otherwise).
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/13/2008 11:24 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Dromiceius wrote:
And what do you mean by "test menu"?
Dip switches. Ideally, the movie format should store ALL settings that can affect sync in its header, and load them so that they will be active at least until the movie is playing. That's the only foolproof way to counter erroneous setting desyncs.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/12/2008 6:18 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Kriole: you're currently working on any% together with Taco, right? Are you going to use this new route, then?
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/12/2008 2:26 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Can't you shoot her with all beams first, then disable Ice, finish her off with the powerbomb shields, and never pause again?
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/12/2008 1:43 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
z0MG wrote:
so why the hell shouldn't it be published?
You forgot reading comprehension:
Upthorn wrote:
I don't care one way or another whether it's published
Yet Upthorn has a full right to express his thoughts on what he has seen in the run.
z0MG wrote:
If you personally don't think there's enough improvement for it to be worth watching, no one's forcing you to watch! Many people enjoy watching it for the small improvements, and it makes the viewer experience slightly better for first time viewers.
There's no sure way to know if you'll tell the difference until you watch it.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/12/2008 1:27 PM
(Edited: 9/12/2008 8:45 PM)
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
While it's true that the >10% thing was a hoax (should have known but never been bothered to check, my bad), and it's also true that all parts of the brain are known and used by the organism, that's not even close to tapping its potential. Knowing the function of each part doesn't mean too much. Consider that a human brain is actually a very, VERY powerful supercomputer whose performance by far exceeds modern desktop computers and then some. If you just analyze the human visual system, you'll see that huge amounts of data far exceeding HDTV detail depth are being processed at enormous rates… so fast we don't even have time to think about it unless someone reminds us to! The neural system allows for very effective parallelism that helps in nonlinear pattern recognition no software is yet capable of. And keep in mind that our brains manage our whole organisms without even interrupting our thought process. The problem with its low performance, speaking in computer hardware terms, is that we: 1) don't have any feasible ways of direct long-term memory access. In order to remember something, we go through whole chains of memories, and still may be unable to remember the event we were looking for. The information is still there, though; 2) have literally awful debugging interface. We have little to no ways of accessing our brain at a lower level without help from hypnosis, strong mind-altering substances, or some other external help. Because of that, most problems and other mental bugs that crawl in are usually there to stay; 3) don't have developed routines for really fast linear calculation. How many people are there who can multiply 4+ digit numbers without using tools? It's not like we lack processing power for it, though, as demonstrated by certain individuals; 4) are very rigid. Developed ways of thinking don't yield to changing themselves well, and sometimes at all; 5) are very autonomous. There are no manual ways to tweak the performance of a brain by assigning priorities to certain functions over the others. In fact, the only really manual way of doing something with your brain is learning something new and hoping it will override any conflicting or erroneous knowledge you have learnt in the past; 6) have the abilities to change or distort the characteristics of our perception (subjective time, for instance), but we barely, if ever, can control the quality and extent of these changes, or even induce them at will; et cetera. As you see, it's not that the hardware is ineffective per se, it's the interface that is. As such, I'm positive it's much less than even 1% we can take advantage of on our own will, in contrast to our organism's hardwired routines, which, unfortunately, only take what is required to solve a certain survival task.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/12/2008 12:55 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I assume you tried running it in FCEUX, didn't you?
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/12/2008 12:21 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Bisqwit wrote:
If you were an omniscient God, who has created the universe, including all the nature laws in it, and you have the capability of seeing all the extent of time from the beginning to the end at a glance, and you wanted to give the people living in the universe a message, but you wanted the people to write it, how would you do it, considering that the people are an unreliable medium?
That question sounds very much like "if you were able to and wanted things to be as they are now, would you not leave them as they are now". Thus, I will not answer it. :) I find it funny that a god would be enjoying looking at creatures as primitive as us, though. We can't even interact with physical things in non-physical ways (well, some supposedly can, but not anything close to reliability), or use our brains to >10% of its potential.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/12/2008 11:55 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Bisqwit wrote:
We have God's message, the Bible, but like any message that is 600 pages long and created by an intelligence and wisdom infinitely superior to ours, we rarely quite grasp the full meaning of it.
Setting aside my disbelief, the Bible was written by people; in other words, it wasn't created by a superior intelligence because it had to be "dumbed down" to be able to be processed by humans who wrote and read it, with all the required adaptation of thinking categories, terms, and other kinds of knowledge people couldn't have possessed at that point of time, or ever. The existence of a man-made book as a medium for a god's message sounds like a fundamental flaw by itself.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/12/2008 7:53 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
New topic proposal: Ask Warp.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/12/2008 6:43 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Morrison wrote:
The second quest has 'invisible' doors. You just run into a wall sometimes where a door would be if there was a door, and eventually you can run through it :)
To think Nintendo would be guilty of one of the most outrageous level design offenses… :)
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/11/2008 7:05 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
The thing is, your idea is a glorified speed/entertainment tradeoff that may or may not contain additional speed/entertainment tradeoffs per se. A nested controversy, if you insist. One might just as well make a run with speed/entertainment tradeoffs without applying any additional labels to it, and have it judged just as well. But I think the big point behind this idea is this:
Derakon wrote:
Frankly, I say that we need to just allow for more runs, period.
Justifying it this way won't work with the current submission judging process, where the process itself is the main limiting factor. The idea itself, however, pertains to the current process. In other words, not a solution, but a very awkward workaround.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/11/2008 6:26 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Unfortunately, it's much more controversial than you think. The reason for that is "intention" in most cases where the situation might arise, is completely hypothetical. For one, you list Super Metroid as an example. Programmers included the "attract mode" cutscenes into the intro, that show various gameplay demos. As you play through the game, new demos appear. The last two batches outright show you basic sequence break tricks. In other words, the programmers knew the extent of allowed freedom very well. That brings the main question: in games with open routes, who's to decide the intended ones? Who's to decide programmers' expectations? We can but speculate on that matter, but that spawns more controversy than it solves. Another point is using potentially gamebreaking tricks (not even glitches) to traverse the environments without breaking their local rules — but faster. In other words, limiting the use of certain techniques. How to decide which of them should and shouldn't be used, and where/how? Unfortunately, with the degree of freedom allowed by using tools, it has to boil down to rather arbitrary speed/entertainment tradeoffs decided by author and/or the expert community on a per-game basis, dramatically complicating judging and appraisal of technical quality. Sorry, but I don't see it any less controversial than most controversial ideas brought up over the years of the site's existence. Your previous idea with splitting the site into two distinct sections (anything-goes result-oriented and playaround entertainment-oriented) was way better, and it actually was a good attempt at bringing controversy to logical minimum.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/10/2008 4:23 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Ferret Warlord wrote:
I'd like to mention that Nintendo's Wiimote+Chuck looks like a really good middle ground. What's everyone's opinion on the mostly unfulfilled potential there?
Funny, but games like Bionic Commando 3D and Spiderman 3 haven't been released on the Wii, because its hardware is too weak to support the visuals. Perhaps the most approptiate application of Wii's controller setup was left untapped due to other — completely solvable in any case — pseudoreason. Ironic, huh? This is one of the most facepalm inducing things of the current generation's game distribution. That aside, my only real gripe with the wiimote is that MotionPlus's added precision was supposed to be there from the beginning. Had it been like that, the few Wii games that actually tried to take advantage of the controller could have been playable (Red Steel for an example). Wii just needs more good games that aren't remakes, ports, or sequels.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/10/2008 6:45 AM
Post subject: Re: INICHI!
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Catastrophe wrote:
You're intentionally corrupting your SRAM. I don't think I've seen a run yet that attempts to do this.
Pokemon Yellow (and maybe Green?) TAS also intentionally corrupts SRAM. There might be other examples on 8-bit platforms as well, I just don't know the games well enough.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/9/2008 5:02 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Kriole wrote:
Even if you reached a speed of 2.32xxx, you'd have to start running from the room before
What do you mean? While we're here, has anyone researched the max speed at which CWJ is still possible?
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/9/2008 9:10 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
SaxxonPike wrote:
Only slightly offtopic here, but I think the C64 version of this game owns the NES version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cc4ZaWPWVXQ
Which, in its turn, is owned by the original version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zh9mPILeuOk. :)
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/9/2008 7:44 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Baxter wrote:
I thought the goals of this TAS were kinda arbitrary, but seeing that a new any% run will skip virtually everything, it seems like a good option, without having to do 100%. An any% run and this run are enough...
This. Also, it seems like a conventient excuse to obsolete the published OoT run, even though it's in another category (since temporarily having a single category is better than having a tremendously outdated run that doesn't offer any additional content). Win-win solution?
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/9/2008 7:27 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I tried that method some time ago as a part of the testing for a 14% route (there are major energy concerns there at that point as well), but was stalled by the first cwj. Fyi, I tried doing it off the second pillar and at a higher speed (which was the reason for my roadblock). I'm positive it will be faster at least for that route simply because it allows concerving the energy for the rising acid room shinespark a bit later.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/9/2008 7:21 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Yeah, the Archive is usually transcoding the content to make it available in lower quality/size as well.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 9/8/2008 6:11 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
atro city wrote:
Battle Garegga - Stage 5 music, Stage 5 boss music (Black Heart) Mushihimesama - Final (not the true final) boss Earthworm Jim (SNES) - New Junk City, Level 5 Earthworm Jim (Genesis) - The Descent (also known as Use Your Head)
Oh fuck yes. Adding to that, Black Heart is one of the best shmup boss battles ever, seriously.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
1 2
104 105 106
229 230