Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Fog wrote:
sonicpacker wrote:
So is this new method the standard or are there plans to revert back to the "normal" way? I really prefer Lagarith personally.
Standard.
Can you explain the reasoning behind the change if you know why it happened? Like efficiency or any other sort of justified superiority that would out-favor customization and control? I want to make an encode and would like to know why this method is better, first. I assume it's better anyway, given the circumstances.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
andymac wrote:
hmm, maybe I recall incorrectly, but I thought that was one of the reasons the 5:04 run saved time over the 5:28 run? During the DDD skip, they changed "modes". Lower starting speed meant less forward acceleration during takeoff (not in the air) allowing mario to BLJ more effectively. I wasn't referring to building up speed with long jumps, that's an entirely different kettle of fish.
A lower take off speed saved, yes, but not because of an animation difference. The movement I had thought you meant is this (timestamped for 2:11).
andymac wrote:
And yes, you can BLJ from either mode, but as soon as you start the second jump, you will already be in the slow mode. I seem to remember the slow mode having an exponential increase in speed forwards or backwards, whereas the other mode I thought had a constant acceleration with a max speed (48). You would need some code hacking to do a slow velocity jump at high velocity or vice versa.
No you wouldn't, because as I said, it's the same lol. A long jump is a long jump and has the same physics regardless of takeoff speed. Maybe you are thinking of how once you reach the 48 cap while in the air, your speed begins to increase at a slower rate?
andymac wrote:
I'm just wondering if you have a formula or description of the change in velocity for Mario for long jump takeoff for the various speed brackets?
Tyler Kehne or pannenkoek might, but I only have what's in my head from using MHS. Edit: thanks MKDasher for posting below thissonicpacker wrote:
...while starting a long jump when you have more than like 25 speed (estimate, because I don't want to check).
Checked, and it actually requires 32 speed units to take off with the 48 cap. 25 only gets you to about 40.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
andymac wrote:
Can I also just mention that there are actually two different types of long jump? You can see one with Mario's arms going forwards at low forwards speeds (or negative speeds), and you can see another one with his arms going backwards, at higher positive speeds, I remember the speed calculations per frame being different between these two configurations, especially during "takeoff", the first kind being more suited to acceleration, and the second more suited to maintaining a high speed. I would say it's likely (but without proof) that Mario would not be able to BLJ in this second LJ state (even if it were possible to go backwards in the state). Since the actual LJ is different forwards than backwards, maybe this is a possibility why you can't BLJ forwards?
You can BLJ from both types, and I believe it's merely an animation difference based on speed when leaving the ground. Also, the speed doesn't work differently while in the air either, so you're remembering incorrectly. I know what technique you're referring to and inferred this idea from, and it's used simply for gaining takeoff speed prior to a follow up long jump for crossing a large distance.
Edit: and the reason you can't apply a BLJ to go forward is because the programmers made the speed value decrease to 48 no matter what while starting a long jump when you have more than like 25 speed (estimate, because I don't want to check). You can of course take off with less, but a long jump *never* leaves the ground with over 48 speed due to the cap.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Ready Steady Yeti wrote:
But how is it that I could long jump backwards for hours on end in just any open space in the game, or against any old wall in the game, and would still gain no extra speed. Though there is no speed check on negative speed, just an average backwards long jump will do nothing at all as far as gaining speed goes. Why is it that doing simultaneous BLJs in BLJ spots (you know all the different types, not gonna go into that) builds up speed while just BLJing in regular spots does nothing? How does the time frame in which one A press is done and the next A press is done effect the speed itself?
I want you to think of Mario's speed represented as a number. While in the long jumping animation, Mario's backward speed *IS* capped to an extent. You cannot land with a speed "bigger" than -15.999... However, if you land with that negative speed and then do a consecutive long jump while still holding 100% backward, your speed will go from -15.99 to about -23. The lower the speed Mario has when pressing jump again, the lower your speed will be after the jump. For example, landing with 0 speed will give you -1.4999 on the post-jump frame, while doing it with -5 will lead to roughly -9, etc. The number gets exponentially bigger and increases by larger and larger amounts every further BLJ, and is also affected by where the joystick is. That is key to optimizing BLJs and reaching specific speeds.
Anyway, under regular circumstances, if your jump successfully went "over" -15.999, this value will revert back toward -15.999 by about 1 every frame Mario is in the air until said threshold is reached, when you are once again capped by it while in the LJ animation.
What is required to abuse these physics for massive speed is a long-jumpable surface for Mario to land on before the speed can fully "decrease" back to the above threshold. This is why you see common BLJs on slopes and/or stairs and/or elevators: Mario can "catch" the ground basically instantly due to the surface behind him being higher, instead of doing what TASers call an "air-BLJ," which as explained above, makes Mario's speed move to -15.99 by 1 speed every frame. This applies with all air-BLJs at any speed, even very fast ones. Sometimes BLJ spots actually require air-BLJs and need to be optimized accordingly.
Hopefully this cleared up some stuff for you. If you want to read an in-depth tutorial with photos on how to side-BLJ with TAS tools, check this out.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Plush wrote:
sonicpacker wrote:
Plush wrote:
sonicpacker wrote:
It's not as optimal as it could be though, my run beats his to the koopa shell by 2 frames and starts the celebration 8 frames earlier according to my Vegas comparison. Of course, the death should save overall in a full run, but as a single star, it's not quite WR
DSG makes "single star timing" pretty weird. This is why I always thought time should end on first black frame instead of star dancing. Ending time on star dancing for the DSG strat makes no sense lol
This discussion is old as the hills, my friend. There is no perfect timing method, as star dust, celebration, and first black frame all have pros and cons. As a community (SM64 people, not here), we decided on star celebration back in early 2010 or late 2009 for a few different reasons. Rather than overhauling that whole system in place for years for a strat that rarely has use (dying), it's easier to just make notes with runs that use it as they happen.
Black frame doesn't have any con though lol, it's just the correct way
The cycle of black frames for a death is 16 frames longer than the one for a star fadeout. And if you measure to full level ending, it just sounds wrong at that point to say "single star" and would confuse new/outside people. It would also not be comparable to longstanding non-TAS measurements, which already have a discrepancy with TAS runs due to time ending on collection instead of celebration. That would look even worse with a larger gap from timing to final fadeout (using that example since I already gave evidence why first black would never work).
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Plush wrote:
sonicpacker wrote:
It's not as optimal as it could be though, my run beats his to the koopa shell by 2 frames and starts the celebration 8 frames earlier according to my Vegas comparison. Of course, the death should save overall in a full run, but as a single star, it's not quite WR
DSG makes "single star timing" pretty weird. This is why I always thought time should end on first black frame instead of star dancing. Ending time on star dancing for the DSG strat makes no sense lol
This discussion is old as the hills, my friend. There is no perfect timing method, as star dust, celebration, and first black frame all have pros and cons. As a community (SM64 people, not here), we decided on star celebration back in early 2010 or late 2009 for a few different reasons. Rather than overhauling that whole system in place for years for a strat that rarely has use (dying), it's easier to just make notes with runs that use it as they happen.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
It's not as optimal as it could be though, my run beats his to the koopa shell by 2 frames and starts the celebration 8 frames earlier according to my Vegas comparison. Of course, the death should save overall in a full run, but as a single star, it's not quite WR
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Isotarge wrote:
GoombaHeart wrote:
How well have you guys figured out what causes crashes in PUs? If you have to constantly console test and re-test parts of the run, that'll surely make a ton of extra work.
We have all of our PU stuff syncing on console already, but yes, the issue linked above was reported by MKDasher so devs could be more accurate in the future, making constant console testing not necessary for TASers.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Mothrayas wrote:
Nahoc wrote:
sonicpacker wrote:
Do moderators exist? Lol. It would be cool if ignorant people weren't allowed to freely spread lies and slander others for no valid reason.
Yes, but they are not as butthurt and don't ban long-time users until 2022 like some people I know. ;))))
As Samsara said half a page back, please stay on topic. We do not need any more of this sort of derailment here. Once again, that goes for everybody.
I won't reply to him this time, but if you don't want me to respond to obvious aggravation attempts in the future, it's probably best to take care of them through deletion, or else I'm going to publicly defend myself when instigated just like in the past because I don't accept unjustified shit talking about myself.
jlun2 wrote:
Back on topic: How many stars does PU save time now for a 100% run? Is there a list?
You also have to consider potentially starting off a 120 run with VCutM and/or basement entry, the latter using PU.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
ALAKTORN wrote:
sonicpacker wrote:
Look at this guy with the inside info! Too bad it's all wrong, glad you're not making bets about this, ahahaha. By all means, keep saying things you have no idea about. It is what you're associated with after all.
inb4 I get blamed for provoking a "derail"
We’re talking about the any%, I don’t see how this is a “derail” at all. That’s a reply to Samsara as well. This is pretty on-topic.
If I’m wrong then you could very easily say what’s taking you people so long to finish the run. I remember pretty clearly you were saying it would only take a little time (like within weeks) many months ago when it was discovered.
I doubt I said that concretely or without the word "hopefully," etc. But it shouldn't matter regardless. Things change, unexpected stuff happens as time progresses, and there's nothing telling a forum can do that will speed up finishing. When the submission text is released, it'll all make sense. Until that time, no author has any obligation to updating the public. We have specifically chosen not to, as we want the reveal to be as huge as possible, and we have agreed this is the way to do so. It will be released this summer for sure and that's the only information I can reveal.
Sharkey91 wrote:
Good luck to everyone to finish the 0 star TAS ! I bet it'll look pretty amazing
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
ALAKTORN wrote:
sonicpacker wrote:
And the run is almost finished, so please be patient. This project is basically the most monumental change in this category since the 5:28 dropped to 5:04.
Yeah… sure. All you have to do after the skip is hexing the rest of the run from the old any%. Oh wait, the Japanese improved the optimization of that a ton and you people never tied their improvements. I guess that’s what’s taking you so long.
Look at this guy with the inside info! Too bad it's all wrong, glad you're not making bets about this, ahahaha. By all means, keep saying things you have no idea about. It is what you're associated with after all.
inb4 I get blamed for provoking a "derail"
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Mitjitsu wrote:
I was under the impression that these Japanese TASers found a way into the Vanish Cap without the wing cap.
The "western" authors did. And the run is almost finished, so please be patient. This project is basically the most monumental change in this category since the 5:28 dropped to 5:04.
ALAKTORN wrote:
The news is that they’ve been hoarding how to enter the moat door from TASers who’d actually put it into good use (the Japanese) because the western SM64 TASing community is made up by a bunch of faggots. With the exception of Plush.
Do moderators exist? Lol. It would be cool if ignorant people weren't allowed to freely spread lies and slander others for no valid reason.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
TAG wrote:
Tyler? is that you?
TMK wrote:
BTW I'm Tyler Kehne, just made an account here. Not a TASer but I do extensive SM64 research, mostly ABC stuff. If anyone has weird SM64 glitches they've experienced but haven't been able to explain, hit me up and I can probably figure out what happened.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
From the 120 submission:
Big House: 39"43
Rainbow with 100 coins: 1'05"78 & 1'09"95
From SM64.org wiki's TAS records page:
Rainbow: 27"53 (YT link dead)
Worth noting this isn't console verified yet and *would* most likely crash even with fixed cam being utilized (I say that with knowledge of tests that didn't go public from certain other PU strats...this stuff can be quite finicky). Great route though, many thought RR PU wouldn't work because of the limitations of the maze walls. But now with this input "proven," I hope Snark collaborates with MKDasher to get a confirmed no-crash + optimized version.
Edit: Opened YT to see this in my subs:
Link to video
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
I don't have much to say on the topic. It is what it is. In fact, I won't be posting about it anymore after this as there's nothing to justify. I'm honestly confused why it was even pointed out. No one's miscredited in the subtitles or description. I think specific people here like to question any motive I have for anything they can grasp at... Directing people to an informational "article" about the topic at hand, on a website they're used to navigating and seeing informational links from, isn't a crime as far as I know.
Description link is fixed btw, even though that was pretty funny. Thanks z1mb0bw4y for pointing it out.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Nahoc wrote:
sonicpacker wrote:
I made a thing with a couple input plugins using slowdown on an emulator that some people here may enjoy watching:
I'm gonna ask here again, since it appears you deleted my comment on your video/blocked my account, for whatever reason:
Why does your subtitles and description link to a wikipedia page instead of tasvideos.org?
I didn't delete your comment. I got a mobile notification to my phone and never saw it on my video. I thought you deleted it. I don't think I blocked you either. My run was not submitted here and has no affiliation with it... so I don't know what link you're expecting exactly
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(420)
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Synx wrote:
I really hope somebody wants to and is able to complete the new any%
Funny coming from you of all people, who never TASes anything. No need to be sarcastic when I gave a real answer.
Secondly, no one is doing anything unless it's our tiny group that got into VCutM with 0 stars...because no one else would be able to do the aforementioned task with how technical and specific the numbers are. So basically, you're waiting for us no matter how you look at it.
