Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
weirwindle: what you don't seem to understand is that this sort of TAS might interest someone if it were played on a traditional chess game, without such lengthy animations. Why are you so attached to battle chess?
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
This GMV says it needs a savestate, and I haven't been following this thread terribly closely so I do not know what savestate, precisely, or where to get it.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
My personal opinion is that I would much prefer a 25 minute run that has more variety over this 15 minute run that uses one move over and over.
I guess I'm heavily in the minority here, though.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
Jungon wrote:
You never know when the perfect weapon for a job will be ... a panther.
There is some variety and some bugs (what did you do to the last knights on stage 7??) so,... I voted Yes.
And it would be way more repetitive with 1 player...
I would expect that, with one player, there would not be a single move that is always the best move to perform in every situation. If I am wrong about that then I'd revise my opinion to "This is a really bad game for TASing."
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
I think that, in this case, I would rather see a 1P run, because the optimal 2P combination is way, way, too repetetive. If there were even one instance where something besides that swinging attack or the highest power magic attack was used against anything besides a thief I might be inclined to vote meh instead of no.
It is a shame that you cannot log into the forums. You should try coming by IRC to see if anyone can help resolve the problem.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
Sonikkustar, have you watched any of the Sonic R videos up at The Sonic Center?
After watching those videos, let me know if you still think it would be a good TAS candidate.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
hero of the day wrote:
sgrunt wrote:
Let me draw attention to another recently rejected run, submitted under similar circumstances where there's no substantial difference in game play between the NTSC runs (and there are several there as well) and the PAL run.
Does that submission warrant revival for publication as a separate branch?
But that submission was slower than the (U) run. Why would it be comparable to this run which is faster than the (U) run?
If the PAL and NTSC are separate branches, there shouldn't be any comparison between the two, so why shouldn't that one have been equally worthy of publication as a second branch as this one is right now?
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
This should be accepted and should obsolete the NTSC version. The preference for NTSC is a matter of speed. In most cases, the PAL version of a game is unmodified from NTSC, and therefore runs 1/6th slower (though with slightly less lag). When PAL versions are modified by the developers to compensate for the speed difference, they become comparable to the NTSC versions, unless significantly altered in some other way. In this particular case, Mario runs at a very similar rate in pixels per second to the NTSC version, and there are no other significant gameplay differences, so the PAL version should be directly comparable to the NTSC version.
The speed alteration allows for a few additional tricks to be used, allowing faster completion than the NTSC version. However, in all other respects the game is exactly the same, and should therefore be considered to compete directly with the NTSC version.
I do not see any reason to reject this obsoletion, and there is certainly not enough difference between this and the US version to justify simultaneous publication, so I reiterate: Accept and obsolete.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
DrJones wrote:
IHMO, it's not cheat if the ROM only competes in its own category.
You're failing to understand the objection. When the video leaks out onto the internet as a TAS of Zelda that completes the game without ever using a sword, people are first going to think "Wow, you can kill Ganon in the original Zelda without using your sword? I wonder how that works."
And then when they find out that the ROM was hacked to make it possible will be disappointed and angry that they were lied to. That is how it would be a cheat. Not so much in the context of this site as in the context of the internet at large.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
Regarding the comparison to the SM64 CCC run, I would argue that, in Super Mario 64, while coins, caps, and cannons are helpful, they never seem absolutely necessary for game completion. It's sort of like a Sonic the Hedgehog run that never collects rings or powerups in that, while it is technically a challenge to avoid the rings and never take any damage, it's a lot less interesting to watch than a standard run.
By contrast, the sword in Zelda seems like an absolute necessity, and even though you can choose to avoid getting it, it is surprising to learn that it is possible to accomplish any meaningful progress in such a case, even given the benefit of tool assistance.
It'd be sort of like a Brain Age math run that never writes any numerals in terms of surprise and entertainment value.
Now I haven't actually watched this movie yet, so this post is all theory at this point. But I personally find even the notion that the first 8 dungeons can be completed without a sword to be incredibly entertaining. Not so for the idea that a sonic or mario game can be completed without coins/rings or powerups.
Edit: Having now watched the run, I stand by my line of argumentation. Item use was really creative and unexpected.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
I have finally gotten off my lazy ass and watched one of these submissions in an emulator, instead of waiting for a youtube encode that will never come.
Where I had previously assumed people were voting no based off a misunderstanding of the submission text, or dislike of goal choice, I now see how sloppy the play is.
While the author does make use of some interesting tricks that the published movie lacks, he is inconsistent about using them, and often seems to have superstitions about what is necessary to perform them.
In addition, he seems to be unaware of some basic velocity control techniques that ought to be able to increase or maintain his speed better at several points where he simply holds right instead.
So, while I am not opposed to the goal choice, and I am interested by a trick or two that I hadn't seen before, I find that the quality of play is way too sloppy to be acceptable.
Edit: I would cite specific examples, but my hand is injured, leaving me unable to type at such length.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
sgrunt wrote:
I haven't watched this as yet, but I recall raising concerns about Oil Ocean which don't seem to have been addressed from the previous run (is it possible to continue across the surface for most/all of the level as in the currently published run in the absence of spindashing?
It might be possible without repeated spindashing, but it'd be really really slow, because frequent jumps are required and you lose speed as the jumps peak, so it'd basically just be sonic walking the entire length of the level.
And in Oil Ocean 2 this route requires a spindash is required at the end to prevent death from the level boundaries changing.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
ais523 wrote:
upthorn wrote:
You're thinking about this the wrong way. Truncated's proposal is to change from "minimum turns" to "minimum actions", considering any command to the game as an action whether it advances the turn counter or not. Which would basically be nethack's equivalent to aiming for lowest real-time instead of lowest game-displayed time.
In that case, mightn't "fewest keystrokes" work as a goal? Similar to "minimum actions", but easier to count. (It does have the problem of typing something like "n1000k" to walk into a wall 1000 times, though.)
Well, it could, but it is a little bit less analagous to time in a game that is rather incongruous with the concept of frames.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
ais523 wrote:
You would need to be very careful about trying to define a "minimum turns and RNG manipulations" run, by the way. There are other ways to manipulate the RNG that don't involve turn-taking actions at all (repeatedly renaming an item to an invalid name, for instance), but they're slower than simply walking into a wall and also more annoying to watch. (At least it would be clearer what was going on.)
I sort-of dislike arbitrary goals, though. Would a run requiring no more than 50 manipulations per turn be obsoleted by a run requiring no more than 60, for instance, if it were ten turns faster?
You're thinking about this the wrong way. Truncated's proposal is to change from "minimum turns" to "minimum actions", considering any command to the game as an action whether it advances the turn counter or not. Which would basically be nethack's equivalent to aiming for lowest real-time instead of lowest game-displayed time.
Of course, given two equivalent length sets of input, the one with the lower game-displayed time will probably be preferred as more impressive.
By the way "least actions taken" is no more arbitrary a goal than "fastest completion", it simply has less precedent on the site.
Edit: for clarification, least actions taken and fastest time both measure performance based on a single aspect of gameplay to the exclusion of all else, and there is no particular reasoning to justify the selection of the time aspect as compared to any other single aspect. This is the definition of arbitrary.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
nfq wrote:
I would like to see the SuperEagle Kreed SaiX2 or whatever its name was back again. It was the best filter. Why has it been removed from newer gens versions?
It has not been removed, but it does not function in 32bpp mode. If you want to use it, switch your desktop to 16bpp.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
While I can agree that Nach has occasionally rejected movies too quickly, I can't name an occasion when the judging consensus has not come to agree with his decision on the matter.
Still, it would be more conducive to community morale if there were more time given for people to state and argue their sides. I don't think that Nach should stop judging, but it might be worthwhile to set a minimum period before rejection on movies that do not clearly violate an established rule. (e.g. "aims for fastest time" runs that are slower than the published version, or a real-time speedrun).
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
TASeditor wrote:
i said, collecting all item doesn't work, not playing all levels.
Try read twice, if you don't understand
I don't think randil thought you were saying that beating all levels is impossible. I think he wants to know how you plan to improve on the published movie.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(388)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
I just stumbled onto this post discussing some theoretical limits to the number of 1UPs possible in SMB2 on the OC Remix forums. It is not really relevant to TASing but I thought this community might find it interesting anyway, and this seems like the best place to put it.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
