Experienced Forum User, Skilled player (1230)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 1354
Location: U.S.
Sega TASer of 2021Sega TAS of 2021Sega TASer of 2011Sega TAS of 2011
Im guessing what the picture about this whole fiasco is that its generally more impressive to go through an arcade game without using continues since arcade games are known to be hard in general, especially on the hardest dificullty. Console games are different in that regard because usually games have sort of a continue option built in for casuall gaming. Take Ganbare Goemon for example. It literally has infinite continues. That will mean that you will beat the game eventually. This might sound like it would take no skill to beat it, but the fact of the matter is that the designers didnt intend for plaers to use death to skip portions of the game. Therefore, the impressive play would come from the effective utilization of deaths & infinite continues. In Arcades though, you have to pay to keep on playing games that you are most likely not going to beat in your 1st try. This is because arcade games in general were designed to basically suck your money away. But, since dying actually gives a stronger position or an instant kill attack in most games, it is usually considered cheap since you used the games automatic routine of getting you started right back into the game. So its usually more impressive to try and survive in one credit. The Metal Slug games for instance, are known to be crazy and severely challenging. So obviouly, It would look very impressive to survive the onslaught without losing a life. Im not trying to go against you x2poet, but im just trying to grasp what people mean by deaths in arcade runs "ruining the entertainment". For Metal Slug's case though, its also considered very impressive to using limited resources effectively like the deaths in Ganbare Goemon. If you use a continue, you are basically using an unlimited resource of power which doesnt seem impressive at all since almost everybody could basically do it. But in my eyes, seeing where ammo, bombs & shots are used is very entertaining in and of itself because not only is it impressive, but it shows that the player knows what they are doing instead of hopefully dying just to get a refill. However, Its very hard for me to really decide since most of the points adressed by other users are very vauge and cryptic. There are other games for arcades which act like console games. Take Nemo for example. I believe that this game might actually cause even more controversy than the Metal Slug runs, but thats for another time. All in all, Im in between "Yes" and "No, but will allow exceptions."
Experienced Forum User, Skilled player (1318)
Joined: 10/27/2004
Posts: 1972
Location: Making an escape
In my Willow run, I die once in order to speed up a cutscene. If I ever finish it, I had I don't get any flack for it.
A hundred years from now, they will gaze upon my work and marvel at my skills but never know my name. And that will be good enough for me.
Twisted Eye
He/Him
Experienced Forum User, Player (249)
Joined: 10/17/2005
Posts: 611
Location: Seattle, WA
Personally, I'm all for allowing it--and if it is abused in such a way that it removes the difficulty (and thus entertainment) from the run, then that run will get the 'Meh' and 'No' votes it deserves, and it won't be published. Then we can discuss that situation briefly for the game in question, and either a new, less coin-usage run will be made or another game to TAS will be found. I don't like the 'rare exceptions' option for the reason that I'd rather the Coin input be a tool to be used freely without the fear of, "Will this fit as that one exception for good?" I rather believe the bad examples will be the exception. So, "Yes" with a helping of "case by case as appropriate" on the side.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 656
I'm voting of not using countinues, except in some cases. Or, at least, using only if it seems natural within the movie. And, really, Metal Slug is not one of these games.
My first language is not English, so please excuse myself if I write something wrong. I'll do my best do write as cleary as I can, so cope with me here =) (ノಥ益ಥ)ノ
upthorn
He/Him
Active player, Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User (474)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
Sega TAS of 2011Sega TAS of 2010Sega TAS of 2008Sega TASer of 2007
If dying and continuing is actually faster, I say go for it. And certainly if a TAS is well planned and executed, the use of deaths and continues should never disqualify it from publication. You guys are just seriously overthinking this.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
The difference between death in a console game and in an arcade game is that in the former death often incurs some kind of penalty (you lose your powerups, or you have to start the level over, etc) while in arcade games the main motivation for death is to induce the player to pay more money (and doing so will usually cause a reward rather than a penalty in terms of gameplay, eg. in the form of your powerups being replenished rather than removed, etc.) Hence death in an arcade game is just the means to buy yourself the rewards (with virtual money that incurs no real penalty). The death itself is not the relevant issue, really. It just simply happens to usually be the only way to "insert more coins" imposed by the game. If in some arcade game you could insert coins at any time and get an immediate reward, the question would be exactly the same. Thus I don't think death/continues in console games is comparable to them in arcade games, and hence the judgement/ruling should be independent in both cases. One should not think that "if we allow death in console games, we should also allow it in arcade games" because they are not the same thing. Allowing one does not automatically mean the other must be allowed as well.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 6/4/2009
Posts: 893
voted no but with exeptions and for entertainement purpose only ( like an arcade MK2 / killer instinct run for exemple)
Experienced Forum User, Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5745
Location: Moscow, Russia
Ok, time to make one more lengthy post on the subject, hopefully the last one so that I won't have to reiterate my view once again, as there seem to be some misconceptions about it that just keep on appearing. :P Also let me get this straight out of the way: I'm talking about credit-feeding, i. e. putting coins in mid-game as a means to get a free buff to the player character or circumvent a game over screen. I'm not talking about using deaths, as those are limited within each credit. Using continues in arcade games, ports thereof, and console games designed in the same spirit, doesn't break the rules of a game the same way glitch abuse or simple death abuse does, because the developers have designed two sets of rules. Credit-feeding circumvents the main set by forcing the player on a pre-designed fallback routine that, in many cases, drastically changes the gameplay in ways that aren't particularly appreciable in TASes (again, assuming they are not about simply making an arbitrary number on a web page smaller at all costs). Arcade games know it when you're doing this, and act accordingly, which is why it's very hard for me to consider feeding coins mid-game clever. You aren't fooling the game anyway, it just treats your actions differently. In essence, credit-feeding substitutes the concept of beating the game with the concept of just getting through it to the end credits. This means it changes the issue from a speed/entertainment tradeoff question to a goal question, or at least a categorization question. Coins in arcade games are a vessel of income for the arcade operator, so naturally all arcade games are made hard and short. The reason is simple: faster credit rotation = faster money gain. Because of this you also can't pause mid-game, and all stages and bosses run on timers, preventing potentially infinite credits (unless the player is just crazy good to loop a game over and over). The challenge also needs to be there so that players who have beaten the game would play it again for fun. For this reason many arcade games employ dynamic difficulty system (commonly referred to as rank) that makes the game progressively harder if the player is doing well and, respectively, easier if he dies a lot, doesn't score, or doesn't power himself up too much. Classic example: Battle Garegga's last boss played by a good player skilled enough to reach it, and the same boss played by a WR holder. Note the difference. Obviously it can be thrown out of the window if the player suicides on a whim, having unlimited lives granted by continues. Feeding coins mid-game has been allowed for the same reason as the high difficulty mentioned above: so that players who can't (yet) cope with it could still have some fun with the game (although exempt from the score ranking), see the content, and learn it — all the while bringing profit to the arcade operator. Because if this the use of continues is associated with free powerups, lowering the difficulty, granting additional lives (as well as an easier opportunity to get the score-based 1-ups in many cases) to bait the player into paying more. This completely defeats the purpose of setting the game on a higher difficulty, as you're just lowering it back this way. Arcade games employ a scoring system that would make a small-scale or even large scale competition viable, because competing and making progress in more ways than just getting farther in the game is fun. No arcade game would let a player buy themselves a high score by putting in enough money. On the contrary, it would in pretty much all cases reset it or mark it as invalid with every subsequent coin, and in many cases completely exempt it from the scoreboard. The score must be earned, separating the players who put beating the game as their goal from those who just want to see the end credits. Many games won't let you put in the first coin's score even if it beats an existing scoreboard entry as a means of punishment! Many games have additional stages or so-called true last bosses that are only accessible if the player does not continue. Many games that have a second loop won't grant you the access if you so much as died once too many on the initial loop, let alone used a continue. Some won't show you a real ending, or even end credits at all, which brings me back to the point of what exactly should count as beating an arcade game. Additionally, using free benefits throws such important and impressive aspect of TASing as resource management out of the window as coins, which are limited in the real world, are infinite in a virtual, so the need of planning is also thrown out of the window. Because console games are designed around a different playing scenario, these differences need to be addressed. 1. You pay for the game only once. This is the reason there aren't as many (if at all) credit-feeding "tricks" available: you aren't bringing anybody profit by making the game easier. For the same reason, however, console games are also easier and usually don't have any dynamic difficulty curves, as dying frequently doesn't bring anybody profit anymore. 2. You aren't standing in a line when playing at home. Because of this you can pause, save, load, access later levels through various means. This is also the main reason console games are usually much longer: if there is no hurry, the developers can put more content, as well as more useless padding (I'm looking at you, Zelda) and backtracking (hello, Metroid). Games like these would never appear on an arcade cab because an arcade game is designed to be a whole and complete experience for 20–40 minutes, rarely any more. It is already an endurance test for most purposes. This suggests that continues in console games are often (but not always!) a part of the system that lets you leave off and literally continue playing it at some later point in time. It doesn't have to be a way to circumvent a game over, although oftentimes it is required to make use of this system. Arguing the intentions of developers is a touchy subject ridden with prejudice and speculation, but in general, console games (unless they are, as mentioned previously, arcade ports or arcade-like games like the PS2-exclusive Gradius V) aren't designed to always be played in a single sitting, hence the well-understood need for means to access the later levels in some way. This means that getting a game over is sometimes a necessary step, and is thus normal for some circumstances. Upon inspecting this aspect further I've come to conclusion that with console games it needs to be decided on case-by-case basis. For arcade games, however, credit-feeding should just be prohibited. There are abundant reasons outlined in this post that justify this, so if you think it's unfair, well, I don't have anything else to say. There might be exceptions if abusing additional credits can reduce the length of the game drastically (like the aforementioned Bionic Commando example), but it still must be viewed as a deviation from the norm the same way NewGame+ runs, or runs that use codes/passwords for a direct benefit, are.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Patashu
He/Him
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/2/2005
Posts: 3870
IMO the categories for an arcade game should be: -Fastest time with deaths/continues -Fastest time deathless -Maximum score (would be interesting for games like cave shmups with ridiculous scoring systems) EDIT: -Fastest time, pacifist EDIT: -Minimum score EDIT: Stuff like loop 2/loop 255/raising the difficulty/'plays on hardest difficulty' type stuff would also be interesting. Mmh, so many goals... Fastest time with continues is 'I am a god of this game, how fast can I reach the ending if I don't care how much I spend on it'. Fastest time deathless is 'I am a god of this game, I want to make every player of this game eat their heart out and I want to do it fast'. From a pure speed point of view continue using is better, but only doing it on one coin is more psychologically impressive since it's the level of skill you'd expect a pro of the game to strive for - after all, they want to pay as little as possible for the same experience. For this reason I think no deaths should be the preferred kind of run - however, there are games where dying is an interesting part of a score attack, like in battle garegga where it plays with your rank which controls everything about the game.
My Chiptune music, made in Famitracker: http://soundcloud.com/patashu My twitch. I stream mostly shmups & rhythm games http://twitch.tv/patashu My youtube, again shmups and rhythm games and misc stuff: http://youtube.com/user/patashu
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 8/7/2006
Posts: 344
I've voted for No, with rare exceptions. moozooh's post raises a great point about rank that I had not thought of previously when considering this post, but not every arcade game uses the rank system and there are some arcade games that lend themselves well to playarounds or other types of TAS that being able to credit-feed in works well, such as fighting games. However for single-player/two-player endurance games such as shoot'em ups, run and guns and so on, I feel that credit feeding is a crutch designed for casual players to be able to beat the game using and abuse of them in TASes just looks ugly.
Experienced Forum User, Player (128)
Joined: 7/16/2009
Posts: 686
moozooh, you should make more of those lengthy posts. They seem to convey points very well and you've managed to convince me that "no, with rare exceptions" is by far the best choice.
Experienced Forum User, Skilled player (1668)
Joined: 12/30/2007
Posts: 484
Location: Hubei,China
Exotic platforms TAS of 2015TASer of 2011Arcade TASer of 2011Arcade TAS of 2011
feos wrote:
I see using only INTITAL COINS NEEDED TO START THE GAME as a sort of hard difficulty for Arcade, because in real life it is more probable that the player have some additional money, but nut using it he seems to handle more skilly, which is harder. So, using coins is a NORMAL gameplay for Arcade. But while Superplay is summoned to be ABOVE normal, the continue using shall be a result of discussion in unobvious cases (though I don't know what one would be obvious here). Also, if continues look namely more WTF than avoiding them (requires skill for making unique entertainment), if they are funny played up, they must be allowed. Then, the comunity needs to see WIPs before submitting. If we see a no-death Metal Slug by X2poet, we could compare easily. The things obvious for one may become obvious for all. And if "all" prefer no-death actually, then the decision was found!
It kill the Entertainment only in Metal Slug 1,it is not necessary to have a conparation.I am doing the Spin Master & Metal Slug 3 now.Metal Slug 1 is delayed,I will make the decision by this forum. Whether I should do a no death version? Metal Slug X,continue improve the entertainment.But it will be such long time to show the comparation. I must say,I will only finish X Level-8 with the continues in the train and complete Metal Slug 3 4 5 with no death. Spin Master I will take damage to save time,but no death. Theses are what about I am doing now. My other plans need not consider this problem,because take damage cannot save time any more. http://www.mediafire.com/?71iey4rn6f47shm This is my WIP for Spin Master.If take no damage the y screen cannot scroll itself.
Do the work.
Lex
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 6/25/2007
Posts: 732
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
upthorn wrote:
If dying and continuing is actually faster, I say go for it. And certainly if a TAS is well planned and executed, the use of deaths and continues should never disqualify it from publication. You guys are just seriously overthinking this.
I completely agree. I'm also of the mindset that whatever is fastest from the beginning to the end of the game (with a predefined goal, which can vary beforehand (eg. any% vs 100%)) is absolutely the best, no matter what.
Experienced Forum User, Site Admin, Skilled player (1024)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 10644
Location: RU
NES TAS of 2011
upthorn wrote:
And certainly if a TAS is well planned and executed, the use of deaths and continues should never disqualify it from publication.
I liked this formula very much. We all know that X2poet is not the one who goes easy ways while PLANNING his runs.
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. If TASing is meta-play, TASVideos Movie Rules are meta-meta-play!
AnS
Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Experienced player (698)
Joined: 2/23/2006
Posts: 682
Moozooh's post makes me think that maybe there's no point in "pure speed" runs of arcade games, because arcade games are designed to value completion less than actual playing. So there's probably no fun in knowing how quickly can the game be beaten in super-easy mode (bought by coins), it's more important how clever/artistic can the player be. In some cases using coins may be clever (much like using Reset button can be clever). I voted "No with exceptions", because there's no "Yes with exceptions" option. If we are to set rules (which I don't think is necessary, maybe just general guidelines) here's simple wording: Coins should be used only as a mean to boost entertainment, but not to gain advantage in competitive speedrunning. (that one where we have framewars) Thus if a TASer makes pure speedrun without any tradeoffs, he is not allowed to use coins, even if the game can be completed a couple minutes faster. [*] But if TASer makes playaround or concept demo, he can consider coins as a factor for creating richer content (e.g. having more variety by switching characters, glitching by using excessive amounts of coins, so on). Usually the fact of using coins itself decreases entertainment, so this additional entertainment boost must outweight it by large margin. ___ [*] (now, 10+ minutes is another matter, impressive difference may be entertaining itself)
Experienced Forum User, Player (174)
Joined: 12/24/2010
Posts: 144
Location: Brazil
Voted "No, with rare exception", on arcade game DEATHS are enough([for me] even looking a bit ugly) since many arcades games gives you few lives instead of 1 life to make you always use coins at every death, so abusing death is enough to save time instead of using an *infinite* resource of life ... and use of continues should be used only for GLITCH means.
My main objective here is to TAS the most obscure games titles!
Editor, Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User, Skilled player (1720)
Joined: 5/22/2007
Posts: 1134
Location: Glitchvania
NES TASer of 2018GBA TASer of 2018GBA TAS of 2016Lucky TAS of 2016GBx TASer of 2008NES TAS of 2007
1) Deaths: We have already rules on using deaths that are sufficient for disallowing unnecessary use cases. That's not the topic here. 2) Penalty on and benefit from continues in arcade games: Penalty: There are games with penalty on continues and games without it. Benefit: There are games with benefit from continues and games without it. _OVER_ My vote would be "Yes, with rare exceptions", but there's no such options in the poll, so I'll abstain. EDIT: I oppose these biased options.
<klmz> it reminds me of that people used to keep quoting adelikat's IRC statements in the old good days <adelikat> no doubt <adelikat> klmz, they still do
Experienced Forum User, Skilled player (1230)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 1354
Location: U.S.
Sega TASer of 2021Sega TAS of 2021Sega TASer of 2011Sega TAS of 2011
moozooh's post raises several interesting points about using continues, even though it focuses way too much on danmakus in general. But the big problem that I keep on seeing is that people keep on believeing that game over screens and continue screens are the exact same. I said this in the Metal Slug X run, and im seeing the exact same thing happen again.
Experienced Forum User, Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5745
Location: Moscow, Russia
Sonikkustar wrote:
moozooh's post raises several interesting points about using continues, even though it focuses way too much on danmakus in general.
Actually it doesn't. Battle Garegga isn't danmaku (although it's an important precursor, but I used it as an example only because it is the classic example of rank), and none of the other points concerned danmaku games. Score counters, powerups, etc., all of that is present in other arcade genres.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/6/2011
Posts: 130
Voting "no, with rare exceptions" basiclly because Arcades that gives power ups when using credits might get abused too much and make the run look more like if it were played by a noob who almost purposley die so he can get that "advantages" just before a boss battle and kill him quickly rather than a god like entity which completely destroys the game from it's beginning. ALTHOUGH, sometimes using credits might be just useful because in more than one game a certain enemy boss or certain scene can be skipped through death and in such cases the credit is more used thinking in actual efficency rather than getting "more powerful". So I guess it all falls in the category of "WHY was the credit used"... if it's for the power ups it'a big fat GO TO HELL DO THE RUN AGAIN. BUT if it's for skipping that dang boss with very high health that annoyingly appears from nowhere in the middle of the level and saves up to 2 minutes of constant shooting then it's a big fat HELL YEAH MOVING ON.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 6/4/2009
Posts: 570
Location: 33°07'41"S, 160°42'04"W
Zavalix wrote:
BUT if it's for skipping that dang boss with very high health that annoyingly appears from nowhere in the middle of the level and saves up to 2 minutes of constant shooting then it's a big fat HELL YEAH MOVING ON.
Then someone should unreject that Metal Slug X submission. In that case the "2 minutes of constant shooting" which are skipped do not apply to a boss, but to some underground trains, but the point stands. I prefer to see the continue screen rather than bangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbang for no entertainment reason.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/6/2011
Posts: 130
[quote="Noob Irdoh"] [quote="Zavalix"] BUT if it's for skipping that dang boss with very high health that annoyingly appears from nowhere in the middle of the level and saves up to 2 minutes of constant shooting then it's a big fat HELL YEAH MOVING ON. [/quote] Then someone should unreject that Metal Slug X submission. In that case the "2 minutes of constant shooting" which are skipped do not apply to a boss, but to some underground trains, but the point stands. I prefer to see the continue screen rather than bangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbang for no entertainment reason. [/quote] Exactly!, that's what I said in the Metal Slug submission, if IT'S used there I see NO problem... but if you reach, let's say, the giant jet boss in the middle of the level 3 and die just to get the power ups of the continues it seems silly... altough, in the train part of Metal Slug X I think there's plenty enough weapons to actually destroy the trains (some R and a C) and the prisioners up top which makes you fat and actually the second train always drops grenade ammo and the third one the G weapon... but meh, don't know how many frames would had take to make all that. Anyway, back to the point, credits perfectly OK as long it's for REAL efficency instead of "powering up"
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 7/2/2007
Posts: 3960
Noob Irdoh wrote:
Then someone should unreject that Metal Slug X submission. In that case the "2 minutes of constant shooting" which are skipped do not apply to a boss, but to some underground trains, but the point stands. I prefer to see the continue screen rather than bangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbangbang for no entertainment reason.
So you don't think it's amusing to watch a couple of soldiers shoot down a train with handguns? Tough crowd. ;)
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
upthorn
He/Him
Active player, Emulator Coder, Experienced Forum User (474)
Joined: 3/24/2006
Posts: 1802
Sega TAS of 2011Sega TAS of 2010Sega TAS of 2008Sega TASer of 2007
My thought is that there shouldn't be an overarching policy on the way continues are handled in arcade games. Because each game handles continues differently, it must be considered on a case-by-case basis. In some cases, dying and feeding quarters will lower the game difficulty, in which case continues should be considered on the same criteria we use for assessing game difficulty choice. In other cases, dying and feeding quarters will grant a temporary invincibility that can be used strategically in a TAS, in which case a TAS that uses it will have merit, and a TAS that doesn't use it will also have merit, and the game should have separate categories for both runs. And in other cases, there will be no specific benefit or penalty to using a continue, and the use of continues should be treated the same as it is on console games? Why do we have to have a site policy on the matter at all? Why shouldn't we leave it up to judge's discretion like most other individual TAS decisions?
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 5/29/2004
Posts: 757
It takes a LOT of skill to blaze through most Arcade titles. Moreso, and luck, to do it on a Single Credit! I personally feel that an Arcade TAS should be.. something akin to some wunderkid down to his last quarter.. pops it into the machine.. and gives the performance of a lifetime that catapaults them to fame. Honestly.. ANYONE can drop in an assload of quarters and speed through a game. It takes someone with SKILL to do it on a single quarter. It takes a TAS to do it not only on a Single Quarter, but in a manner that defies all belief in how it does it...and considering what a TAS is meant to be.. But this is just my personal thoughts.. Mr. Kelly R. Flewin
Mr. Kelly R. Flewin Just another random gamer ---- <OmnipotentEntity> How do you people get bored in the span of 10 seconds? Worst ADD ever.