For those wondering about the goal choice - this game apparently cycles levels after level 48 (so past that point can probably be considered "second quest / post-game completion"). EDIT: It seems to me that the key technical merit of this run would be in the form of route-planning, and though I can't really comment on how well or poorly that was performed, it does nevertheless look as though there's a certain amount of technical care that was put into the run (cf. the timing of jumps in the bonus rounds to be at the peak of a jump at the last catch, and thus ending the round as soon as possible, though there are a couple of instances where this seems to be out by a frame or two). That said, 48 levels of watching the player character go through the routes is mind-numbing. I therefore give this a Meh.

youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCpfYPgjWEg

I voted yes initially, but it is slower than a console run on some levels, so I don't think it should be accepted.

It looks really well done, but good grief this was boring to watch, I only lasted 5 minutes. I am afraid I must say No due to game choice.

The audio makes my ears vomit mucus, and the gameplay is repetitive. No for bad game choice.

The TAS doesn't have the main character move with high precision - especially visible in the bonus rounds. For that reason alone, I vote no.

video file (100mb) http://hotfile.com/dl/123508535/1b193e9/Flicky_k.avi.html http://www.fileserve.com/file/UbvkKNq

My ears are bleeding. Thank you.

I enjoy playing Flicky casually, though I don't know a whole lot about what would make a good TAS of it. Unfortunately, I have to agree with Warepipe et al, that this was pretty boring. My vote is No, for bad game choice.

Voting no for bad game choice and questionable tech quality.

To my mind this is a bad game choice... This game is some serious ear rape... On top of that it seems like an unassisted run would be as fast as yours and sometimes your routes and gameplay seem to be unoptimized (i'm not saying it is) No vote...

wouldn't this look pretty much the same unassisted? edit: posted at the same time as the guy above

Sorry, but I don't really think that this should be voted down purely due to the game's own faults. I agree that the music sucks, and that the game, and gameplay does get extremely repetative, but that's no reason to dislike the TAS. It is optimized quite a bit, and watching it again, I can see a couple frames of improvement, but there are no TASes of this game on the site yet so there's no harm in publishing it.

It is a pretty well optimized run, but there are points where, at first glance, it looks like a couple frames could be shaved. There are also a few times later on when you have to stop for enemies, and any way to manipulate this is highly encouraged. Might be hard, but if it's possible, it's worth trying, and will make the run look better. It might also help the entertainment part of the run to attack more of the enemies wherever it doesn't cost time, and in unexpected ways. Bounce the weapons off of walls, over cliffs, and land right on the spawning door just as a cat is climbing out and BOOM! Or something like that. It's more engaging to watch. It's also another way to separate the tool-assisted speedrun from appearing like it wouldn't be very different from an unassisted speedrun. The purpose of the site isn't to catalog a TAS of every game, it is to use TASes to provide entertainment. If a game does poorly with this, a TAS of it would really have to focus on making up for that if it hopes to be published, and there is a large amount of games where there really isn't a chance. Due to the length and poor music, sound, and graphics, this game may be one of those. It might seem unfair, but the ultimate goal is entertainment, and that's up to the viewers watching the TAS and the game at the same time. I think there might be a chance that a TAS of this game could be published, but I can't give this run here more than a Meh, for reasons similar to those already expressed.

Sorry, but I don't really think that this should be voted down purely due to the game's own faults. I agree that the music sucks, and that the game, and gameplay does get extremely repetative, but that's no reason to dislike the TAS. It is optimized quite a bit, and watching it again, I can see a couple frames of improvement, but there are no TASes of this game on the site yet so there's no harm in publishing it.

I've been thinking the same way either. I always thought 'hey, why don't publish a run of every game if there is one?' But this site stands for quality and the rules say that the game should be TASable. And if you think about that you see why such games are voted down... I guess there have been enough discussions about that but i think 'non-TASable games' should have their own category...

Goood job on your first TAS, it looks like you did a decent job of optimizing it. However, the game choice is pretty bad - the scenes get very repetitive, fast. I voted no, but I encourage you to keep TASing.

Sorry, but I don't really think that this should be voted down purely due to the game's own faults. I agree that the music sucks, and that the game, and gameplay does get extremely repetative, but that's no reason to dislike the TAS.

People aren't saying they dislike the TAS, they're saying that they dislike your choice of game. I watched the whole thing, and there's just not enough variety for the amount of time it takes. Remember, the question posited by the site is, "Should this movie be published?" It's not "Did you enjoy watching this movie?" although it used to be.

there are no TASes of this game on the site yet so there's no harm in publishing it.

this site is about quality rather than quantity, and this game just doesn't make for a quality TAS…

I can personally barely wait for a TAS of the SG-1000 version, once a suitable emulator is released (to my knowledge Kega Fusion and MEKA lack rerecording and frame advance).

Voting No for bad technical quality, ... as this guy can do better on some stages on a real console: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qkmCAmFgeE (9 seconds on the first stage, and there are some others with faster times, look especially at stage 14 in 8 seconds) But I really think it's not a bad game choice, .. maybe this SG-1000 run would be a better idea, then..? +D (.....can Dega 1.16 record SG-1000 movies?)

Flicky is a game I played a heck of a lot in my time, extremely frustrating levels later on, probably because the bright colours frazzled my brain. :D I'd agree that the run doesn't look as optimised as it should be though. One point is in the above post about someone doing some levels faster on a real console. (Being beaten in time on level 1 is never a good start) - The reason is that he swings to the right more in the descent so that he can get more ground speed when he comes back to the left and lands and that is something that should be exploited in many more levels which isn't. - Also, bouncing off the walls bounces you back faster if you're not up to full speed, you use it in some levels but in other levels it might be a quicker way of getting around, did you compare that against your current routes? - Given that someone has done the levels in real time (in the Youtube video above) then you should be beating or matching all of those - Think about what the optimum route would be if there were no animals to get in your way, you should as much as possible try and follow those but there will be (later) levels where the cats get all in the way, and so going through a part of the level earlier may be of benefit, especially if a later part of the level is a big drop where the cats can't interfere significantly. Against that real run linked above, here's the difference in all the levels in terms of time. (Not frames, as I can't measure that) 1: + 1 second 2: 0 seconds 4: - 1 second 5: + 1 second 6: - 1 second 8: 0 seconds 9: 0 seconds 10: 0 seconds 12: - 1 second 13: - 2 seconds 14: + 2 seconds 16: 0 seconds 17: - 2 seconds 18: - 3 seconds 20: - 1 second 21: - 1 second 22: - 3 seconds (maybe 2, can't see the screen properly) 24: + 1 second 25: - 1 second 26: + 2 seconds 28: 0 seconds 29: - 1 second 30: - 3 seconds 32: - 2 seconds 33: - 1 second 34: 0 seconds 36: - 1 second 37: - 1 second 38: - 1 second 40: - 1 second 41: - 3 seconds 42: - 8 seconds 44: - 5 seconds 45: - 3 seconds 46: - 6 seconds 48: - 6 seconds I think the guy stopped trying too hard at level 41, but right there you can automatically see 5 levels that can be improved and in many of the other ones small optimisations (like the kinds I mentioned earlier) may shave off enough frames to knock off a second. In some of the levels the guy takes different routes that may be faster with the powers of TAS. Flicky does suit being TAS'd in my opinion, the routes in the later levels can be pretty tricky, there was some creative use of letting the cats break the chain at places that lost very little time. One thing I think adds to the feeling of unoptimisation is how horrible Flicky's jump height is, it leaves you waiting a lot of the time in places where you can do nothing about it.

1: + 1 second 2: 0 seconds 4: - 1 second 5: + 1 second 6: - 1 second 8: 0 seconds 9: 0 seconds 10: 0 seconds 12: - 1 second 13: - 2 seconds 14: + 2 seconds 16: 0 seconds 17: - 2 seconds 18: - 3 seconds 20: - 1 second 21: - 1 second 22: - 3 seconds (maybe 2, can't see the screen properly) 24: + 1 second 25: - 1 second 26: + 2 seconds 28: 0 seconds 29: - 1 second 30: - 3 seconds 32: - 2 seconds 33: - 1 second 34: 0 seconds 36: - 1 second 37: - 1 second 38: - 1 second 40: - 1 second 41: - 3 seconds 42: - 8 seconds 44: - 5 seconds 45: - 3 seconds 46: - 6 seconds 48: - 6 seconds

I don't think the human speedrunner stopped trying too hard on stage 41, .. as it's clear on the video that he's not playing the game entirely, he's restarting the game many times so he can improve just the stage he's playing =P I'm saying this console player doesn't need to think of routes in order, he could try his favorite stages more than some others, ... OR the TASer tried very hard on the last stages and got good TAS routes for these.. xP I still have to vote No for these obvious flaws and worse times, even I got 9 seconds once on the first stage, and I wasn't frame advancing.. +D

Slower than unassisted run in many stages. Voting no.

I don't think the human speedrunner stopped trying too hard on stage 41, .. as it's clear on the video that he's not playing the game entirely, he's restarting the game many times so he can improve just the stage he's playing =P

I know he is, the score changes on a lot of levels confirm that, which is why being so far behind (especially on the level where you essentially just need to jump up and down the stairs) the TAS times it looked like he could have gone a good 2 seconds faster on a few of those later levels, especially given how well he'd done the previous 40. If he'd got all those times in one run that would be particularly impressive. I hope you're not discouraged ptorflaxendrosis, there's improvements to be made but they can be done.