They both have the movie class "One player in a multiplayer game". I don't know if they need a tag (you mean branch name?) or not.
I meant branch name, yes. That's because in this game, one-player mode is actually faster (and we have a run for that) so the two-player version branch needs to identify itself as such.
Regarding retroactive obsoletion, I have thought about the issue for a while but I think that the use of retroactive obsoletion may open up a can of worms.
I'm not sure how retroactive obsoletion is more of a can of worms than retroactively moving to a tier that the run didn't qualify for when it was published.
Clearly we'll need a discussion at some point on how to deal with moon tier movies with poor entertainment ratings; it feels wrong to leave those in moon indefinitely, and not all of them can just be moved to vault tier.
They both have the movie class "One player in a multiplayer game". I don't know if they need a tag (you mean branch name?) or not.
I meant branch name, yes. That's because in this game, one-player mode is actually faster (and we have a run for that) so the two-player version branch needs to identify itself as such.
I think he means those two runs don't actually use two players, so they don't need a branch name.
Patashu: Then how about something like "no OAM data as code" for the slower SMW run?
I think he means those two runs don't actually use two players, so they don't need a branch name.
Wait, then why are they obsoleted by this 2P movie when there's a different 1P branch for the game?
(edit) wait, I think I got it. The chain is incorrect. There are two 1P movies from 2004, which were obsoleted by a faster movie in 2007 which happened to be 2P. Then, six years later, somebody saw the 2P movie and decided to make a 1P movie as a separate branch, and which got obsoleted twice since by other 1P movies. So what should happen is that movie 105 counts as obsoleted by 2401 (rather than 830) so that it ends up in the proper branch and obsoletion chain.
Aside from that, what's an OAM?
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4090
Location: The Netherlands
Radiant wrote:
FractalFusion wrote:
Regarding retroactive obsoletion, I have thought about the issue for a while but I think that the use of retroactive obsoletion may open up a can of worms.
I'm not sure how retroactive obsoletion is more of a can of worms than retroactively moving to a tier that the run didn't qualify for when it was published.
For starters, it's in direct contradiction with a verdict recently made by a judge and site admin about the state of the two runs.
Second, applying Moons tier to movies with poor entertainment rates but aren't Vault-eligible isn't new. Right now, there are three Moons ranked worse than FractalFusion's Pokémon Gold, and in total 44 Moons with entertainment rated lower than 5.7. The issue has already come up once here, and in the end it was decided to put that movie in Moons.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4090
Location: The Netherlands
Radiant wrote:
Certainly, but putting it in moon tier when the judge and admin initially put it in the vault is also in direct contradiction with their verdict.
Except they didn't. That movie was published long before the Vault or Moon tiers even existed, and was split to Vault automatically with no explicit or particular discretion for that game from either a judge or an admin.
Also, there's a difference between determinining tiers and determining obsoletion. Tier placement can be overruled for any reason like entertainment ratings, or things like starring a movie. Retroactive obsoletion is very rarely done and only when there are significant categorization issues with the obsoleted movie in question.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Right, finally I understand. So in these somewhat rare scenarios, being unvaultable trumps being boring and the run goes into Moons. It's nice to know there are precedents for this decision too. Admittedly I have never been aware of a retroactive obsoletion before but there's a whole thread dedicated to retroactive unobsoletions so it didn't seem too far-fetched.
In this light, [949] GB Metroid II: Return of Samus by Cardboard in 45:08.42 should also be promoted.
The any% run's submission text defines it as "a chunk of memory that stores the data about the sprite tiles to draw onto screen". According to Patashu, both any% SMW runs execute this data as code, and that sets them apart from the ~10 minute run (and its predecessors). Should I rename the longer run "no executing OAM data as code" or something similar? I'm thinking of just giving up and calling it "no null sprite spit, no stun glitch", similar to the longer Yoshi's Island run.
Joined: 10/12/2011
Posts: 6438
Location: The land down under.
[1457] PSX Crash Bandicoot 2: Cortex Strikes Back by Mukki in 47:37.62
Issues with it.
first the tags:
- Takes damage to save time
There is only one little part where this happens.
- Heavy glitch abuse
It's not heavy glitch abuse... it's actually fairly light.
now the branch... recently given to it "no box glitch"
for [1506] PSX Crash Bandicoot 2: Cortex Strikes Back "item glitch" by pirohiko in 11:34.85
it actually deserves the credit of being noted as a glitched run...
I say remove "no box glitch" from mukki's run and put something on pirohiko's.
In crash RTA there are 4 categories. glitched, any%, any% No Game Over Abuse and 100%
for tasvideos there's 3.
Glitched, any% and 100%
WebNations/Sabih wrote:
+fsvgm777 never censoring anything.
Disables Comments and Ratings for the YouTube account.Something better for yourself and also others.
As explained earlier in this thread, that's not the case. "Glitched" has sometimes been used here as a synonym of "any% but faster", but that's not possible since "any%" already means "the fastest run". Pirohiko is the fastest run of this game, and therefore qualifies as "any%".
- Takes damage to save time
There is only one little part where this happens.
But it does happen at least once, right? If it does, that tag is properly applied.
Spikestuff wrote:
- Heavy glitch abuse
It's not heavy glitch abuse... it's actually fairly light.
According to the definition of that tag in the Movie Class Guidelines, that tag can apply to a run where a significant time-saving strategy is used (and that run abuses a heavy glitch, so it fits).
Spikestuff wrote:
now the branch... recently given to it "no box glitch"
It actually used to be "no memory corruption" but you rightly pointed out that that didn't sound right, so I recently changed it to something objective and specific. The box glitch is the one glitch that run avoids.
And Radiant's right about the branch names. On this site, we normally have any% (fastest, no restrictions), any% with restrictions laid out in the branch name ("no motion glitch", "no zips"), and 100% ("all shards", "96 exits", "all items"). We don't follow the rules of any other site, including how they categorize their runs.
As explained earlier in this thread, that's not the case. "Glitched" has sometimes been used here as a synonym of "any% but faster", but that's not possible since "any%" already means "the fastest run". Pirohiko is the fastest run of this game, and therefore qualifies as "any%".
Actually, faster than any% is still possible. For example by not choosing the highest difficulty (the default for any% is to use the highest difficulty unless there are compelling reasons to use another difficulty), by using passwords, or by using codes. So the definition of "any%" isn't really just "the fastest run". It is "the fastest run using [usually] the hardest difficulty, but no passwords saves or cheats". Deviating from that requires other categories, which would have to qualify for a moon under the current system, even if they are faster.
Joined: 10/12/2011
Posts: 6438
Location: The land down under.
CoolKirby wrote:
Spikestuff wrote:
- Heavy glitch abuse
It's not heavy glitch abuse... it's actually fairly light.
According to the definition of that tag in the Movie Class Guidelines, that tag can apply to a run where a significant time-saving strategy is used (and that run abuses a heavy glitch, so it fits).
Oh I should clear this one up. It uses one glitch... which is just landing on the pad during Tiny fight.
"Small bugs in the programming do not warrant this category."
WebNations/Sabih wrote:
+fsvgm777 never censoring anything.
Disables Comments and Ratings for the YouTube account.Something better for yourself and also others.
Joined: 10/12/2011
Posts: 6438
Location: The land down under.
NitroGenesis wrote:
Looking at the submission text it appears Mukki's run does use a lot of glitches.
*Re-reads it*
Movement... yup, normal.
Gripping isn't explained correctly.
Jumping in the front of 2.5D isn't a glitch.
Traction... Uh now I see where you said the words "use a lot of glitches"
WebNations/Sabih wrote:
+fsvgm777 never censoring anything.
Disables Comments and Ratings for the YouTube account.Something better for yourself and also others.
Hmm... how come some best ending movies have the "best ending" branch but others don't?
http://tasvideos.org/Movies-C2010Y.html
I lean toward including it on all.
YoungJ1997lol wrote:
Normally i would say Yes, but thennI thought "its not the same hack" so ill stick with meh.
Hmm... how come some best ending movies have the "best ending" branch but others don't?
Because the point of the branch name is not to describe the movie, nor to repeat its tag list. "Best ending" only needs to be in the branch name if there's multiple branches, e.g. one that is faster and gets a lesser ending, and one that is slower and gets the best ending. As Adelikat said,
adelikat wrote:
There's some ambiguity between the role of tags and categories. However, I think we should avoid using a category when a tag is more appropriate. ... The intent of the category is for specifying branches, not describing the movie.
The other ending means you don't have to care about Curly after the Core, you don't have the extra level and extra boss at Sacred Grounds. Maybe, you could even take the easy form of the Last Cave, as it is quicker if I remember well. I wouldn't be surprised to see a run shorter by 5 or 10 minutes with the faster ending.
Like Zarmakuizz said, a "good ending" (beat The Doctor, escape) or even a "bad ending" (escape the first chance you get) run would be faster by a lot. I was going by what Radiant said earlier though:
"Best ending" only needs to be in the branch name if there's multiple branches, e.g. one that is faster and gets a lesser ending, and one that is slower and gets the best ending.
All of the other published runs tagged "Best ending" of games that only have one branch don't have a branch name, so it seems Cave Story's branch name should be removed unless we want every run that gets the best ending to gain a branch name.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
@ all: I see your logics. If I publish a playaround that is the only current branch, it is also any% for you? What if I then publish 100% that is SLOWER?
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.
