"Super Mario 64 (NTSC) [Japanese-Shindou Edition (Rumble Pak)] 30 frames per second. This is special version, where the BLJ trick is fixed"
I feel like the next 70 star BLJless TAS that is made should be done on this version. It just seems better than using other versions and pretending the glitch doesn't exist.
Joined: 10/12/2011
Posts: 6337
Location: The land down under.
On the topic of PAL being faster as stated can there be a comparison of PAL vs NTSC (language already selected).
Also I agree with Kyman about the BLJless 70 stars tas, that should be either modified or redone.
WebNations/Sabih wrote:
+fsvgm777 never censoring anything.
Disables Comments and Ratings for the YouTube account.Something better for yourself and also others.
"Super Mario 64 (NTSC) [Japanese-Shindou Edition (Rumble Pak)] 30 frames per second. This is special version, where the BLJ trick is fixed"
I feel like the next 70 star BLJless TAS that is made should be done on this version. It just seems better than using other versions and pretending the glitch doesn't exist.
I disagree. Why use a different version where a bug is fixed instead of just using the version already standardized to TASVideos and just not use the bug? It comes to the same thing.
"Super Mario 64 (NTSC) [Japanese-Shindou Edition (Rumble Pak)] 30 frames per second. This is special version, where the BLJ trick is fixed"
I feel like the next 70 star BLJless TAS that is made should be done on this version. It just seems better than using other versions and pretending the glitch doesn't exist.
I disagree. Why use a different version where a bug is fixed instead of just using the version already standardized to TASVideos and just not use the bug? It comes to the same thing.
I actually like the idea of a TAS trying to finish a particular version of the game using all available tricks in that version better than one that finishes the "accepted" version with one hand tied behind the TASer's back. It feels like a less arbitrary goal that way, to me.
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4083
Location: The Netherlands
What were the improvements?
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.
I think the wallkicks in BitFS were done faster, but I'm not an expert.
It's definitely the wall-kicks. They found a faster way to gain speed by doing more wall-kicks inside the column.
Also, the climb to the 2nd locked door is slighty different, but doesn't look faster.
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
GimMick wrote:
andypanther wrote:
I think the wallkicks in BitFS were done faster, but I'm not an expert.
It's definitely the wall-kicks. They found a faster way to gain speed by doing more wall-kicks inside the column.
Also, the climb to the 2nd locked door is slighty different, but doesn't look faster.
I liked how every part was a little different and many novel camera angles were used for castle BLJs. It will take some analysis; I find it hard to say from looking whether some of the parts not already mentioned are faster/slower/the same. The answer is interesting regardless because of how many changes there were from what I've come to expect in a 0 star.
I liked how every part was a little different and many novel camera angles were used for castle BLJs. It will take some analysis; I find it hard to say from looking whether some of the parts not already mentioned are faster/slower/the same. The answer is interesting regardless because of how many changes there were from what I've come to expect in a 0 star.
I agree, they’ve changed stuff up a lot, and even if it looks less optimized it looks novel and is entertaining
it’s as if they’ve free-run parts where they could go slower and still make it in the same amount of frames
@SP: how many frames does removing a PBLJ save? 2? then 7 were all in the BitFS WKs?
edit: btw, has anyone else noticed the fact that entering BitFS has no sound? how come?
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4083
Location: The Netherlands
jlun2 wrote:
So....will you guys do it then if Snark decides against submitting it?
There are rules and precedents about submitting other people's work without their permission. If ToT and Snark won't submit it and haven't given permission to anyone else to submit it, then it likely won't appear on the site.
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: 10/30/2011
Posts: 146
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Mothrayas wrote:
jlun2 wrote:
So....will you guys do it then if Snark decides against submitting it?
There are rules and precedents about submitting other people's work without their permission. If ToT and Snark won't submit it and haven't given permission to anyone else to submit it, then it likely won't appear on the site.
I think he was trying to ask if they would do the TAS themselves and submit it here
