This topic is for the purpose of discussing #5813: billygod's PSX Resident Evil 3: Nemesis "knife only" in 1:18:58.37

>Mashing Input >Blank Input >Has the movie set to it but doesn't use Analog which the game supports Light Spike to correct the Blank Input: User movie #44854402190235392 (Which removes 3,458 frames)

I used a lot of Dodge nd I played all the time in 25% slow

did you slow down the movie and just play through it? Seeing how your re-record count is only 3950 for a 284018 frame movie, I'm pretty sure that's the case.

There were parts that I accelerated and has parts that I slowed down a lot, But most of the game I played in 25%

100% optimized or not, this certainly looks impressive. I don't know the game, but from my uninformed opinion, I think this has a place here. Yes vote.

Gets a private message Yeah, I'm just going to make this message public.

You were talking about "accept background input" right? If so, I've activated it so I do not have any more mistakes. Tks bro.

No. Background Input means nothing to what I wrote. It's not even related. You've created mistakes in making the TAS by not going through it properly and only playing at 25% of the game speed instead of taking it seriously. Your rerecord count in a game like this is an indication on how little effort you put into making this TAS. You have instances in your TAS where you fail to get past some Zombies. At (3:00) where the Zombies burst through you decide to push them for a good couple of seconds. It's faster to transition into another room and then back into that section then go by those Zombies. (Or probably better to not shove the Zombies around in a jumbled mess) If I knew how the IGT worked on the PS1 version and PC version I would have done a direct comparison to the PC speedrun but since I don't, the only option available is to compare to the PS1 runs that exist or find someone in the RE community to go through this. I've done the latter half and asking the RE community about this. --- Edit: And I got a response about it, didn't ask if they wanted to be public or not so I do apologize as I'm bringing them up as private. (Kinda jumbled my words when bringing this TAS up to them as it was assumed as something I made. Which I later state wasn't done by me.) - There's few criticisms probably just because after watching like 10 mins can already stuff that could be faster. - In the rpd at 6:40 instead of doing the strat most PC players do, which is squeezing between that crawling zombie's hitbox and the desk and clipping through that alone is like 3-4 secs gone in the first 6 mins, for just a single room. - 11:26, in this room you don't need to stop at all, you just keep running and strafe from right to left to avoid the first zombie (here is a video of that strafe). - 14:04 this fat zombie optimally wouldn't need to be dodged, as you can slip in and out before he even gets near the doorway if he isn't turbo. There's more, but this is just within the first 20 minutes.

c-square tks bro

Spikestuff : Now I understand everything, yes in some parts you are right, I did not think these parts would be delayed for a few seconds since I did not go back to the door, But as it was my first TAS, you think that everything is okay, But do not worry, In the next TAS I will improve a lot u can believe. Tks bro Spikestuff

Spikestuff can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe TAStudio is available for PSX games in BizHawk? (I've not yet done any PSX runs). billygod, you might be able to use that tool clean up (or completely redo) your run.

yes DrD2k9.

Doing a TAS at 25% offers the possibility of making big mistakes + a low rerecord count compared to a long movie makes this obvious. I recommend that you remake the TAS with frame advance, this can be useful to do tricks in the first available frame, this gives you total control of the game, and try to optimize your movie with re-recordings to show the audience that your TASes are as good as those that currently exist.

Evil_3D Yes I understand, thanks for everything

Billygod, since you seem to be receptive to criticism and understand the high standards we have here, I just want to say that you should redo this run properly with frame advance to make it perfect and then resubmit it. I think it's a good concept for a run and has a decent chance to be accepted. Don't be discouraged! (This is, of course, in contrast to the woefully imperfect runs of Super Mario Bros. we get about once a month these days. Those submitters should be discouraged, at least from trying to run Mario games.)

Just pointing out that for some people using tastudio right away is an easier way to familiarize themselves with serious tasing. Some basic usage example: https://youtu.be/wJu_DHnJbJA?t=290 For a detailed manual of a similar tool (taseditor in fceux, which has almost identical controls and features), read this: http://www.fceux.com/web/help/taseditor/

Just pointing out that for some people using tastudio right away is an easier way to familiarize themselves with serious tasing.

Agreed. I probably wouldn't have even attempted TASing without TAStudio/TAS Editor (in FCEUX). But having that tool when starting helped me understand better strategies to use TASing on systems that don't currently offer visualized input editing. billygod, I'd suggest getting a feel for TAStudio using a well known game like Mario, Sonic, etc. (not for a submission, just learning). That way you can compare your results to current runs and see how others have solved similar game actions. TAStudio really helps with understanding/optimizing lag for example. Once you're more familiar with TAStudio, then return to this game if you want.

Thank you guys, thank you for everything, Good for being the first TAS, I thought it was good, So from now on I'll be doing just with frame advance, but I will leave this first TAS, so that my mistakes are marked, feel free to vote Bye :D

Definite no. It's one thing for a first time TAS to be accepted ([2590] Windows Ikachan "warp glitch" by arandomgameTASer in 03:31.56) and another thing entirely for a LOTAD to be accepted. When obvious improvements are found rather easily due to a lack of optimization that doesn't bode well.

om, nom, nom