I was just saying that (apperently) you're the one who has the worst opinion of this movie.
Fixed also doesn't seem that speedy to me.
[16:36:31] <Mothrayas> I have to say this argument about robot drug usage is a lot more fun than whatever else we have been doing in the past two+ hours
[16:08:10] <BenLubar> a TAS is just the limit of a segmented speedrun as the segment length approaches zero
Games are basically math with a visual representation of this math, that's why I make the scripts, to re-see games as math.
My things:
YouTube, GitHub, Pastebin, Twitter
Joined: 4/7/2015
Posts: 331
Location: Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
Spikestuff wrote:
Go back a page as this has been disputed and come up with more/better points in favour of having this as a nomination for a speedy TAS.
I'm aware, and I don't back my opinion, it still looks speedy.
Games are basically math with a visual representation of this math, that's why I make the scripts, to re-see games as math.
My things:
YouTube, GitHub, Pastebin, Twitter
Games are basically math with a visual representation of this math, that's why I make the scripts, to re-see games as math.
My things:
YouTube, GitHub, Pastebin, Twitter
Special note: Due to issues with nominations for previous iterations of this award, nominations must include an explanation in order to be counted. It does not need to be long, but it needs to make clear how the nominated movie ties in with the award description (see above). Nominations with no explanation or with no appropriate justification will not be counted.
You might want to expand on your post a little bit..
Special note: Due to issues with nominations for previous iterations of this award, nominations must include an explanation in order to be counted. It does not need to be long, but it needs to make clear how the nominated movie ties in with the award description (see above). Nominations with no explanation or with no appropriate justification will not be counted.
You might want to expand on your post a little bit..
I was considering this, but I need more convincing that this is eligible.
The bulk of the speed that allows it anywhere near 18 seconds comes from running the game on a system much faster than it was designed for. The overall game-time is also not relevant for this award.
If we factored out the speed from overclocking the game, would you still consider the character movement to be insanely fast enough that you'd consider it for a speedy award?
I completely missed this, as there was no question in my mind that the KQ TAS qualifies. On high-end systems of its era, the KQ1 game was literally uncontrollable at the fastest game setting. The setting was there just so that low-end systems wouldn't be unbearably slow.
Furthermore, there's a lot of precedent for this, as Space Quest 1 was nominated in 2017, Hero's Quest was nominated in 2016, and CD-Man won in 2015. The same argument you made to keep KQ1 out could have been made for any of those, yet they qualified.
I kindly request you reconsider your decision, as I think it truly deserves to be on the list, and is arguably more deserving than either of the other two Quest games that did get nominated.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
c-square wrote:
I completely missed this, as there was no question in my mind that the KQ TAS qualifies. On high-end systems of its era, the KQ1 game was literally uncontrollable at the fastest game setting.
I don't know what you're talking about. The game was designed for 2x86. I played it on a 2x86, it wasn't fast at all.
c-square wrote:
Unlike KQ1, CD-Man was designed for 4x86, and it's Warp option was even insanely fast on a 3x86, even though our emulator is even faster. However, it was elligible, because when we slowed down the movie to match a more realistic 4x86 speed, it still qualifies. When I slow down KQ1 to match 2x86 speeds, I don't see anything fast about it.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
I'd like to point out that the point of requiring nominations to be justified is precisely to weed out nominations that were added in previous years but were not actually considered proper candidates (as Nach pointed out last year). So, the fact that these sort of movies were nominated in previous years does not mean anything. And as Nach pointed out, CD-Man is a different case.
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 completely missed this, as there was no question in my mind that the KQ TAS qualifies. On high-end systems of its era, the KQ1 game was literally uncontrollable at the fastest game setting.
I don't know what you're talking about.
The KQ TAS is based on version 2.0F which was released in May 1987. In February 1987, 20 Mhz 386 computers were first coming on to the market, and JPC-rr at default settings runs at 20 Mhz. That's what I mean by high-end systems at that time making the game uncontrollable at the fastest setting.
Mothrayas wrote:
I'd like to point out that the point of requiring nominations to be justified is precisely to weed out nominations that were added in previous years but were not actually considered proper candidates (as Nach pointed out last year). So, the fact that these sort of movies were nominated in previous years does not mean anything.
Space Quest I was released in 1986-87 and Hero's Quest was released in 1989, the former when machines comparable to JPC-rr's performance were coming out, and the latter when they were very common. To me, they're both proper candidates, so I feel they are valid comparisons.
Even if you disagree with everything I've said above, it would be helpful to change the wording around the link to the list of "eligible TASes" in the original post. It's confusing to me to have nominated a run from the list of eligible TASes to then find out it's not actually eligible.
I completely missed this, as there was no question in my mind that the KQ TAS qualifies. On high-end systems of its era, the KQ1 game was literally uncontrollable at the fastest game setting.
I don't know what you're talking about. The game was designed for 2x86. I played it on a 2x86, it wasn't fast at all.
Yes, but did you play at the game's default speed, or did you type in 'fast' at the game's command prompt to change this? That makes a pretty big difference: fast mode is meant for 4.7 MHz machines which were also on the market back then.
On high-end PCs back in 1987, 'fast' mode was so unplayable fast that later Sierra games renamed it to 'fastest' and put in another faster-than-regular mode to compensate.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Radiant wrote:
Yes, but did you play at the game's default speed, or did you type in 'fast' at the game's command prompt to change this? That makes a pretty big difference: fast mode is meant for 4.7 MHz machines which were also on the market back then.
I wasn't even aware this was an option. I don't see it in the manual.
I'm not sure what speed my machine was, as I wasn't big into tech jargon and specifics back then, I just know that it was a 2x86 with a whopping 2MB of RAM as that's what it said on the case, and it had a turbo button. It was slower than my neighbor's computer that said 2x86 16MHz on it.
I can tell you that King's Quest, Space Quest, Police Quest was slow for me, and it was slow for my friends too. It used to take forever to walk across screens. In Space Quest II though, we used to turn the Turbo off to walk through the death plant maze, as it went so slow, you had to be incompetent to die.
I didn't even notice it when I first watched this run, but looking at the submission again now, I see it was edited to say it uses this "fast" parameter.
Radiant wrote:
On high-end PCs back in 1987, 'fast' mode was so unplayable fast that later Sierra games renamed it to 'fastest' and put in another faster-than-regular mode to compensate.
I no longer have my 2x86 or even 3x86 handy in order to test, you have a citation for this or a video of it running on a 1987 machine with the "fast" parameter?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4089
Location: The Netherlands
We've concluded that [3793] DOS King's Quest: Quest for the Crown by DrD2k9 in 00:18.30 was excluded by mistake in judging Speedy TAS nomination entries. As such, it has now been added to the poll. As a consequence, the poll has been reset.
Apologies for the inconvenience.
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.
We've concluded that [3793] DOS King's Quest: Quest for the Crown by DrD2k9 in 00:18.30 was excluded by mistake in judging Speedy TAS nomination entries. As such, it has now been added to the poll. As a consequence, the poll has been reset.
Apologies for the inconvenience.
