This is a 2 players movie of Altered Beast, 28.26 seconds (1696 frames) faster than Dan's 1 player version.
It abuses a programming error so that you only need to see the transformation once per level (normally, you need to see it twice on 2 players). Without this alone, a 2 player run would be about 15 seconds slower (not counting other improvements) compared to a 1 player run, because of having to see both players transform.
Bosses memory addresses (HP):
00FFE365 = 1st, 4th and 5th boss
00FFE3A5 = 2nd boss
00FFE377 = 3rd boss
adelikat: The verdict is "accepted for publication". The movie should have used the hardest difficulty setting by using B+Start at the title screen. An improved movie that does not use this will be rejected. As a result, an "improved" movie will be longer than this submission.
I wish to maintain a site without age restrictions, and most importantly, one that does not interfere with my morals. I don't like dirty jokes. Perhaps majority does, but in this case the majority does not decide.
It seems like you are saying that publishing this TAS would interfere with your morals, which you don't want this site to do. If that is the case (and please correct me if it isn't) then why isn't this rejected yet? Did I miss something?
my morals. I don't like dirty jokes. Perhaps majority does, but in this case the majority does not decide.It seems like you are saying that publishing this TAS would interfere with your morals, which you don't want this site to do. If that is the case (and please correct me if it isn't) then why isn't this rejected yet?
A lot of people will be pissed if the run gets rejected over morals.
I wish to maintain a site without age restrictions, and most importantly, one that does not interfere with my morals. I don't like dirty jokes. Perhaps majority does, but in this case the majority does not decide.
It seems like you are saying that publishing this TAS would interfere with your morals
May seem so, but I did not explicitly say so. :)
That post was a response to FODA's words "MAYBE you're just boring and too worried about looking serious?" ; I explained why I'm trying to look serious, and went to explain my policy. It does not, however, judge this submission in that same sentence. It does judge the consequences supposed from publishing this movie. A fine difference.
But whether those suppositions are correct, I wanted to leave open for discussion. And I believe, at least with 40% of my mind, that a possibility has been shown that they weren't. :)
(Why am I smiling? Because I am amused by the level of haziness in this post.)
Joined: 5/1/2004
Posts: 4096
Location: Rio, Brazil
moozooh wrote:
Mechuyael wrote:
Personally I think that the movie would be better if you actually got to see some of the monsters getting crushed instead of killing them off-screen.
That I agree with, as stated somewhere close to the first page. I had similar sentiment regarding the last two Golden Axe runs which sacrificed entertainment for speed in a similar fashion. >_>
You do know why I kill the enemies Off-screen, right? when enemies appear, the scrolling goes slower. It may even stop scrolling if too many enemies are on screen (3 I think). So killing enemies as soon as it's possible to kill them is the biggest time saver in TASing this game.
You do know why I kill the enemies Off-screen, right? when enemies appear, the scrolling goes slower. It may even stop scrolling if too many enemies are on screen (3 I think). So killing enemies as soon as it's possible to kill them is the biggest time saver in TASing this game.
Right. Hence, it's a sacrifice of entertainment for speed, just like in Golden Axe.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
IronSlayer wrote:
You have GOT TO BE KIDDING ME....this is like someone saying that "Space Invaders", "Galaga", and "Pacman" are "really boring, really bad games".
I try very hard to qualify my posts, but I think this is one case where I'm being misunderstood. To me this game looks boring and/or bad. I tried to express that I've never played (or even heard of) the game before, so I'm just judging the game based on how this TAS completes it.
It could also be that some games are good, but they're boring to watch as a TAS.
"Altered Beast" is one of the most influential, famous, revolutionary games ever made, and as well-considered by 20-somethings as "Super Mario Brothers".
Well, I certainly never heard of it before (I'm under 20, though, so maybe this point doesn't count). Again, a game can be really good, but unsuited as a TAS. Look at the entertainment rating of the published movie - it has a 4.8, hardly one of the most popular runs on the site.
People don't seem to understand that the published run is one-player only.
Two-player mode is that much better.
I don't know how this game is revolutionary. This game looks like a laughingstock. Perhaps it's because I never saw this game before three days ago. Perhaps it's the TAS. To me, it's a bad game (to play) that makes an entertaining TAS (i.e. entertaining to watch).
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 1058
Location: Reykjavík, Ísland
FODA wrote:
Frenom wrote:
If you press B and START at the title screen you can select HARDEST difficulty instead of normal.
Otherwise was it a great run. Great job Foda. :)
damn I swear I tried to do that, searched the web, but since I didn't find anything I assumed it was my memory failing again. oh well :)
Did everyone miss this? Isn't every run supposed to be played on the hardest possible difficulty? If so, and this movie played on a difficulty less than the highest possible, then the discussion is already over, right?
I didn't watch the movie, but I did fast-forward to the "omg teh buttsecks" scene and well, it is exaggerated way out of proportion in this discussion. Also, there are MUCH worse unintended sex scenes in other games.
I say if this movie gets published, there should be no kind of warning whatsoever, because the ONLY thing such a warning would do is get more people to watch based on that. If you want people to forget something, don't remind them of it constantly. :P
Does anyone know if the published movie was also played on this difficulty or if it uses the hardest one? Either way, I'm very much against publishing runs that are not played on the hardest difficulty, because it creates a problem for future runs. Should they be played on the same difficulty level? Would it be acceptable to run it with a harder difficulty even if it was slower? If this is the case, how can you compare the times to see whether the new run is actually of the same quality?
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Kyrsimys wrote:
Does anyone know if the published movie was also played on this difficulty or if it uses the hardest one? Either way, I'm very much against publishing runs that are not played on the hardest difficulty, because it creates a problem for future runs. Should they be played on the same difficulty level? Would it be acceptable to run it with a harder difficulty even if it was slower? If this is the case, how can you compare the times to see whether the new run is actually of the same quality?
Old run was on the same difficulty as this. Also, there are many many runs that have been accepted despite using a less than "hardest" difficulty, all in the name of "it will only be me fighting the bosses for 10% more damage" and whatnot.
Personally, I always strive to play on the hardest difficulty (without using SRAM, looking at you pirate_sephiroth), but I can still accept other reasoning from time to time. So long as quality and content are not compromised, I usually won't care about difficulty.
Imo, the "5 -average" in the rating system is the same as "Meh". It's not bad nor good. It doesn't represent the average of all rated movies which is 6 or little higher.
Also, chefstef said that 4.8 is far from being popular which is almost right. But I think it's not 100% reliable too.
Joined: 12/2/2005
Posts: 139
Location: New York, United States
IronSlayer wrote:
"Altered Beast" is one of the most influential, famous, revolutionary games ever made, and as well-considered by 20-somethings as "Super Mario Brothers".
Feelings about the TAS aside, this cannot stand. Altered Beast is remembered by many, for sure, but as an overhyped piece of trash. It falls into the so bad-it's-sort-of-funny category, I'd never want to play it ever again.
WIIIISE FWOM YO GWAAAAVE.
What's a man like me supposed to do with all this extra savoir-faire?
I as well think that most of this "controversy" is because FODA unfortunately mentioned those things in his submission text. To try to look smart, I'll point you to submission #1000, which also could be said to contain similar imagery, but without the fuss that this submission has created.
Anyway, bears aside, I still the game sucks horribly and I've never actually understood why it became such a cult classic. Still, I think using two players was a good choice and it's faster than before which means less torment from this game, which cannot be a bad thing.
"Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home."
( Pratchett & Gaiman: Good Omens )
To me this game looks boring and/or bad. I tried to express that I've never played (or even heard of) the game before,
FractalFusion wrote:
I don't know how this game is revolutionary. This game looks like a laughingstock. Perhaps it's because I never saw this game before three days ago.
notBowen wrote:
Altered Beast is remembered by many, for sure, but as an overhyped piece of trash.
Tombad wrote:
I still the game sucks horribly and I've never actually understood why it became such a cult classic.
Wow, just wow. I don't know if these opinions are more related to "Altered Beast" not aging particularly well, or a number of people not enjoying it even upon release in 1988, but I'm very surprised.
Speaking with the people who were gamers back in 1988, or actually owned and played a Genesis, "Altered Beast" is uttered in the same breath as "Pacman", "Super Mario Brothers", or any number of other revolutionary classics.
Keep in mind; there wasn't an entire library of beat em' ups and fighters in 1988. In fact, I would even argue that "Altered Beast" was one of the games that helped create the supply for this.
Obviously, by present day standards, "Altered Beast" too short, linear, and one-dimensional, but much like "Pong" back in the 70's or Atari 2600 in the early 80's, the game was something awesome and unique at the time it was released.
Anyways, enough of this slightly off-topic divergence; for some reason, I thought speedrunners were these game maniacs who have heard of every single title under the sun in Japan and the US.
Phil, care to elaborate on why you think the rating system produces unreliable results?
Ironslayer, you can add me to the list of people that think this game is shit. I think I first played this game in 1990 or 1991. I remember thinking that the music sucked, the graphics were only slightly better than some of the later NES Mega Man games, and the game was repetitive, boring, and pointless.
Watching the game these days, I mostly think "Wow, this is pretty gay." Comparing it to Super Mario Bros. or Pac-Man is ridiculous. Altered Beast did very little to advance video gaming, except maybe start the trend of awful but hilarious voice acting.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Was it really that well-known? I had a Genesis (though it was called a Mega Drive here), but I never heard about this game until a few years ago maybe.
Joined: 4/21/2004
Posts: 3517
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Mechuyael wrote:
Was it really that well-known?
Most definitely. I strongly believe it was one of the top selling games during its time. Now can someone either lock this thread or accept/reject it so we can move on from this dumb discussion.
Nitrogenesis wrote:
Guys I come from the DidyKnogRacist communite, and you are all wrong, tihs is the run of the mileniun and everyone who says otherwise dosnt know any bater! I found this run vary ease to masturbate too!!!! Don't fuck with me, I know this game so that mean I'm always right!StupedfackincommunityTASVideoz!!!!!!
Arc wrote:
I enjoyed this movie in which hands firmly gripping a shaft lead to balls deep in multiple holes.
natt wrote:
I don't want to get involved in this discussion, but as a point of fact C# is literally the first goddamn thing on that fucking page you linked did you even fucking read it
Cooljay wrote:
Mayor Haggar and Cody are such nice people for the community. Metro City's hospitals reached an all time new record of incoming patients due to their great efforts :P
I strongly believe it was one of the top selling games during its time.
I doubt it. At least, it hasn't sold enough to get onto this list: Best selling games (Genesis)
Also, calling for a thread lock to stop discussion immediately after giving your own point is pretty lame - though not quite as lame as posting to say "It's better to ignore this."
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
This game was actually popular from the arcades, not the Genesis.
If that was the case, then all ratings should be undone and we should all have to re-rate everything based on the new sense of average.
No, the scale is not based upon a mean. If 1 is "bad" and 10 is "good", 5 is "average". But the mean would be the average if you added up all the run's scores and divided it by the number of runs on the site. Which may or may not be the same "average" as average is.
BTW, I still think you suck, but that's a different topic entirely that only SDA visitors would understand. ^_~
I don't think that Wikipedia list is complete. In the PSX list, they don't have SOTN - that was a Greatest Hits game and all, so I would have to presume it broke the million mark, right?
Not that I think Altered Beast did so, just pointing out.
Also, AB was a launch title, so that's why it got hype at the time. Saying it's great/innovative is grossly exaggerating, though; we already had a great deal of beat-em-ups back in those days even.
but then you take my 75 perchance chance of winning, if we was to go one-on-one, and then add 66 and two-thirds ch...percents...i got a 141 and two-thirds chance of winning at sacrifice
