The reason I asked this question is because, most of the time, your TAS speedruns are the only ones posted on Google Video. It's possibly the only easy way for non-experienced gamers to see the entire game, and when you skip an entire section of the game by abusing errors, they don't get to see everything.
Speedruns (tool-assisted or not) are often not a good way to see a complete walkthrough of a game. Many regular speedruns skip entire sections of the game too (the Quake, Half-Life and Half-Life 2 speedruns being excellent examples). The only difference with tool-assisted ones is that we try to find the absolute extreme minimal completion time without the limits imposed by human imperfection. That's one of the basic goals of TASes: How fast could the game be completed if it human imperfection was not a limiting factor?
Regular speedruns are awesome shows of skill, and they are really admirable in that category. However, TASes do not and don't even attempt to show skills. They just attempt to show what would happen if the human factor was removed completely.
Also, a lot of people on Google Video flame you guys for being cheaters (which is technically true, because you're using emulator tricks).
Not abusing programming errors in the games would do little to help that problem, now would it? So I don't see your point here.
They want to see real speedruns with no cheats.
And how exactly would avoiding exploiting programming errors in the games help that? Tool-assisted speedruns are still tool-assisted even if programming errors in games were not exploited. If they want to see regular speedruns they should go to SDA.
I really don't understand your point here.
Joined: 5/1/2004
Posts: 4096
Location: Rio, Brazil
The people who think we're cheating didn't read to understand our goals. Or they don't have a sufficiently open mind. Many people thought it "finally made sense" when they found out the smb3 morimoto run was tool-assisted, because it looked quite improbable to be played normally. The people who complain may think that we're trying to fool someone, which is not the case.
I, personally, like using programming errors because they speed up the runs so much. Look at SM64: There's a run which collects a mere 1 star, as opposed to the 70 it normally takes. However, when a game is glitched that badly, normally people usually start a no-glitch run, or in SM64's case, a run without one particular glitch.
The people who think we're cheating didn't read to understand our goals. Or they don't have a sufficiently open mind.
In theory there is a "legit" interpretation to "they are cheating": Someone might have the opinion that the only admirable way of speedrunning a game is to do it without the aid of any ancillary program (such as an emulator) nor in-game "cheats" not normally available in normal play (such as using a god-mode in certain FPS games), and that someone using an emulator to make a tool-assisted speedrun is "cheating" and shows no skill. Even someone who fully understands how and why TASes are made could still think negatively of them and call them "cheating" because he thinks that there's nothing admirable in them.
Of course I'm certain that at least 99% of people who call TASes "cheating" do it for the wrong reason: They think that we try to pass TASes for regular speedruns, trying to fool people, basically creating a fake speedrun in order to gather the admiration of the speedrunning fans.
Speedruns (tool-assisted or not) are often not a good way to see a complete walkthrough of a game. Many regular speedruns skip entire sections of the game too (the Quake, Half-Life and Half-Life 2 speedruns being excellent examples). The only difference with tool-assisted ones is that we try to find the absolute extreme minimal completion time without the limits imposed by human imperfection. That's one of the basic goals of TASes: How fast could the game be completed if it human imperfection was not a limiting factor?
Regular speedruns are awesome shows of skill, and they are really admirable in that category. However, TASes do not and don't even attempt to show skills. They just attempt to show what would happen if the human factor was removed completely.
I just have to say, this is a very elegant way of saying it.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
In addition to Bisqwit's point, some games do have a separate appeal as a TAS when less programming errors are abused, and in many of those cases, there are multiple runs of that game. Most Legend of Zelda games fall into this category, for example.
Laughing_gas, please stop posting stupid shit that doesn't answer the question you're pretending to respond to. It was old six months ago.
2 years ago is more accurate.
I agree that I can't stand watching walls scoll by me fast. Whoopdee doo. I can find spots in games to do in real time, its just i end up dying eventually in those games, so it is not impressive to me to sit and watch walls fly by me.
I do like when things fighting techniques not intended by programmers are abused (i.e. pause glitching and such).
Joined: 2/13/2007
Posts: 448
Location: Calgary, Alberta
I personally like watched gltched runs and finding glitches for my own personal, twisted, enjoyment.
Here is a thought: If you built a robot human, could it do Tases for you?
Renting this space for rent.
Trying to fix image on this site. Please cut slack.
As of April 6th, 2012:
After a long absence, here we go again?
