Posts for Sleepz

1 2
13 14
Post subject: Re: Legend of Zelda x Glitch x Broken
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
hanzou wrote:
They can, although I haven't seen a place where this is likely to save time.
When I try to enter a cave in the black area, its just an empty square and nothing happens. Probably doesnt save time, but how did you get in? edit: ah I see now. It has to be opened normally first. thanks.
Post subject: Legend of Zelda x Glitch x Broken
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
http://members.shaw.ca/richu/Hyrule_Glitch_Tour.fcm Made a demo abusing the glitch to its fullest. The game looks really broken now. I kept finding more shortcuts so I put most of them in one movie plus some playing around with armos and the black area. It should be a fun watch and I had a lot of fun making it. There are shortcuts all over the place, but I think the ones most useful for improving the TAS are: -Glitch to L3 -Glitch to L5 -Glitch from L7 to Graveyard -Glitch from L1 to Arrow shop -Glitch to L2 or L8 (glitching from the coast will probably be faster, but going through the forest looks better) And I’m pretty sure that these are the rules that stick (let me know if something’s missing or inaccurate): -Link can only completely enter block from the bottom since he can already partly enter through the bottom. -If Link glitches to a screen, into a wall of 2 tiles or more, he will be unable to exit. Same goes for the screen he glitched from. -The black area contains current screen’s outlay, moved slightly to the left. However, entrances can’t be entered, rocks can’t be bombed, and bushes can’t be burned. Armos and ghosts can still be awakened. -Glitching left from any screen in column “A” will lead to “P” and up one row. A8 to P7, A7 to P6, etc. A1 leads to the starting screen. -Can’t glitch through barriers. L7 goriya, L9 entrance, old man, etc. -Glitching won’t work on stairs or doorways. So… really awesome glitch. It’s like the equivalent of zipping in a Megaman game. It’s also not that hard to do in real time; I’ve already incorporated it in my speedrun and it helps big time. Props and thanks to Baxter. ^_^
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
There are places you can cross. Any instance where link can get that extra step while fully within the tile, it can be done. L4 for example, once you have the ladder, go 1 room left, up to the dark room, use the glitch and you can cross over 2 whole tiles of water and straight into the rupee room. 2 less rooms that youre walking through. You also dont need to use bombs either if youre ever short on them.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Sick movie guys. Never seen that done before!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Awesome improvement guys, but that glitch can be used to walk over water too. Hint hint. ;)
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Kles wrote:
Here's a hypothetical situation for you, Sleepz. I ran 1:10:53'52 in the race, breaking the record. Next year, someone ran 1:10:52'63 next year. He beat me by less than a second therefore I should keep the record. What? He did it faster, plain and simple. He should get the record. Yes, this site should be about fun and entertainment but we can't get sloppy on the competition part. Don't take this badly but I think you're just sore about being beat.
Bisqwit wrote:
This isn't like a 100m sprint - in sprint, you compete on your own power. You can't beat someone's record sprint time by watching him run and then fixing a 10ms error he did. In TAS movies, you compete with intellect, and you can always learn from other players' movies or even reproduce them entirely.
Sleepz wrote:
And having my run beaten doesn’t bother me. My LoZ, MM3 and previous SMB2 run were all beaten, and I didn’t mind at all. Like I said, I was very pleased about the SMB2 that replaced mine. It just bothers me when someone takes someone else’s run, makes a carbon copy of it, and tries to replace that run without contributing or adding something new.
You're just repeating now, and I already said I accepted Bisqwit's decision for Phil's run to replace mine.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Well ok then. It’s Bisqwit’s site, so he gets the final decision, and I have to respect that. I didn’t mean to cause such a commotion, and I apologize for that, but if I didn’t say anything about my opinion and kept quite, it would have been a knick on my shoulder. I still think TAS making should concentrate on making cool videos and showing new ideas, and not about lame frame competitions and things the average viewer who would download these clips would ever notice or care about. I also still find it unfair that such an identical run with nothing new but a few frames less should replace mine. I still don’t understand why you would choose to redo a run if you weren’t planning to add anything to it or even get a decent improvement time-wise. It’s like you’re purposely trying to rub it in my face that frames mean more than creativity and new ideas now. The whole reason I bothered doing this run frame by frame is so the person making the next run would have to come up with some new and innovative ideas to improve it (which would get people excited over this run again), and not just get some cheap frames on it and call it a new run. Kinda makes the extra effort seem for nothing since it happened anyway. A request to Phil or Bisqwit, when you do the write-up for this run, I don’t want my name given any special credits. If people are just going to think that it’s put there out of pity, or that I was somehow forcing you to, then I don’t want anything to do with it. If Phil’s new run had some amazing, or at least significant improvements, just watching such a run would have been credit enough for me.
DrJones wrote:
I think most of this has been originated because people didn't know about Phil's project until it was done. If Phil opened a thread instead, saying that he was going to try to improve this video, would you have helped him, sleepz? I think there's no need to answer.
You know I helped Michael when he said he was working on improving my previous SMB2 run, although it was Genisto that submitted the next run. The same would go for anyone else if they just bothered asking me.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Phil wrote:
I can easily redo the whole first 20 seconds to look much more different. It won't be that hard. The video won't be faster nor more entertaining.
Don't take my question as an offense. One problem with being too similar in the beginning is that if they've seen my video, they might close yours right away because they think they've seen it before. Same with most clips on the net.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Just an example though. That's the longest TAS I know of so far.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Phil wrote:
36 frames in a 3 hour movie is by far not the same as the 8 minute movie.
Why? They are just as insignificant in an 8 minute run as they are in a 3 hour run, even though everyone would agree more so for the 3 hour run. And now, the video is up so everyone can see for themselves. I also want to ask, and I'm not accusing at this point, but is the first 20 seconds just a cut and paste from my run? They look even more similar watching them side by side than seperately. Just asking.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Omega wrote:
With the Super Mario Bros movie being obsoleted by just one frame, I don't see a reason to vote no for this submission.
I think I found some possible frame saving in the 2:57:34 SMB RPG run. Think I'll get some yes votes if I fix it? If not, why? If one run can be obsoleted by a frame, so can another, right? What about you Phil? Do you agree with this? And in my example, would you give the person who ripped-off everyone's run all Yes votes?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Bob, that was just a light-hearted joke reply back there. It still adds another point though.
jxq2000 wrote:
You have no right determining who has the right to vote and who doesn't based on whether or not they agree with your opinion.
Yea, maybe you don’t care if someone came and ripped-off every run on this site like in that scenario, but I think a lot of the actual TAS makers would be outraged. Maybe if you took the time to understand what my example was getting at, instead of just taking its follow-up sentence literally and by itself, you would know that I wasn’t determining rights, and you wouldn’t make such a clueless comment that defends the thief in the example. It’s a scenario that that forces people to the No side to see a different POV. Get a clue. And for the people who just started reading these post, and maybe already getting the wrong idea, this isn’t about who beat who, or frames, or who’s name’s on, or speed vs aesthetics, etc. It’s about , ill just paste:
Sleepz wrote:
But getting away from the whole speed vs aesthetics argument and back to my original point, people shouldn’t rip-off other people’s runs unless they can do something new and actually add some of their own ideas to it. I’m sure everyone’s heard of plagiarism?
And here’s my extreme example again: I see jxq2000 already misunderstood.
Sleepz wrote:
Now here’s something to think about. From what everyone posted, many people seem to have the similar opinion of “If it’s faster(regardless of amount) and isn’t less entertaining” to be the end-all criteria for one run to obsolete another. Keeping that in mind; what if someone were to take every single run on this site, copy them move for move(so they’re no less entertaining), and bringing each one down an extra frame or two so all the new runs are now faster than the existing ones. Now if this person were to submit all these runs, would you all vote “Yes” and have every TAS maker’s run replaced? Would you all still be like, “His run’s are faster, and they aren’t any less entertaining. They’re all one frame closer to perfection, I don’t see any problem. Forget the previous run and author, just judge this one on its own merits. I vote Yes!” Then every run on the site will be replaced with a carbon copy run –1 frame, all made by the same author. Now if you see no problem with this situation and would vote Yes for every single run, you’ve lost your mind and shouldn’t even be allowed to vote. But if you voted No because you changed your mind and think there are some exceptions to the end-all criteria, then the SMB2 situation is also an exception.
And No, Phil. I'm not jealous of your 36 frames. I think I made it clear from my very first post that frames don't interest me.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Phil, Its a carbon copy -36 frames, but I'm sure people can tell the differences right from the get go. Btw, I really like your freefall with Toad in the beggining, and I like how the first 20 seconds of your run looks totally different from mine. Spacecow, everything in that line is just quotes from others that recently posted.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Bob Whoops wrote:
Plus, I think that is pretty cool, because it encourages looking for all of these new shortcuts. Come on Sleepz, I'm waiting for your version where you beat Phil by 2 frames!
I’m pretty sure you were just joking in your last sentence Bob, but just to ask, why would you be waiting for it? You’d just be watching the same run over again, and I would have wasted my time because I really just accomplished nothing. If anything, you should be disappointed, since I released a “new improved run” that, as far as you can tell, is still the same old run. Like a TV network showing a re-run when they told you it was going to be a new episode. Also, 2 frames might be tough to hype up. Now here’s something to think about. From what everyone posted, many people seem to have the similar opinion of “If it’s faster(regardless of amount) and isn’t less entertaining” to be the end-all criteria for one run to obsolete another. Keeping that in mind; what if someone were to take every single run on this site, copy them move for move(so they’re no less entertaining), and bringing each one down an extra frame or two so all the new runs are now faster than the existing ones. Now if this person were to submit all these runs, would you all vote “Yes” and have every TAS maker’s run replaced? Would you all still be like, “His run’s are faster, and they aren’t any less entertaining. They’re all one frame closer to perfection, I don’t see any problem. Forget the previous run and author, just judge this one on its own merits. I vote Yes!” Then every run on the site will be replaced with a carbon copy run –1 frame, all made by the same author. Now if you see no problem with this situation and would vote Yes for every single run, you’ve lost your mind and shouldn’t even be allowed to vote. But if you voted No because you changed your mind and think there are some exceptions to the end-all criteria, then the SMB2 situation is also an exception.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
hopper wrote:
For the record, I don't consider the wobbling an unforgivable sin. I wouldn't want to see it constantly, but it wasn't overly distracting. All I ever noticed was that someone found a way to improve a nearly flawless run by 36 frames, and my hat is off to him. If it hurts someone's ego to lose their record by a mere 36 frames, that's unfortunate, but I'm sure he'll set another record in the near future. Every movie will be beaten eventually. I'm just impressed that SMB2 can still be improved.
Maybe you haven’t been reading my posts hopper, but I’ve stated over and over again that my problem with the submission is that it is an exact copy of mine and adds nothing new. You’re the one who’s making a big deal about the frames. Like you just said, “All I ever noticed was that someone found a way to improve a nearly flawless run by 36 frames.” And in your previous post, you keep going on and on about frames and split seconds. I just brought up the 36 frames just to emphasize the “adds nothing new” fact. With the wobbling, you said you didn’t want to see it constantly, yet 36 frames is enough to make you favor a video full of wobbling. And even if you really thought it wasn’t overly distracting, there are even more people that do: http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=86&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=60 And having my run beating doesn’t bother me. My LoZ, MM3 and previous SMB2 run were all beaten, and I didn’t mind at all. Like I said, I was very pleased about the SMB2 that replaced mine. It just bothers me when someone takes someone else’s run, makes a carbon copy of it, and tries to replace that run without contributing or adding something new. If you're going to replace one of my runs, at least try to make something worthy of being called an improvement.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
I'm saying that this situation is similar to plagiarism. I'm sure no one likes having their worked completely ripped-off.
AngerFist wrote:
As I wrote in irc: you know what pisses me off? when kaitoukid and krieg writes comments like: "I still would be amazed if someone would improve a run by 1 frame". Where is the freakin entertainment in that?!? (Im not pointing anybody here or you Phil)
Yea, these guys are missing the point of making TAS.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
hopper wrote:
Well, it certainly succeeded in making an awful lot of people look foolish and petty. Hard to believe supposedly intelligent people care so much about 36 frames. Thank you, Phil. Just for that, you get a Yes vote.
Yes, it is hard to believe supposedly intelligent people care so much about 36 frames that they would vote Yes to a run that adds undesireable profound wobbling. The choice boils down to this: 1. A 7:54 run without annoying wobbling or 2. A 7:54 run with annoying wobbling Now from reading people's opinions on the forum, it seems people prefer No Wobbling. But getting away from the whole speed vs aesthetics argument and back to my original point, people shouldn’t rip-off other people’s runs unless they can do something new and actually add some of their own ideas to it. I’m sure everyone’s heard of plagiarism?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
hopper wrote:
Yeah, maybe they should stop giving the gold medal to the fastest runners and the highest scoring teams and award prizes for most entertaining run and most artistic passing. I mean, why bother going for perfection? Why should we accept the fastest time if the second fastest time was pretty good? Sorry USA, we're awarding the women's 1000m butterfly record to Russia because their swimmers are hotter. Nice swim, though. That was the fastest swim ever. You were one boob job from getting the gold.
Hopper, I'm going to make a new SMB3 run. It's going to be 1 or 2 frames faster, but I'm going to refrain from doing any of the 99 lives canonball jumps. It should defintely replace the previous run, being a frame or two faster and all. Faster is better, right? So I'm going to totally omit the highlight of SMB3 TAS for this one frame. Would you accept that? And yes, Deviance, I remember that arguement. I thought it was pretty rediculous trying to replace an aethetics run. Arc let everyone know he was doing that game also.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
hopper wrote:
If the goal isn't perfection then what the hell am I doing here? The goal is perfection, and you try to make it artistic and entertaining as well.
Other way around hopper. The goal is to be entertaining and artistic, and you try for perfection.
KaitouKid wrote:
Funny, I thought sloppy runs weren't allowed. Get the fucking hair out of your ass and stop your god damn whining already. Christ. People like you make me wholly embarassed to be a part of this community. -.-
I was part of this community and making runs long before you showed up, so I wouldn't talk.
KaitouKid wrote:
And remember kids: Arguing on the internet is like competing in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded. .
Funny thing to say in your own ARGUMENT.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
I’m annoyed because Phil took my whole run and recopied a few frames faster. If it were Bisqwit or Genisto that submitted this run, it wouldn’t bother me as much since they both contributed. Phil didn’t contribute anything beforehand, and basically, he just ripped-off my whole run. Btw, if it were Genisto that submitted this run, I’d be even more disappointed, since I’d expect something new and innovative from someone of his caliber.
Phil wrote:
I am not making drama because adelikat beats me at Punch Out or WalkerBoh beats me by 5 frames at Circus Charlie or even SMB1 that is 1 frame faster than me.
Is it seriously that fun re-doing a whole run to improve by frames? Do those few frames make the run more entertaining or more enjoyable to watch in some way? This is exactly what I’m talking about. When this site was still new, it felt like the goal was to make cool, entertaining videos and showing off new tricks and glitches. Now, it seems TAS makers only care about shaving off frames here and there, and doing plain old run-throughs of game x. This has been my thoughts for sometime, and it’s only now that I’m bringing it up. I’m not trying to discourage perfection. I just think that scavenging a run for frames is a lame reason for making a TAS.
Phil wrote:
Yes but Sleepz could have posted his new trick in SMB2 thread to tell Genisto about this. In fact, in my video there's more than 1 new trick but most of them makes only 1-2 frames faster. They aren't evident to notice for viewers.
I didn’t want to mention it because I wanted it to be a surprise. A video is a lot more entertaining to watch when it’s full of surprises, and gives people something to look forward to in a new run. That’s why I don’t like releasing WIPs. I would only do that if it was a game I was less familiar with.
KaitouKid wrote:
The goal of this site, unless Bis changed it when I wasn't looking, was to present the most flawless run of Game X possible while making it as entertaining as you can. If doesn't matter how many seconds or frames New Version is in comparison to Last Version - if it beats the previous run, it should replace the previous run unless there are glaring flaws in it somewhere.
The goal isn’t perfection. The goal is creating art and entertainment. It says so right there, clear as day in the How And Why page. Where are you people getting these ideas from? Perfection is just expected of us because were using savestates and slowdowns. It’s not like you can achieve that perfection anyways; every TAS ever created can always be improved by frames. That why its referred to as the Theoretical Fastest Time, because you’ll never be 100% certain.
Deviance wrote:
I don't think it is backstabbing as long as the proper credit is given to those who contributed to the tricks. Thus, if this run is published, Sleepz should be fully credited for his work. In fact, I believe this should be the standard for all runs.
I agree with you there, that’s why I was also wondering how come my LoZ run was properly credited with SleepzTeam, Sleepz, Mfried, and Ramzi, where as Phil’s run just says Phil Cote, with no other names.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Ok, I didn’t say anything when Phil redid the LoZ run, since a minute and a half is a significant improvement, and taught me the importance of meticulous accuracy, but Phil, this is a joke. You redid this whole run copying mine move for move just to improve by 36 frames. My improvement over the previous run was 20 whole seconds, contributing several new tricks and ideas. And yours is 36 frames, contributing nothing? Why would you even bother to do something like this if you can’t add anything to the table? As FODA said, this is really a stab in the back. And it’s not the thought of my run being beaten that’s bothering me, if that’s what you’re thinking. When Genisto beat my first run, I was very pleased since he added some neat things like killing Birdo with the key and DJs. His run became and instant favorite of mine. Your run on the other hand adds nothing new and doesn’t even get an extra second. It’s still 7:54. Now to critique the run itself, I must ask Phil, why do you still do those annoying fast left/right, up/down movements? There was already a discussion or two about this, and as I recall, everyone said they hated it. Your run is full of it, while I made an effort to avoid it in mine. Even Bisqwit thinks it’s stupid; he mentions it openly in the guidelines page. It’s like you made the run uglier in exchange for a few measly frames. I thought that a slightly slower run that is more pleasing to the eye (not to mention original) takes precedence over a slightly faster one. But now people are voting for it because all they can see is the “36 frames faster!” Is that all you people care about? Seriously, if this is what TAS making is all about now, I don’t even see the point in making them anymore. Who cares about making cool videos when we can compete over who can scavenge for the most frames instead. For those of you who keep up with human speedruns, this is exactly why I’m keeping my LoZ run from the public’s eye. Someone can just rip-off your hard work, make a carbon copy of your run with a dinky little improvement to obsolete it, and claim it as their own. I don’t mean to come off sounding like a jerk or to degrade your work, but when people do this shit, whether it be in gaming, business, or any other aspect of life, I just lose respect for them.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Kitsune wrote:
I think this is a good idea, and I like it. Instead of just skipping through the text, I think it will be more interesting if I can read it through, since I'm a fast reader.
I was about to do it that way too, regardless. However, looking at the differences in time between just the opening dialouges, reading speed might extend the length of the run by an hour or more. Even I can't ignore that. But I feel less motivated to do the run now.
LarsenSan wrote:
By the way, where can I find SandWorms? I'm now at Zio's Fortress.
Go near Termi and walk around. That reminds me, I have to redo that part since I forgot you can just run into sandworms without having to go through the infant worms.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
TSA wrote:
I still think: Level 3 Up+A Gamble 1X Blue Candle Level 4 Up+A HC 100 rupees Level 2 HC White Sword Level 5 Up+A HC Level 1 Warp to Level 3 Arrows/Bait Level 7 Magical Sword Level 6 Warp to Level 2 Level 8 Warp to Level 1 Level 9 Is a good route.
I'll time.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
TG syndrome? Didn't I just say I'd reveal everything I know, save the route and tmes. You don't see me carrot dangling either.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 3/11/2004
Posts: 336
Honestly, I am tempted to keep the run private. Believe me, it was my original intention to send to both TG and SDA, but I was also expecting my time to be just under 33:45, not sub 33. This is why I didn’t want to announce it. The TAS didn’t help as much as you think for this one, especially since LoZ is far from a linear run, and the fighting is so ridiculously fast. I spent a LOT of time with both TAS and Speedrun to come up with a routine on my own. Please understand. So I've decided for now, the route and the times I’m not revealing. I might eventually change my mind though. As for everything else, strategies, other possible route ideas, I don’t mind sharing everything I know. Edit: Just so I don’t leave you wondering, no, I didn’t use the route I posted. The route I used is only 5 seconds slower overall, but the changes make the run easier to perform. That route posted is still the fastest for a human though.
1 2
13 14