Submission Text Full Submission Page Publication Page

Game Information

Earthbound is a game where the hero, Ness, is just an average 13 year old kid from the suburbs... until the night a meteor lands in his backyard. The local wildlife starts attacking him, he begins to realize psychic powers, and a mysterious messenger from the future tells him that he must save the world, but before he faces any of that Ness has to change out of his pajamas. With a baseball bat as his weapon, Ness begins a quest to stop an evil alien presence from destroying the world. He will later meet with Paula, a girl with strong psychic abilities, Jeff, a young genius with the ability to repair broken things, and Poo, a prince from far, far away who also happens to have strong psychic abilities.

About the run

  • Uses death to save time
  • Uses warps
  • Manipulates luck
  • Abuses programming errors in the game
  • Genre: RPG
Used emulator: Snes9x rerecording 1.51 v6
The following comments are written by mugg: I know many game series only because I played Super Smash Bros. Melee on the Nintendo Gamecube, a beat 'em up featuring many Nintendo characters and the prequel for SSBB. I got to know F-zero, Starfox, Kirby, and of course I got to know Earthbound. I always wanted to play through this game at some point and after I did so I felt the need to TAS this game. I simply loved the graphics, the comic-style and the music in this game. But a full run seemed to be very long and the glitched category was already well optimized. I wasn't very knowledgeable with the game either. Always with an eye for possible improvements for popular Nintendo games, I watched many Youtube videos until I saw the Tent glitch in Earthbound. It was said that when you check a certain place in the tent in Threed, the game would behave very strangely and sometimes it would even glitch up. People had written comments stating that it also triggered the debug menu #1 in this game so I thought this was my lucky day. I began researching the glitch, checking places in the out-of-bounds area and making a map for it, telling people like Nitrodon and Halamantariel about it and getting things started. However, I wasn't able to record this glitch in snes9x 1.43 (because playback behaved differently than recording mode), so this stopped progress for a while until I was said that it worked properly in snes9x 1.51. I tried it with the Japanese version, Mother 2, and it seemed to be more glitch-friendly and more likely to trigger the debug menu so this version was used. Pirohiko teamed up with me and I want to thank him for his work. When I TASed a section of this game, he would often improve it by a few frames and he is also much better at manipulating luck and did basicly all the battles. He wrote a very useful lua script regarding RNG behavior. When we reached the debug menu, things got a bit difficult since we couldn't directly go to the credits with it. More details on this below...
The debug menu glitch worked differently when using different versions of the game on different versions of snes9x. But pirohiko [dead link removed] recorded himself testing the tent glitch on the Japanese version on a real SNES and it behaves like snes9x 1.51 with the Japanese ROM.

Tricks

Optimizing positioning

This game has subpixel carry-over. This means that approaching a door a bit differently can be done in order to optimize the subpixels.

Luck-manipulation

The game uses a flow of 14592 sequent RNG values which it will run through during playing the game. Those values determine the appearance of enemies, item drops, SMAAAASH!! attacks, NPC behavior and other things. Having text being written onscreen will cause the flow of RNG to move with each character written. When the game loads new enemies onto the map, it will shift the flow of RNG too.

Overworld

In order to skip enemies or to have specific enemies appear or to have NPCs not move into one's path, one can pause the game by pressing "B" or "select". The RNG will be called each frame during pausing. The game uses barriers to determine if enemies should appear. Once you walk across such a barrier, enemies may appear and it will shift the RNG a bit. This is very useful in Giant Step since we can shift the RNG very efficiently here by walking across barriers repeatedly. This trick is even more useful when walking on an intersection of barriers. We needed to do this in Giant Step in order to get 6 speed and 24 offense from the Gigantic Ant boss battle so we could knock out every police officer with one SMAAAASH!! only. We needed to shift the RNG for an entire 700 steps which explains the random walking in Giant Steps...

Battle

Changing the selection during a battle will change the RNG. This can be used to manipulate SMAAAASH!! attacks. Since you can change the selection only every other frame it is better to manipulate the first SMAAAAASH!! before the battle, by pausing the game.

Skipping a trigger spot (Stutter walk)

It is possible to skip spots which trigger an event by moving through it every other frame. This was used in order to skip the Starman Jr. battle and the Soundstone from Buzz Buzz.

Walk through cliffs

You can walk through certain types of cliffs with proper subpixel positioning. See this section for more detail. It was used in order to skip Twoson.

Tent glitch (Debug menu)

In the circus tent in Threed, position yourself into the wall on the right, below the door. If you are in the correct spot, try to check the area and the dialoge should be delayed. You might end up warping to some place, freezing your game, causing graphical glitches, seeing garbage dialogue or triggering the debug menu. The latter is interesting from a speedrunning point of view since you can use the debug menu in order to complete the game very quickly with it. The debug menu occurs more likely on the Japanese version of the game (Mother 2). I wasn't able to trigger it even once on the US version, however, people made comments stating in English language that they triggered the debug menu so I'm assuming that it may work on the US version.
When you check the glitch area in the tent, there are two primary glitch messages that are very likely to appear eventually. One message would prevent you from proceeding and eventually freezes your game, with the graphics glitched up and the Arcade BGM. The other will change the music to the game-over BGM often and it will produce many invisible text boxes. Depending on the timing and on how long and how often you press "L", "A" or "R" the 'next' invisible text box may or may not appear. If it doesn't appear you basicly failed the glitch. During the first two invisible text boxes, there is a tiny chance of glitching up the game (in that it gives you a bicycle and plays the bicycle BGM or warping you somewhere while freezing the game and similar things). Once you reach the third invisible text box, the debug menu will eventually come after ~10.000 frames of auto-firing "L" and "A" alternatedly. I tested this glitch thoroughly and it would either get me to the debug menu on frame ~77000, ~72000 or ~68000. I was able to change a 77000 outcome to 68000 by random input, but I wasn't able to get an even better outcome. The assumption was that the text would be read from some point of memory until it reaches the debug menu, but the text pointer (0x7e9979) didn't seem to affect anything. We went on as we couldn't reduce more time. The next problem was to get to the staff credits fast! We could go to different events throughout the games so we chose to go to event 70 (69 goes to Ness' house after the Staff credits, but playing the Staff credits instead of skipping them was prefered). It sends us to Saturn Valley with the game beaten, with Paula in the party, and all left to do was to talk to Ness' mother. But the game still seems to be glitched after using the debug menu. It may randomly crash, freeze but most likely it would warp us to Fourside's café with a lot of invisible dialogue to click away before we could proceed. After a lot of trying different strategies we used this strategy:
  1. Add Paula as a character
  2. Make Ness' HP run out
  3. Give him the 'diamondized' status ailment
    This makes the game behave like Ness has no HP but is still alive.
    This is needed to make a game-over sequence work later on.
  4. Make Paula's HP run out
  5. Give Paula the 'diamondized' status ailment
    The same for Paula...
  6. Give each party member as much Skip Sandwich DX as they can carry
    This is a special feature of the debug menu. After going to event 70, Ness loses his inventory items but we can still use a Skip Sandwich DX from Paula's inventory.
  7. Go to event '70'
  8. Game-Over (very rare and we tried to reduce lag as much as we could, but it always forced us to go back to the center of Saturn Valley...)
    We used death as a shortcut here, otherwise we would have had to walk home from Saturn Valley or Fourside.
  9. Walk home and finish the game
This page explains the features of the debug menu.

Possible improvements?

We wouldn't know of a confident way to improve this movie. However, it may be possible to set up a better randomness in the long run for Giant Step so we wouldn't need to spend much time towards manipulating the RNG there. But it is very hard since you can't predict how things are going to turn out. Seeing how random the tent glitch can act, it may be possible to abuse it further. Maybe someday we will be able to access the Staff credits a whole lot faster without the need of the debug menu at all? Maybe the waiting time for the debug menu can be shortened, but we tried our best to reduce it as much as we could already.

Closing words

Thanks to Nitrodon, Halamantariel, Scepheo, and others! Maybe more information will be added later.
Please feel free to ask questions since my complicated explanations may not be clear sometimes.
Flygon: Added YouTube module.
FractalFusion: Judging.
FractalFusion: This run uses a glitch which passes through a debug menu which cannot otherwise (as to our knowledge) be accessed by means apart from external codes. If the debug menu was easily accessed by an internal code, that would be a different story. As it stands, it can only be assumed as part of the glitch process, and it will be allowed.
In the apparently non-existent event that such an internal code is found later, the published run will be placed in the impure category and any further runs going through the debug menu will likely be rejected.
This run will be accepted for publication alongside the existing publication.

Show more

Hide
1 2 3 4 5 6
Posted: 9/19/2010 7:38 AM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
DarkKobold wrote:
So, let me get this straight.... You've made 5 multi-paragraph posts in this thread, and you expect people to take your opinion as valid, and you didn't even take the time to watch the movie? Seriously, you've just lost all credibility in this thread, because you haven't even seen the source material for which you are arguing over. Do you even care about TASes, or are you on this site just to argue?
So, let me get this straight... Discussing a rule of the website which applies to cheat codes supported by the game itself is invalid if I haven't watched a certain run? Exactly how does that make any sense? Exactly how would watching the run change anything I have written? Do runs get special exceptions of the rules if they look good enough or something? Could this be applied to other rules as well? Do, for example, using GameGenie codes become a valid form of TASing if the run looks cool enough? If you read what I wrote again, I was asking what this debug menu is and what can be done with it, and as a side note I commented that in my opinion if the debug menu can be used for entering cheat codes in the same way as you can do with a cheating device such as GameGenie, it would make the technique invalid and against the rules. (And btw, what's with the "multi-paragraph" thing? I don't really get it. Why does that need to be mentioned? Is the number of paragraphs in a post somehow significant? What difference would it make if I had made all my posts using one single paragraph?)
Limne wrote:
I find it difficult to believe that people are referring to the debug menu as a "cheat code." Did any of you even watch what happened? The TASer messed around with memory addresses using glitches until they gained access to a debug menu, a development tool inside the code left over from production. That's not a cheat.
Could you please define what makes the Konami code a cheat, while such a debug menu (which I assume allows you to do similar things to a GameGenie device) isn't a cheat? Does the definition of "cheat" involve how difficult it is to access the code? If the code is hard to access, then it's not a cheat, but if it's trivial to access, then it is. Where do you draw the line? As I suggested earlier, would the Konami code stop being a cheat if it was more difficult to access? If yes, could you please explain why? I just can't grasp the logic.
We already have runs that allow players to mess around with a game's memory (CT comes to mind...).
Personally I'm not very fond of runs that use save data corruption, for reasons I have explained in other threads. I view them as borderline hardware cheating.
The only thing difference in this game is that there are better tools to manipulate inside the game's code.
It may be just me, but I would consider that an aggravating fact, not an alleviating one (for the exact same reason why the Konami code is banned).
There is a world of difference between manipulating intentional "cheats" inside the GAME and memory addresses inside the CODE. There's a difference between pressing A and B on the title screen 50 times to see the credits roll and using a glitch to access a command in the game's memory that causes the same ending to appear. There is not a difference between the latter and using a glitch to access developer tools buried deep within the code (a debug menu) to access the same command.
So your stance is, indeed, that if the cheat code is difficult to access, it becomes acceptable?
Posted: 9/19/2010 9:32 AM
Quote
jlun2
Skilled player (1741)
Joined: 9/17/2009
Posts: 4981
Location: ̶C̶a̶n̶a̶d̶a̶ "Kanatah"
GBA TASer of 2010
Warp, I believe they meant that in-game cheats accessed through a glitch is allowed, but deliberate use of cheat without glitch is banned. For example: Konami Code: Gives 30+ extra lifes; Access by button combination - Cheating Glitched Debug Menu: Gives players control over event flags; Access by glitching - Ok If the Debug menu were to be accessed by In-game cheats, such as button combinations, or through a game-genie, then that would've been unaceptable. This run does not do such, so it's ok.
LLCoolDave wrote:
This seems to be competing for the "Worst looking TAS of 2011" Award.
Posted: 9/19/2010 9:53 AM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
jlun2 wrote:
Warp, I believe they meant that in-game cheats accessed through a glitch is allowed, but deliberate use of cheat without glitch is banned.
Yes, I can understand that opinion, and I suppose the only thing I can say about it is that personally I disagree with it. Maybe what ticks me off a bit here is the attitude some people seem to have about this subject. An attitude like it's hard to believe how anybody could have any objection to the idea (ie. that cheats are ok if the only way to access them is by glitching), like if it was some kind of given that it's pretty obviously ok, and it's strange to claim otherwise.
Posted: 9/19/2010 12:40 PM
Quote
Scepheo
Player (146)
Joined: 7/16/2009
Posts: 686
Warp wrote:
Maybe what ticks me off a bit here is the attitude some people seem to have about this subject. An attitude like it's hard to believe how anybody could have any objection to the idea (ie. that cheats are ok if the only way to access them is by glitching), like if it was some kind of given that it's pretty obviously ok, and it's strange to claim otherwise.
It's hard not to have that attitude, considering you're coming into the discussion with the exact same attitude, but for the opposing side. You act(ed, not anymore) like it's unthinkable that this would be accepted, because it's clearly cheating.
Posted: 9/19/2010 1:11 PM
Quote
Acheron86
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Warp wrote:
Discussing a rule of the website which applies to cheat codes supported by the game itself is invalid if I haven't watched a certain run? Exactly how does that make any sense? Exactly how would watching the run change anything I have written? Do runs get special exceptions of the rules if they look good enough or something? Could this be applied to other rules as well? Do, for example, using GameGenie codes become a valid form of TASing if the run looks cool enough?
At some point you have to remember the purpose of the rules. We uphold them because there is a spirit to the law, not just because somebody came along and said "hey, these are the rules, and it doesn't matter why they're there, we just have to follow them." If you haven't seen the run, it will definitely affect your perceived credibility. As it is, your posts give the impression that your interest here is to enforce the rules regardless of their consequences or purpose. Surely you can see why that would rub people the wrong way. If you want to have that reputation, I have no problem with it, and I really don't feel a strong need to defend this run from your criticisms, because I think it's a good proof-of-concept in and of itself of why the rules should not be blindly enforced; if the judges decide otherwise, so be it. That's assuming that your perspective is correct, and that's not something of which I'm convinced, but I won't argue the point that the definition of "cheat vs. glitch" here is anything but a fine line. I do agree with the posters here that the fine line is still there, and you don't, which is okay, but it's still a hard pill to swallow that you'd be so adamant about the rules when you haven't taken the time to appreciate why we think this should be exceptioned assuming that you're right in the first place. I find it a dangerous and problematic policy to critique runs I've not watched under any circumstances, simply because enforcing rules just to enforce them, without exception, isn't in my job description. Are you sure it should be your role here? Can't we trust the judges to do that? It seems like a good way to build a bad reputation.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Posted: 9/20/2010 4:45 PM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Scepheo wrote:
You act(ed, not anymore) like it's unthinkable that this would be accepted, because it's clearly cheating.
I honestly don't understand why you got that impression. In my first post I wrote:
me wrote:
Personally I think that using such a debug menu to "cheat" in the game is completely equivalent to using a cheat-key (such as the Konami code)
I didn't say anything about it being completely and unambiguously clear.
Posted: 9/20/2010 6:40 PM
Quote
FractalFusion
Editor, Expert player (2073)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3282
Glitchy TAS of 2013 Gameboy TAS of 2013 PSX TASer of 2010
Just to let everyone know, I am still judging this submission and haven't forgotten about it. I'm just listening to the discussion, which seems to be rather lively and has certainly delayed the final verdict. Essentially, this situation is different from just using a cheat code or such to jump to a debug menu. It is essentially a game-destroying glitch which happens to pass through a debug menu in the code. If it didn't, or if the authors didn't say anything about it, no one would be discussing anything about debug menu right now.
Posted: 9/20/2010 8:05 PM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
I suppose it's lucky that this is, I assume, the only old console game with such a debug menu (at least one which is accessible at all), so it shouldn't cause too much of a precedent for other games. I am, and have always been, the first person to defend exceptions. This doesn't mean I have changed my opinion in this case, though. I just want to make clear that some people took too harshly what I wrote. I was simply trying to discuss if this peculiar case could be considered in the same category as the Konami code (and hence technically forbidden).
Posted: 9/20/2010 10:36 PM
(Edited: 9/21/2010 12:20 AM)
Quote
DarkKobold
Skilled player (1652)
Joined: 11/15/2004
Posts: 2202
Location: Killjoy
Arcade TASer of 2010 PCE TASer of 2010 Arcade TAS of 2010 Lucky TAS of 2009 Lucky TAS of 2007
Warp wrote:
So, let me get this straight... Discussing a rule of the website which applies to cheat codes supported by the game itself is invalid if I haven't watched a certain run? Exactly how does that make any sense? Exactly how would watching the run change anything I have written?
#1 You would have known what was happening, and people wouldn't have to explain to you what happened in the movie. You had zero clue what actually happened, but that didn't stop you from making those 5 posts. #2
The Website wrote:
Vote: Should this movie be published? (Vote after watching!)
See that up there? Voting is the first and most basic form of stating your opinion. You decided to ignore that request to watch, and spiel your opinion, repeatedly, in verbose form, numerous times. You want to talk about rules of this site? That one is ON EVERY SUBMISSION, because it is THE MOST IMPORTANT part of the process of forming an opinion about the run undergoing the judging process. #3, It demonstrates a total lack of interest in the actual content of the site, also invalidating your opinion. You forget that the person making a point can be just as important as the point being made. Why should anyone care about the opinions of a person who doesn't care about TASes? I asked a question, which you ignored. "If you can't even be assed to watch a TAS that you are going to comment on, what are you doing here?"
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.
Posted: 9/21/2010 12:10 AM
Quote
Deign
Active player (437)
Joined: 7/23/2006
Posts: 389
Location: Washington
TASer of 2008 NES TAS of 2008
Warp wrote:
Discussing a rule of the website which applies to cheat codes supported by the game itself is invalid if I haven't watched a certain run?
Yes
Warp wrote:
Exactly how would watching the run change anything I have written?
You'd know what the fuck you're talking about.
Warp wrote:
Do runs get special exceptions of the rules if they look good enough or something?
Yes
Warp wrote:
Could this be applied to other rules as well? Do, for example, using GameGenie codes become a valid form of TASing if the run looks cool enough?
No, the game must stand on it's own without outside influence, just the code that exists on the cartridge. This debug menu exists on the cartridge. And cheat codes are used in runs on this site. Most of them go directly to the concept demos and such.
Warp wrote:
I commented that in my opinion if the debug menu can be used for entering cheat codes in the same way as you can do with a cheating device such as GameGenie, it would make the technique invalid and against the rules.
You're wrong.
Warp wrote:
Could you please define what makes the Konami code a cheat, while such a debug menu (which I assume allows you to do similar things to a GameGenie device) isn't a cheat? Does the definition of "cheat" involve how difficult it is to access the code? If the code is hard to access, then it's not a cheat, but if it's trivial to access, then it is. Where do you draw the line?
Yes Why do you want to draw a line? This site is about entertainment...stop being a douche.
Warp wrote:
As I suggested earlier, would the Konami code stop being a cheat if it was more difficult to access? If yes, could you please explain why? I just can't grasp the logic.
Yes, unless you want to also remove all ability to do anything that wasn't intended by the programmers. You could eliminate all OOB glitches and all memory glitches and all wall glitches. As you seem to like to say "Where do you draw the line?!"
Warp wrote:
Personally I'm not very fond of runs that use save data corruption, for reasons I have explained in other threads. I view them as borderline hardware cheating.
Good for you, fortunately not everyone shares your opinion.
Warp wrote:
So your stance is, indeed, that if the cheat code is difficult to access, it becomes acceptable?
There's a pretty large difference between a cheat code and a glitch. If you don't want to make that distinction, that's your problem. Lastly, good job guys, voted yes. Was totally fuzzy pickles!
I'm sciencing as fast as I can ! ______________________________________ <adelikat> once more balls enter the picture, everything gets a lot more entertraining <adelikat> mmmmm yummy penises
Posted: 9/21/2010 1:56 AM
Quote
p4wn3r
Player (42)
Joined: 12/27/2008
Posts: 873
Location: Germany
Lucky TAS of 2011 Gameboy TAS of 2011
Warp wrote:
I commented that in my opinion if the debug menu can be used for entering cheat codes in the same way as you can do with a cheating device such as GameGenie, it would make the technique invalid and against the rules.
TASing can be viewed in a computational way as trying to find the smallest input file that takes the game to a certain state, normally the ending. The input file consists only of the buttons you pressed, it doesn't include any cheat code you entered on certain frames. Therefore, anything that uses Game Genie to complete the game will desync for everyone on playback. This run, however, doesn't use any third-party device to finish the game, it gets to the credits by entering a possible input from the controller. Your comparison doesn't make sense. The reason in-game cheat codes are usually forbidden is only one: entertainment, which is what the site stands for. Codes that make the run trivial, like Metroid passwords, are rejected. Passwords that take you to the last levels of a puzzle game can be accepted, if finishing all the levels would be repetitive and uninteresting. No line was ever drawn, what determines if something is acceptable is not a generalized concept, but a search for entertaining movies. If you didn't watch it before giving an opinion, you can't tell anything of its value if published. About special categories, we've also had slower movies obsolete faster ones that weren't as entertaining. There are also movies that obsoleted others on different platforms. New categories are also heavily influenced by entertainment, before arguing on non-obsoletion, it's necessary to know if the old movie offers a decent amount of entertainment when a faster possibility is known.
Warp wrote:
(And before someone argues that that one pokemon run also jumps straight to the end of the game from almost the beginning, two points: 1) There's a difference: It's not using a cheat code to do that. 2) Personally I find the entire concept of that run a bit dubious, especially since it uses save corruption which is something I don't really like as it feels almost like using a cheating device, but that's just my opinion.)
Knowing Pokémon better, I should say that there are some items that were programmed in the game for debug purposes, like the WTW item and the surfboard, that can be accessed only by glitching. My run doesn't abuse their effect, but it's exactly one of the IDs of these items that allows warping to the end of the game. You should clarify what you mean by "cheat". Saying that save corruption is "almost" like cheating devices is imprecise and unclear. If you mean that it destroys the normal gameplay and completes the game in an entirely different way, I agree with you. However, if you want to say that it's like Gameshark, I strongly disagree because hard resetting is a completely valid input and the effects of save corruption are a lot more limited than having a Gameshark, corrupting the save doesn't mean you can do "anything" to the game. Again, Yellow is in its own category, while the glitched CT run obsoleted the older one. Save corruption is also difficult to fit in. If you think my work of searching the game's memory for a faster warp was just a rebuscated form of cheating, there's nothing I can do except telling my strong opposition to this statement. Fortunately, the opinion of only one person isn't enough to change the rules of the site.
Posted: 9/21/2010 8:37 AM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Deign wrote:
Warp wrote:
Discussing a rule of the website which applies to cheat codes supported by the game itself is invalid if I haven't watched a certain run?
Yes
Thanks for explaining why. You totally convinced me.
Warp wrote:
Do runs get special exceptions of the rules if they look good enough or something?
Yes
Warp wrote:
Could this be applied to other rules as well? Do, for example, using GameGenie codes become a valid form of TASing if the run looks cool enough?
No, the game must stand on it's own without outside influence, just the code that exists on the cartridge. This debug menu exists on the cartridge. And cheat codes are used in runs on this site. Most of them go directly to the concept demos and such.
I'm sorry, but you are being completely contradictory there. First you firmly assert that special exceptions to the rules are justified if breaking the rule makes the run look good enough, and immediately after that you claim that breaking the rule I talked about is not ok. So which is it? Breaking the rules is ok or isn't? If your intention was to say "this run does not break any rule", then your answer to my previous question above seems to be like arguing just for the sake of an argument, rather than being a justified answer. And why are you being so hostile anyways? I have not said this run breaks the rules, and I have not said this run should be immediately disqualified. I asked if this run could be breaking the rules, and explained why I think this could be so. People answered the question with arguments that don't sound very convincing to me (namely, "if it's difficult to access the debug menu, it becomes ok to use it even though it would be more questionable if it was trivial to access it"). I expressed my personal view of why those arguments don't sound very convincing to me, and now I'm a "douche". I'm honestly trying to have a conversation about the rules and the rather exceptional case of this particular game, which creates a rather fuzzy line about whether it can be considered breaking a particular rule or not. Why are some people here considering this as being a jerk and a douche?
Warp wrote:
As I suggested earlier, would the Konami code stop being a cheat if it was more difficult to access? If yes, could you please explain why? I just can't grasp the logic.
Yes, unless you want to also remove all ability to do anything that wasn't intended by the programmers. You could eliminate all OOB glitches and all memory glitches and all wall glitches. As you seem to like to say "Where do you draw the line?!"
Your comparison is not valid. Abusing memory glitches and wall glitches is not prohibited by the rules, and hence they are ok to use regardless of how this abuse happens. However, cheat codes such as the Konami code are prohibited by the rules, and hence they are different from wall glitches. There's a reason why these cheat codes are prohibited, and accessing them via glitching does not change that reason.
Warp wrote:
So your stance is, indeed, that if the cheat code is difficult to access, it becomes acceptable?
There's a pretty large difference between a cheat code and a glitch. If you don't want to make that distinction, that's your problem.
Wait a second. It sounds like you think that I'm opposing the glitch itself, rather than the usage of the debug menu to modify memory addresses. What gives you that impression? I'm not opposing any glitch here.
Posted: 9/21/2010 9:16 AM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
p4wn3r wrote:
Warp wrote:
I commented that in my opinion if the debug menu can be used for entering cheat codes in the same way as you can do with a cheating device such as GameGenie, it would make the technique invalid and against the rules.
TASing can be viewed in a computational way as trying to find the smallest input file that takes the game to a certain state, normally the ending. The input file consists only of the buttons you pressed, it doesn't include any cheat code you entered on certain frames. Therefore, anything that uses Game Genie to complete the game will desync for everyone on playback. This run, however, doesn't use any third-party device to finish the game, it gets to the credits by entering a possible input from the controller. Your comparison doesn't make sense. The reason in-game cheat codes are usually forbidden is only one: entertainment, which is what the site stands for. Codes that make the run trivial, like Metroid passwords, are rejected. Passwords that take you to the last levels of a puzzle game can be accepted, if finishing all the levels would be repetitive and uninteresting. No line was ever drawn, what determines if something is acceptable is not a generalized concept, but a search for entertaining movies. If you didn't watch it before giving an opinion, you can't tell anything of its value if published. About special categories, we've also had slower movies obsolete faster ones that weren't as entertaining. There are also movies that obsoleted others on different platforms. New categories are also heavily influenced by entertainment, before arguing on non-obsoletion, it's necessary to know if the old movie offers a decent amount of entertainment when a faster possibility is known.
I must admit that those are the soundest arguments so far (or, more specifically, the best expression of the idea, as others have also presented the same arguments, in different wording). Basically what you are saying is that the rules lay out the basic principle that if a cheat code (or any other similar feature, such as a level password) makes the run trivial (in other words, there's nothing spectacular nor superhuman about it anymore), then it's generally disqualified because there's no entertainment value. However, if such a feature would in contrast increase the entertainment value of the run, then using the cheat/password/whatever feature could be considered a valid technique. In other words, the rule "the Konami code is forbidden" is more like an example of something that isn't acceptable, laying out a more broad concept, rather than being a rule all in itself (in other words, if there actually was an actual literal Konami code accessible through the classic key combination in a game which would significantly improve the entertainment value of the run, it might actually be acceptable). So the question is not so much about "is entering cheat codes prohibited?" as much as "does entering cheat codes make the run trivial?"
Posted: 9/21/2010 3:49 PM
Quote
p4wn3r
Player (42)
Joined: 12/27/2008
Posts: 873
Location: Germany
Lucky TAS of 2011 Gameboy TAS of 2011
Exactly. I believe you expressed my point better than myself.
Posted: 9/21/2010 3:59 PM
Quote
DarkKobold
Skilled player (1652)
Joined: 11/15/2004
Posts: 2202
Location: Killjoy
Arcade TASer of 2010 PCE TASer of 2010 Arcade TAS of 2010 Lucky TAS of 2009 Lucky TAS of 2007
Warp wrote:
And why are you being so hostile anyways? .... I expressed my personal view of why those arguments don't sound very convincing to me, and now I'm a "douche"...
Wow, Warp, you are just not getting it. I noticed you STILL haven't answered my question. The discussion with you was civil until everyone found out you had not watched the run. I will state it in as few words as possible. You look bad to people because you seem too LAZY to watch the run, making you UNINFORMED about the current run in question. However, this has not stopped you from making LONG-WINDED posts.
Warp wrote:
I'm honestly trying to have a conversation about the rules and the rather exceptional case of this particular game, which creates a rather fuzzy line about whether it can be considered breaking a particular rule or not. Why are some people here considering this as being a jerk and a douche?
Because, once again, you can't have an honest conversation when you didn't even take the 30 minutes and 42.12 seconds to become informed what you've babbled about for multiple posts. I really don't know how else to get this across to you: That pisses people off. You started arguing something that you didn't even bother to first become fully informed. People start feeling that you are lazy and just here to argue. Once again, Warp, seriously, why are you here? Do you even like TASes, or do you just like arguing the rules of this site? Remember, I was like you once. However, I chilled out, and realized the site was about entertaining movies first, and the rules second. So yes, there are rules. But if some run comes along that is hellishly entertaining with a game genie code? It would probably be accepted.
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.
Posted: 9/21/2010 4:50 PM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
DarkKobold wrote:
The discussion with you was civil until everyone found out you had not watched the run.
No, it was civil until you "found out" that and unanimously declared that I had "lost all credibility".
You look bad to people because you seem too LAZY to watch the run, making you UNINFORMED about the current run in question.
My objection has still absolutely nothing to do with how the run looks like or how it accesses the debug menu. Even if this was the best run I had ever seen in my life and would blow my mind, it would still have absolutely nothing to do with my objection. Even if I thought that the method by which the debug menu is being accessed is by far the best piece of TASing prowess and because of that this run should be elevated to be the best run of the entire site and would be the only run which deserves two stars, it would still not have any effect on my objection. My objection was: Is using such a debug menu (which can be used to modify memory) acceptable regardless of how the menu is being accessed? What the run looks like has zero effect on the answer to that question. Will you finally get that through your thick head, please? You have insinuated that watching the run would somehow affect my opinion on the subject matter that I have been writing about, but you have completely failed to explain why that would be so.
However, this has not stopped you from making LONG-WINDED posts.
Why do you seem to have such an obsession with multi-paragraph long-winded posts? What the h*** does it matter how long or short posts are? Who cares? Are you paying for your internet connection by the byte or something? I honestly can't understand that. If you don't want to read "multi-paragraph" "long-winded" posts, then don't. I just can't understand your objection.
Once again, Warp, seriously, why are you here? Do you even like TASes, or do you just like arguing the rules of this site?
You seem to read only what you want to read. Have you even bothered to read everything that I have written in this thread? I have been having a civil, rational conversation about the rules and how the technique used in this run should be handled according to them, and how the rules should be understood. You started to convert this conversation into some kind of flamewar starting with your "you lost all your credibility" BS.
Posted: 9/21/2010 5:16 PM
Quote
DarkKobold
Skilled player (1652)
Joined: 11/15/2004
Posts: 2202
Location: Killjoy
Arcade TASer of 2010 PCE TASer of 2010 Arcade TAS of 2010 Lucky TAS of 2009 Lucky TAS of 2007
Warp wrote:
My objection was: Is using such a debug menu (which can be used to modify memory) acceptable regardless of how the menu is being accessed? What the run looks like has zero effect on the answer to that question.
Actually, the point everyone is trying to get across to you is that how the run looks has an effect on the answer to that question.
Warp wrote:
Once again, Warp, seriously, why are you here? Do you even like TASes, or do you just like arguing the rules of this site?
You seem to read only what you want to read. Have you even bothered to read everything that I have written in this thread? I have been having a civil, rational conversation about the rules and how the technique used in this run should be handled according to them, and how the rules should be understood. You started to convert this conversation into some kind of flamewar starting with your "you lost all your credibility" BS.
Deflected. Again. I wasn't trying to flame you, I was trying to explain why not watching the run made you look bad. I give up.
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.
Posted: 9/21/2010 5:35 PM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
DarkKobold wrote:
Deflected. Again.
You claim that you are not trying to flame me, yet you are doing exactly that. Imagine that I asked you: "Seriously, why are you here? Do you even like TASes, or do you just like to whine about the length of people's posts and how many paragraphs they use?" Do you seriously expect me to try to answer such an inflammatory and nonsensical question? If you had read everything I have written in this thread (not to talk about everything I have written in the past), you would not be asking such a stupid question. Your question is inflammatory and insulting, and from the tone of your posts I'm pretty certain it's so on purpose. You know perfectly well that your question is provocative and insulting.
Posted: 9/21/2010 5:44 PM
Quote
Acheron86
Joined: 8/23/2008
Posts: 417
Warp wrote:
You have insinuated that watching the run would somehow affect my opinion on the subject matter that I have been writing about, but you have completely failed to explain why that would be so.
I don't want to fan the flames here, but this question needs answering. -Sometimes, exceptions to the rules will come up. Runs will be submitted that require special attention. -In such cases, it may be helpful to view the run before you argue for or against its exceptional publication. -In the event you argue the rules without first viewing the run, you may not have all the details. This to me is a logical train of thought. When it is ignored, it appears as though one does not feel a need to watch the run to postulate an argument regarding its publication. I feel that this is akin to a movie critic who watches the trailer, reads a synopsis, and decides a film is bad without watching it, or a game reviewer who plays ten minutes into a game, decides it is not to his liking, and writes out the reasons the game is bad, without experiencing the game beyond his initial cursory examination. In all cases, we are ultimately talking about informed vs. uninformed opinion. I can tell you the reasons this game should be an exception, but why should that onus fall on me? In the case something exceptional is submitted, it should fall on its critics to take a look at it themselves, and make a logical decision regarding its publication. That does not mean it is in no way an argument that I can contribute to, but since ultimately we cannot deal in absolutes here (tasvideos.org isn't owned by Kierkegaard), players and viewers who see an argument regarding a run should really take the time to see the run in question before discussing it. Otherwise they will never be properly informed, because no amount of arguing I or anyone else makes will be equivalent to the actual run itself. In other words, if you want an argument, you should watch the run--it speaks for itself, better than we can.
I will not use self-reference in my signature.
Posted: 9/21/2010 6:03 PM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Acheron86 wrote:
This to me is a logical train of thought. When it is ignored, it appears as though one does not feel a need to watch the run to postulate an argument regarding its publication.
Please note that I had a slightly different mindset about the significance of the rules when I first posed my objection. I admit that this mindset of mine has changed a bit during this thread (towards being more accepting of the debug menu trick used in this run). My original objection was (and, in fact, still is): Using cheats provided by the game itself (the Konami code being one example of such) is usually prohibited for a reason (they make "god-like" playing accessible to the unassisted player, hence removing most of the relevance of the tool-assisted play). This reason is completely independent of how the cheat is triggered. What matters is the end result: If the run becomes trivial, then it becomes trivial regardless. The counter-argument to this objection seemed to be that if triggering the cheat is "cool enough" and requires techniques which are extremely difficult (if not even impossible) to achieve in normal play, and/or very elaborate (and hence entertaining) setting-up, then the cheat becomes acceptable. At first I found this counter-argument to be invalid: It's still triggering a cheat, and the method by which it's being triggered doesn't matter. However, after the discussion in this thread I have been convinced otherwise, so I have changed my opinion. If triggering the cheat is entertaining enough, then that is, indeed, a good reason to accept the run. After all, even if the cheat itself is making the rest of the run "trivial", triggering the cheat was not, and that in itself can be so entertaining as to warrant publication. (OTOH, I still disagree with "the cheat becomes acceptable if it can only be triggered using a glitch". What I have started agreeing with is, as said, "the cheat becomes acceptable if it can only be triggered in a way that is entertaining enough".)
Posted: 9/21/2010 9:35 PM
Quote
Darkdata
Joined: 6/2/2008
Posts: 25
Voting yes, because this is just like bottle adventure. :3
(???)
Posted: 9/22/2010 5:54 PM
Quote
DrJones
Joined: 4/3/2005
Posts: 575
Location: Spain
In a way, this is like that glitch in Pokemon that allows you to catch Mew, that you theoretically could only get by trading for it in an once-in-a-lifetime event in Tokyo. It's cool to showcase the use of these kind of glitches because it's extremely difficult and extremely unlikely someone would find them in a normal playthrough and surprising people is always entertaining. However, unlike in Pokemon, the glitch in this game gets you to a disabled debug menu that (mostly) skips the rest of the game, and I think using it is outlimits for a TAS, much akin to using Ctrl + W in Monkey Island 2 to beat the game: you are not actually beating the game, you are asking the game to beat it for you. It's cool to watch it ONCE, but after that it becomes lame as there's no skill in using a debug feature. In any case, I voted against this run replacing the current any% run, as this one steps on a rule that I think deserves enforcing. I would settle for a separate publication because the extraordinary circumstances around this glitch, though I think it's better suited for youtube than TASVideos.
No.
Posted: 9/23/2010 4:16 AM
Quote
jlun2
Skilled player (1741)
Joined: 9/17/2009
Posts: 4981
Location: ̶C̶a̶n̶a̶d̶a̶ "Kanatah"
GBA TASer of 2010
To all you people who request a seperate catagory, what should this run be label as? A glitched run? The previous run already uses glitches, so that won't work. Can't call it "warped" either. If it was classified as a "Debug Menu" Run, then that would make it sound like its cheating.
LLCoolDave wrote:
This seems to be competing for the "Worst looking TAS of 2011" Award.
Posted: 9/23/2010 4:57 AM
Quote
blahmoomoo
Joined: 2/1/2008
Posts: 347
Well, if you look at some other games with the label Uses warps, there are games there that warp in the game with glitches rather than warps that were intended to be used (warp pipes in SMB were intended, flying around a Castlevania game was not). Heavy glitch abuse is already applied to the current run, but it should apply to this one too for obvious reasons. However, as for the label put in the title of the publication (in quotation marks)... I can't think of a fully appropriate one right now. Perhaps something along the lines of memory glitching? I believe that happens to some extent in order to get to the debug menu. Maybe not... Maybe no major bosses? The other run still defeats Giygas and two (?) sanctuary bosses. Though... this one does defeat one sanctuary boss... Hmm...
<ccfreak2k> There is no 'ctrl' button on DeHackEd's computer. DeHackEd is always in control.
Posted: 9/23/2010 11:40 AM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
jlun2 wrote:
If it was classified as a "Debug Menu" Run, then that would make it sound like its cheating.
Maybe that's indicative of something... ;)
1 2 3 4 5 6