Baxter: This movie is full of entertaining TASing that is not present in the 0 or 120 star runs that allow BLJs. There is nothing wrong with choosing restrictions and goals that may appear slightly arbitrary, in order to show off an aspect of the game that is underrepresented in the published TASes or significantly different in some other way. This movie does this well, and is therefore accepted to be published alongside the 0 and 120 star runs.
How exactly this run should be labeled, or what restrictions would be superior is up for debate, but it does not negate the above judgement.
After much thinking, I gave up on trying to define this category under any sort of "do something as fast as possible without doing something else" description, and settled with "aims for entertainment while also getting 70 stars BLJless, with speed as a secondary goal". This kind of puts it in the same vein as the Family Feud and Air (SMB1 Hack) runs.
Voting yes.
I think the label "70 Stars, BLJless" is a pretty good one.
"70 Stars" should be read as "does not glitch past star doors", since this is (I think) the only definition in which the number 70 makes sense.
"BLJless" means that no BLJs will be used in the TAS. This restriction has little to do with the "70 Stars" part of the label, but is inserted for the sole purpose of making a movie that offers significantly different content compared to the two published TASes.
Then there is the discussion if there are better possible restrictions. Well, maybe there are, maybe there are not. If someone submits a 120 star BLJless run, then maybe the majority is in favor of that movie obsoleting this one. For now, I do not see any reason why that should keep this movie from being published.
I think it can be categorised quite simply:
- Does not use BLJs anywhere
- Does not sequence-break the overworld via any method
Vaguely arbitrary, but defined goals. And they certainly lead to an interesting result.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
ais523 wrote:
I think it can be categorised quite simply:
- Does not use BLJs anywhere
- Does not sequence-break the overworld via any method
Vaguely arbitrary, but defined goals. And they certainly lead to an interesting result.
I actually really like this as a statement for the goals. It nicely avoids questions like why the endless stairs were not skipped in order to get the 70th star in bowser 3. The reason is clear, but expressing it as a goal is not always a simple thing.
One major issue needs to be addressed here and thats the fact that the game can be beaten using HSWKs. BLJless run seems a bit arbitary to me.
Why is arbitraryness bad, when it can be well-defined, and provides something entertaining and significantly different than what is currently available?
One major issue needs to be addressed here and thats the fact that the game can be beaten using HSWKs. BLJless run seems a bit arbitary to me.
I think that can be covered with "Does not use acceleration-related glitches" as a goal.
But, "Big Boo's Balcony" would be slower if it were not for the effects of highspeed wallkicking. In fact, would the strat used in this video even be possible without it?
One major issue needs to be addressed here and thats the fact that the game can be beaten using HSWKs. BLJless run seems a bit arbitary to me.
I think that can be covered with "Does not use acceleration-related glitches" as a goal.
But, "Big Boo's Balcony" would be slower if it were not for the effects of highspeed wallkicking. In fact, would the strat used in this video even be possible without it?
No, but I don't really even consider HWSK a glitch. It's something that the programmers knew was possible (in my opinion), but they just didn't think someone could/would hit A every frame possible in a row to slowly gain speed. You can also get this exact effect with repeatedly ZBing frame perfectly over and over again in a corner.
I wouldn't even say the wallkicking in Big Boo's Balcony is hyperspeed anyhow, as you can get more speed than that off of most hills in the entire game.
I think it can be categorised quite simply:
- Does not use BLJs anywhere
- Does not sequence-break the overworld via any method
Vaguely arbitrary, but defined goals. And they certainly lead to an interesting result.
I like these statements.
It might be more specifically defined as:
- Beats the game as fast as possible while also following the below two statements:
- Intentionally sacrifices speed by not using BLJs, for entertainment.
- Intentionally opens the 8 star door, 30 star door, 50 star door, and 70 star door while sacrificing speed to do so, for entertainment (in the last case, "opening" the door means causing the stairs behind it to be non-endless).
For those arguing that one or more of the goals is/are arbitrary, I'm pretty sure the goal of the site has always been entertainment primarily, with speed as a (very strong) secondary goal. If the general audience feels these goals make for an entertaining run, it should get published.
Eh, I find the BLJless totally arbitrary, while not necessarily a bad thing, I just don't see the point in not using it.
Now, I'm not saying that there's no point in a 70 star run, I just don't see the point in not using BLJs. Your goal could be "beat the game as fast as possible without using hyperspeed outside of a level." I dunno, I just feel the lack of BLJs inside the levels is odd, unless it's more entertaining without them which I have no idea because I don't have a comparison.
Eh, I find the BLJless totally arbitrary, while not necessarily a bad thing, I just don't see the point in not using it.
The point of not using it is to provide a movie that is different from the published movies. The categories 0 star and 120 stars are not under discussion, and a 70 star run that would use BLJs will basically feature exactly the same content as a 120 star run, but with the 50 slowest stars cut out. I don't think it's likely for such a 70 star movie to even be published, as it adds nothing new, in terms of content, to the site.
I don't think it would. In fact, I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't... but that wasn't the point. The point is that no TAS would then show the different, entertaining non-BLJ gameplay that this TAS provides.
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
AUS wrote:
Well, the published 120 star run is not exactly the image of optimization, it would probably obsolete it, wouldn't it?
That isn't a very good reason to make a *completely* arbitrary movie that would be obsoleted by a real run. This run is more of a playaround. A 120 Stars run wouldn't fit that category. The point is, as Baxter said, to be different from what there already is/will be to offer.
Joined: 11/9/2008
Posts: 108
Location: New Orleans, LA U.S.A.
I just noticed this and wanted to say THANK YOU!!!
I have been waiting for this video for years, literally.
CeeSammerz, coin2884, Eru, Rogonem, Jesus, Kyman, Mickey/VIS, Mokkori, Moltov, Nahoc, Nekuran, Nothing693, pasta, Snark, sonicpacker and ToT, I wholeheartedly salute yoU!
The only category that is ever not arbitrary is any%, get over it.
That's funny because any% is the most arbitrary of all. Can you think of anything more arbitrary than completing any random percentage of a game? Any% means the author completes any percent he chooses, like 42% for example. Beating the game as fast as possible is much better than choosing a random percentage.
The only category that is ever not arbitrary is any%, get over it.
That's funny because any% is the most arbitrary of all. Can you think of anything more arbitrary than completing any random percentage of a game? Any% means the author completes any percent he chooses, like 42% for example. Beating the game as fast as possible is much better than choosing a random percentage.
Time to feed the troll!
The three categories are 100%, any%, and low%. Any% means "as fast as possible, without regards to completion percentage." If you can go faster while using a lower percentage, then that's the percentage you should use. Some games the fastest percentage is also 100% (e.g. Megaman X2), so the any% run is the 100% run.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
The only category that is ever not arbitrary is any%, get over it.
That's funny because any% is the most arbitrary of all. Can you think of anything more arbitrary than completing any random percentage of a game? Any% means the author completes any percent he chooses, like 42% for example. Beating the game as fast as possible is much better than choosing a random percentage.
Yeah, I admit I was just messing around :P but my point is that a noob who doesn't know better could think something like that. I remember a few years ago when I was looking for a speedrun on SDA and I just wanted to see the fastest completion, but they had these weird labels like low% and any%... so I thought maybe low% is the fastest completion because you aim for the lowest time. Any% just makes it confusing, if it was left blank it would be easier to understand that it's the fastest completion. Sorry for the off topic.
