By this definition, it would be lowest time attack (boss) + relics.
Provided it use sram, I suppose I will use it as well.
Since the gameplay difference wont be very consequent with '1 relic", a run going for lowest room count might fall under alternative, or at worse "playground" provided the entertainment is likely going to be low.
Thanks again for the guidance.
So I plan on making a medievil "No DGS" TAS. It's been nearly 2 1/2 years since I made my all chalice TAS, and there are a bunch of new interesting developments in the game. I have a few concerns about the movie and one specific trick that would cause the run not to be submit able. I do still plan on making the movie whether or not it could be accepted. I think it would be a great addition to the site, even if it's classified as playground and or other. So basically there is this trick called the void launch which requires you to enter a certain level and then quit to the main menu. What this does is set an address value from 3 to 0 (0x00). The void launch is a trick that shoots you across the level Scarecrow Fields pretty much, the value indicates which direction it will eject you. The trick is used in RTA runs by entering the ghost ship level and then quitting game , starting a new game, and pretty much a run. Now if this would be allowed in any way shape or form to be used, how would I got about doing it? Would I use saveram, start the movie from the title screen? I honestly don't know the best way of going about this, but regardless the movie will be made. Thanks in advance for any help.
Void Launch vid0x00
How would starting from sram preserve the glitchy value ? if it survive somehow after booting up the bios (in the memory card) you just need to make a seperate verif movie to produce sayd sram.
If you actually meant a savestate I think thats not allowed.
That been sayd I think quiting your game to set the glitch is fine, real question is how slower or faster this will be compared to not starting a new game, if its slower then I guess its playground.
But hey im not a judge so thats just casual answer.
So I plan on making a medievil "No DGS" TAS. It's been nearly 2 1/2 years since I made my all chalice TAS, and there are a bunch of new interesting developments in the game. I have a few concerns about the movie and one specific trick that would cause the run not to be submit able. I do still plan on making the movie whether or not it could be accepted. I think it would be a great addition to the site, even if it's classified as playground and or other. So basically there is this trick called the void launch which requires you to enter a certain level and then quit to the main menu. What this does is set an address value from 3 to 0 (0x00). The void launch is a trick that shoots you across the level Scarecrow Fields pretty much, the value indicates which direction it will eject you. The trick is used in RTA runs by entering the ghost ship level and then quitting game , starting a new game, and pretty much a run. Now if this would be allowed in any way shape or form to be used, how would I got about doing it? Would I use saveram, start the movie from the title screen? I honestly don't know the best way of going about this, but regardless the movie will be made. Thanks in advance for any help.
Void Launch vid0x00
My thought is that it would have to be one continuous submission for Standard, meaning new game, then proceed to a certain level, quit to main menu, and then restart the game and play through to the end. The idea is that you are just modifying an address in ram and not unlocking content.
Although starting from a in game saveram or savestate would be acceptable to Playground : "Runs that start from an in-game save file (SRAM) or an emulator savestate must provide recreation instructions, ideally in the form of a verification file."
Thanks for the feed back you 2. I think this should be playground then. I would prefer to have it as 1 movie to not over complicate things . So to clarify it would be okay to Start New Game > In-game Cheat Code "unlock all levels" > Ghost Ship > Quit Game > Start Game. This does lose like about a minute over RTA, but of course I believe it will still be faster than the world record. I can of course do my best to make that empty minute of the run be as entertaining as possible haha. I am not at all personally concerned about the tas timing, but rather I am doing this movie to compare the main run itself to rta to see the limits of the category. I came into this sorta figuring that it would not be a standard submission, nor have I had to deal with something this odd before. I could also technically split the movies up after the fact now that I think about lol. When I was planning this movie about a year ago this trick did not exist, so it sort of threw a curve ball at me along with a bunch of procrastination.
- Anything regarding the cheat menu is disabled upon quitting game.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11598
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
I think it's publishable to Alternative. The cheat code part makes it not eligible for Standard because that code removes a gameplay requirement instead of unlocking some feature unavailable otherwise.
Single-movie is IMO better because the setup is unique and inherent to this glitch, compared to simply unlocking in-game features as Mike said.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Sorry for asking stuff about sotn again but... I would like to put "bad ending" on my list and since you sayd low% would be standart wether I use sram or not, would this also apply ?
I cant fortell if it will have any other consequences than skipping dialogues at this point, but it is likely to be the only reason to use sram.
Thx in advance for answers.
As far as I can tell there's not really a precedent on how roguelite TASes should be handled regarding savefiles. While most movies tend to start from a "clean slate", roguelites as a genre fundamentally work differently from most other games, since unlocks from one run affect future runs of the game by adding more content such as new items or even new levels and endings. The usual state most roguelikes are played in is a fully completed savefile. Both in regular play and RTA speedruns these games are most often played with all unlocks available.
As it stands right now, creating a TAS that follows this convention is pretty unfeasible, since save-anchored movies require a verification movie. Creating a full 100% movie of a roguelike game, even if unoptimized, is a monumental task due to the time investment required. These games tend to have a lot of content that takes tens of hours to get through to unlock everything.
As far as I can tell I'm the only person to have submitted any roguelite TASes to the site recently, and my approach to them has been... mixed
[5153] Windows The Binding of Isaac: Wrath of the Lamb "Sheol" by rythin in 01:50.67 - starts from a clean file
[5729] Linux Nuclear Throne by rythin in 02:43.80 - starts from a partially completed savefile with a verification movie
#9478: rythin's Windows Balatro "Tutorial" in 02:32.67 - starts from a clean file, though this one requires it
There's also [2650] Windows Spelunky by Tseralith in 01:54.03 which technically starts from a savefile, though I don't believe it's mentioned anywhere and is easy to not realise if one is not familiar with the game (there's usually a forced tutorial at the start, but entering it once marks it as completed. Someone running the movie could just assume the movie desynced when the first level layout doesn't match, run it again and now with the tutorial completed it appears to sync fine)
Now working on a roguelite movie that does require a fair bit of unlock progress, I'm running into a dilemma of how I should handle this. Should I:
a) simply create the TAS on a 100%ed file of the game to follow the usual convention the game is played in
b) create the TAS from a fresh file and include the unlock process in the movie.
c) create a verification movie that unlocks just enough progress to reach my goal in one run
I believe option a) to be the best as it most aligns with how these games are experienced in other forms of gameplay, but applying it would require changes to the rules regarding save-anchored movies.
I think option b) is also fine, and it can be applied without any changes to the rules, though it will result in movies created this way to deviate significantly from what might be expected for a TAS of a certain game to look like.
I find option c) to be the worst of the three. Depending on the game a verification movie for a certain goal might be unreasonably tedious to create, and playing on a partially completed savefile personally just feels arbitrary when the completion is only limited by how much of the unlocks the author felt like doing in the verification movie.
As far as I understand it the requirement for a verification movie stems from the fact that the savefile a movie starts from must be legitimately creatable from within the game. This is a fair rule, but with how TASVideos in general seems to be moving in the direction of becoming less strict on many aspects of getting a TAS accepted, maybe this could be another area to look at in that regard?
Would love some guidance here primarily of what to do with my current project, but also to start a conversation on the ruling mentioned, as it does feel a little outdated.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11598
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
arukAdo wrote:
Sorry for asking stuff about sotn again but... I would like to put "bad ending" on my list and since you sayd low% would be standart wether I use sram or not, would this also apply ?
I cant fortell if it will have any other consequences than skipping dialogues at this point, but it is likely to be the only reason to use sram.
Thx in advance for answers.
Bad ending is not a standard goal on its own, at least not yet. I don't see why this can't go to Alternative tho.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11598
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
rythin wrote:
a) simply create the TAS on a 100%ed file of the game to follow the usual convention the game is played in
Does that save file already exist and is it already verified by the game's community and hosted by it?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11598
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Some time ago Masterjun suggested a neat solution to this problem that would prevent complete chaos. Allow third-party approved savegame files if the respective community considers it legit and relies on it, but if a movie is made on a full verification movie, it'd obsolete. We haven't decided anything yet, for example can the latter even be slower and still obsolete, but this case sounds like a perfect reason to start this discussion for real.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Some time ago Masterjun suggested a neat solution to this problem that would prevent complete chaos. Allow third-party approved savegame files if the respective community considers it legit and relies on it, but if a movie is made on a full verification movie, it'd obsolete. We haven't decided anything yet, for example can the latter even be slower and still obsolete, but this case sounds like a perfect reason to start this discussion for real.
I have differing opinions on third party saves for ones that are solely used to unlock a character or mode, versus a third party savefile that uses data like carryover equipment and abilities for NG+. Also do not want a slower tas to obsolete a faster one unless there is some emulation or regional difference reason.
1) Third Party saves that are used just unlocking characters or modes without a verification movie should be acceptable. Very low chance of hex editing since it is only unlocking a mode or character and nothing from the savefile otherwise would effect the time of the tas.
2) Tases that use a third party save that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities I do not want to be acceptable without a verification movie. I would suspect them of hex editing especially if there is a long period of grinding. Think Chrono Trigger NG+ for example. Would still want a verification movie since I would not trust it. There is a large incentive for the player or taser to try and make the "optimal save". They could make the save then post it to the community for use and after a period it would be "legitimized". Basically laundering hex edited saves to make them legit.
While in certain cases obsoleting a faster tas exists, but those are for reasons like emulation or region differences. Here it would just be a matter of trust. I know if I was a new user I would get really upset if one of my tases was obsoleted by a slower tas just because my savefile which I had trusted was seemingly deemed unacceptable after publishing. As a judge I would understand, but thinking those kind of obsoletions would just spread confusion and anger. We know most users do not even read the full movie rules and it is foreseeable that drama would result from allowing slower tases obsoleting actual faster ones.
I would be open for tases that use a third party saves that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities for the non-publishable playground class though.
Some time ago Masterjun suggested a neat solution to this problem that would prevent complete chaos. Allow third-party approved savegame files if the respective community considers it legit and relies on it, but if a movie is made on a full verification movie, it'd obsolete. We haven't decided anything yet, for example can the latter even be slower and still obsolete, but this case sounds like a perfect reason to start this discussion for real.
I have differing opinions on third party saves for ones that are solely used to unlock a character or mode, versus a third party savefile that uses data like carryover equipment and abilities for NG+. Also do not want a slower tas to obsolete a faster one unless there is some emulation or regional difference reason.
1) Third Party saves that are used just unlocking characters or modes without a verification movie should be acceptable. Very low chance of hex editing since it is only unlocking a mode or character and nothing from the savefile otherwise would effect the time of the tas.
2) Tases that use a third party save that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities I do not want to be acceptable without a verification movie. I would suspect them of hex editing especially if there is a long period of grinding. Think Chrono Trigger NG+ for example. Would still want a verification movie since I would not trust it. There is a large incentive for the player or taser to try and make the "optimal save". They could make the save then post it to the community for use and after a period it would be "legitimized". Basically laundering hex edited saves to make them legit.
While in certain cases obsoleting a faster tas exists, but those are for reasons like emulation or region differences. Here it would just be a matter of trust. I know if I was a new user I would get really upset if one of my tases was obsoleted by a slower tas just because my savefile which I had trusted was seemingly deemed unacceptable after publishing. As a judge I would understand, but thinking those kind of obsoletions would just spread confusion and anger. We know most users do not even read the full movie rules and it is foreseeable that drama would result from allowing slower tases obsoleting actual faster ones.
I would be open for tases that use a third party saves that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities for the non-publishable playground class though.
If it’s written in the rules (that the longer run that uses the verified save file will obsolete an unverified save run) and someone complains/starts drama because they didn’t read the rules before submitting, we point them to the rules and say (as politely as possible) “it’s been written there since before your submission, you have no grounds for complaint.”
EDIT: I don’t particularly like the idea of unverified/third-party saves, but I’m not going to argue strongly one way or the other
In February, I submitted a 201 frame publication for Famidash. On February 28th, a new version of the game released, adding more content, and I created another submission for that version.
My question is, do I cancel the first submission? I’m going to be honest, I think the current publication is poor in quality. It isn’t optimized and there is little interesting playaround, despite the game offering a lot of opportunity for it. I’d like to have the 201 frame improvement accepted, as there would at least be an optimal TAS of version 1.1 before it gets obsoleted by the 1.2 TAS. Does the 201 frame improvement have any chance of getting accepted?
Additionally, will the version 1.2 TAS get accepted? Figured I’d ask since I don’t think I’ve seen any other examples of a game on TASVideos being given more content in an update, although I could be wrong. The 1.2 TAS is longer, but it’s more representative of the game in its current state (and more interesting than the 1.1 TAS in my opinion). Is there any sort of written policy on this?
I’d also hate to get pedantic, but the collectable coins in Geometry Dash are called “Secret Coins” in-game. Famidash technically doesn’t have a name for them, but I’d assume the same name applies, considering it’s a demake of the Geometry Dash. Is “main levels, all Secret Coins” a better branch name or is “main levels, all coins” still accurate?
Would “main levels” without the coins be accepted? When you collect a coin, you are forced to wait for it to get tallied on the score screen. Sure it’s technically fastest completion, but it doesn’t offer anything different from “main levels, all coins” other than intentionally missing the coins and getting free timesave at the score screen from it. The level route and skips are still the same.
Lastly, I’m working on an “all levels, all coins” TAS of the game. Is this an acceptable branch, or is just “all levels” preferable? I’m reusing my inputs from the “main levels, all coins” TAS I made to save time. Is this allowed? Frowned upon? Should I change the inputs in the main levels to make it more visually distinct from the existing submission I made? Should I just make a “custom levels, all coins” TAS instead?
Many thanks for taking a look at my many questions. I apologise if anything isn’t super clear here.
In February, I submitted a 201 frame publication for Famidash. On February 28th, a new version of the game released, adding more content, and I created another submission for that version.
My question is, do I cancel the first submission? I’m going to be honest, I think the current publication is poor in quality. It isn’t optimized and there is little interesting playaround, despite the game offering a lot of opportunity for it. I’d like to have the 201 frame improvement accepted, as there would at least be an optimal TAS of version 1.1 before it gets obsoleted by the 1.2 TAS. Does the 201 frame improvement have any chance of getting accepted?
Additionally, will the version 1.2 TAS get accepted? Figured I’d ask since I don’t think I’ve seen any other examples of a game on TASVideos being given more content in an update, although I could be wrong. The 1.2 TAS is longer, but it’s more representative of the game in its current state (and more interesting than the 1.1 TAS in my opinion). Is there any sort of written policy on this?
We have this in our rules:
Any release version or update patch of a game may be used, though you should be able to explain why you chose that version.
If there is a significant difference in content between the versions, there is a possibility we may allow both versions as separate publications. That said, I can't guarantee that version 1.2 wouldn't obsolete version 1.1 if all the content from v1.1 is seen in v1.2. I will state that 1.2 would likely be the prefered version (as the more complete version of the game) if we were only going to accept one of the versions for publication.
The current v1.1 TASon the workbench still can be accepted even if it would ultimately be obsoleted by a v1.2 run. (I've gone ahead and claimed both of the workbench runs). Assuming the v1.1 run is acceptable, I'll make sure to delay judgement on the v1.2 run until the updated v1.1 is published. That way, even if v1.2 does end up obsoleting the v1.1 runs, the obsoletion tree will show the better of the v1.1 runs as having been accepted/published.
I'll have to discuss with other staff regarding whether or not the v1.2 run should obsolete v1.1 or be split into a separate publication. If you haven't already, please explain, in detail, the differences betwee the versions in your v1.2 submission notes. That will help us as staff to better decide on what to do with the various versions of the game.
Walgrey wrote:
I’d also hate to get pedantic, but the collectable coins in Geometry Dash are called “Secret Coins” in-game. Famidash technically doesn’t have a name for them, but I’d assume the same name applies, considering it’s a demake of the Geometry Dash. Is “main levels, all Secret Coins” a better branch name or is “main levels, all coins” still accurate?
Either is valid in my opinion. If you feel that specifying "secret" is preferred, you can edit the submission yourself and change the goal name.
Walgrey wrote:
Would “main levels” without the coins be accepted? When you collect a coin, you are forced to wait for it to get tallied on the score screen. Sure it’s technically fastest completion, but it doesn’t offer anything different from “main levels, all coins” other than intentionally missing the coins and getting free timesave at the score screen from it. The level route and skips are still the same.
Potentially, though again, I can't guarantee. A no-coins/minimal coins run would likely be the fastest way to beat the game due to managing less time counting on the score screen. The improvements in time may only appear to occur on the score tally screens, but they would result from different gameplay. So it could be argued that getting the coins and beating the game as fast as possible is a different goal than just beating the game as fast as possible due to different gameplay optimization techniques.
It could also be noted that runs obbtaining coins aren't going for the baseline fastest possible optimization of the game (Standard Class) and would thus be Alternative goals; I'll bring this point of difference up with other judges when I bring up the version issue in staff chat as I'm able.
Walgrey wrote:
Lastly, I’m working on an “all levels, all coins” TAS of the game. Is this an acceptable branch, or is just “all levels” preferable? I’m reusing my inputs from the “main levels, all coins” TAS I made to save time. Is this allowed? Frowned upon? Should I change the inputs in the main levels to make it more visually distinct from the existing submission I made? Should I just make a “custom levels, all coins” TAS instead?
An "all levels" or "all levels, all coins" TAS would probably fall under our standard class definition for "full completion," and it would likely be acceptable along side a baseline "main levels" run. Re-using input is absolutely fine to do for overlapping content. Given how much we are about trying to optimize games here; it would seem odd to tell someone to do more work than necessary just to make overlapping aspects of two separate runs be slightly different visually, yet to also maintain the same level of optimization. Re-using the inputs saves you time and work!
As mentioned above, I can't say if a separation of publications between obtaining or foregoing coins would be the case; so I can't currently make a recommendation on "all levels" vs. "all levels, all coins" run.
I have differing opinions on third party saves for ones that are solely used to unlock a character or mode, versus a third party savefile that uses data like carryover equipment and abilities for NG+. Also do not want a slower tas to obsolete a faster one unless there is some emulation or regional difference reason.
1) Third Party saves that are used just unlocking characters or modes without a verification movie should be acceptable. Very low chance of hex editing since it is only unlocking a mode or character and nothing from the savefile otherwise would effect the time of the tas.
2) Tases that use a third party save that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities I do not want to be acceptable without a verification movie. I would suspect them of hex editing especially if there is a long period of grinding. Think Chrono Trigger NG+ for example. Would still want a verification movie since I would not trust it. There is a large incentive for the player or taser to try and make the "optimal save". They could make the save then post it to the community for use and after a period it would be "legitimized". Basically laundering hex edited saves to make them legit.
While in certain cases obsoleting a faster tas exists, but those are for reasons like emulation or region differences. Here it would just be a matter of trust. I know if I was a new user I would get really upset if one of my tases was obsoleted by a slower tas just because my savefile which I had trusted was seemingly deemed unacceptable after publishing. As a judge I would understand, but thinking those kind of obsoletions would just spread confusion and anger. We know most users do not even read the full movie rules and it is foreseeable that drama would result from allowing slower tases obsoleting actual faster ones.
I would be open for tases that use a third party saves that carry over equipment or character statistics and abilities for the non-publishable playground class though.
I'm unfamiliar with console TASing in general but why is hex editing (i assume same thing as editing a plaintext savefile with notepad) an issue? Especially to skip hours of grinding for a movie that would use lots of items carried over into NG+, isn't that the whole point of allowing community approved savefiles? The only other reason to allow them I could see is in cases where a verification movie can't be provided, which I imagine would be <1% of all save anchored movies.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11598
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Hacking a save file has been traditionally seen as a very nasty way to cheat, but in reality it only happened once as a joke, however a judge quit over it.
#3519: RingRush's PSX Croc: Legend of the Gobbos "glitched" in 01:10.12
It's hard to tell how common this problem is to have a rule to protect against it, maybe post-moderation combined with ban is enough for those who actually lie about what they've done with save files. And we can unpublish if something goes unbelievably bad.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
