I agree very much with greginator on this.
"Our run is 100% which means we have to beat every level that small mario is capable of beating."
This pretty much ends the discussion as far as I'm concerned.
I agree very much with greginator on this.
"Our run is 100% which means we have to beat every level that small mario is capable of beating."
This pretty much ends the discussion as far as I'm concerned.
The entertainment in a small-only run would lie in the crazy circumstances that still allow level completion. Like skamastaG said, switch palaces would ruin Star World 4. Yoshi would ruin a level like CI3 (I think).
We've all seen levels beat with switch palaces, or yoshis, or capes. TASes are supposed to produce entertainment, which is often done by doing the unexpected.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Joined: 6/25/2006
Posts: 138
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Yoshi isn't allowed but they are saying that switch palaces should be included.
I see what you guys are saying but what does this do to SW4, SW5, VD1, maybe others.
I just fear that the run will lose lots of its entertainment value when you add switch palaces. SW4 and 5 are probably the coolest levels done small and will be ruined by the switch palaces. I think it is cooler to watch small mario being forced to perform jawdropping Macgyver like tasks with no aid than to cheat by getting the switch palaces.
EDIT:
We've all seen levels beat with switch palaces, or yoshis, or capes. TASes are supposed to produce entertainment, which is often done by doing the unexpected.
That's exactly what I was trying to say. Thanks for wording it so nicely JXQ.
The entertainment in a small-only run would lie in the crazy circumstances that still allow level completion. Like skamastaG said, switch palaces would ruin Star World 4. Yoshi would ruin a level like CI3 (I think).
We've all seen levels beat with switch palaces, or yoshis, or capes. TASes are supposed to produce entertainment, which is often done by doing the unexpected.
Yeah, yeah, we all know that's what the run should be like, but the question is how do you put that into a short, succint blurb, like Fabian was trying to do (e.g. "never gets a powerup")? If you can't put it into a blurb, the chances are that the definition is going to be "loose" and generate some discussion/controversy.
I don't know anymore, I guess you're right, skamastaG and JXQ. It seems pretty stupid to choose to include fewer of the cool small mario tricks. I do think it seems pretty stupid to arbitrarily skip 4 exits you can complete as well, but yeah, producing entertainment (sup Warp!) is what it's about, and missing out on those tricks would be pretty unfortunate.
So I guess put me in the no switch palace camp.
it desyncs at the ghost house... But even before that it's not minimalist, and every level is much slower than the current TAS. Am I missing something here?
Joined: 6/25/2006
Posts: 138
Location: Fort Collins, CO
I am 100% sure that DGH TSA exit is impossible small.
I am also 100% sure that SW1 both exits are impossible small.
CBA might however be possbible. It didn't work for me but I never thought of trying it with p-speed. This might work if you jump at the bottom of the rope.
I am 99% sure VoB 4 is impossible small. The only way it could work is if you get pushed through the wall by the spring while holding a shell then bounce off of the shell into the key area. Then have the key push you through the wall and somehow grab the key on your way out and keyjump up onto the surface. This is a pretty crazy idea and I don't know how going through walls works but this wall looks hollow so you shouldn't get killed. I am not going to count it out just yet because I have been proven wrong on many occasions before where a trick that I thought was impossble was performed and proven possible.
So far only 3 exits are absolutely impossible small. VoB4 is also most likely impossible but I don't know about CBA.
You mean the walls just to the left and right of the key? The ones that jut up out of the ground? They look hollow, but they aren't. They are kill triggers. Also, I don't think it is possible to go through a wall completely from left to right because the wall will push mario left. Right to left is possible. In the FoI3 trick mario doesn't go completely through the wall, he goes about 3/4 of the way then kicks a shell and is forced out of the left side of the wall.
I still stand by my statement that Switch Palaces should be included. If they are included, maybe 4 seconds of "entertainment" would be sacrificed (see third paragraph). I think getting 4 more exits is worth the 4 seconds. I'm sure there will be plently of crazy stunts like the CI3 thing that have nothing to do with Switch Palaces (or lack thereof) anyway, so they will make up for it.
DK64_MASTER wrote:
Yeah, yeah, we all know that's what the run should be like, but the question is how do you put that into a short, succint blurb, like Fabian was trying to do (e.g. "never gets a powerup")? If you can't put it into a blurb, the chances are that the definition is going to be "loose" and generate some discussion/controversy.
I agree with this. Our run should be able to have a short bullet point explaining the restriction such as "only uses small Mario" or "does not collect powerups." I would argue that a Switch Palace is not considered a powerup. Having "only uses small Mario AND doesnt get any Switch Palacs" doesnt sound right, and it seems that one resitriction is enough for a run. As I said earlier, adding more and more specific restrictions is a slippery slope.
If I understand correctly, people are opposed to using Switch Palaces because they take away entertainmnet value from certain levels, namely SW4 and SW5. Well consider this: Star World is entered before the Blue Switch Palace is reached, and both the Yellow and Green Switch Palaces could be completed after Special World without losing any time. So during Star World, only the Red Switch Palace would be activated, which would do nothing for SW5 and not really change SW4 much. You might be able to go from the left side for SW4 with the red switch platform, but it would still require some kind of shell jump and would still be impressive. So really the whole "Switch Palaces mess up Star World" stand is a non-issue. Thus the only place where entertainment is lost is a small section of DP1 key which would last about 4 seconds. I think 4 exits > 4 seconds.
Yes thats true. So I guess SW4 wouldnt be quite as entertaining, but it is a tool-assisted speedrun. I think the timesaver by getting the switches there is big enough to justify the short lack of entertainment it would cause. Plus 4 more exits, not pointlessly restricting the run, yada yada yada.
EDIT: I really havent been considering the route that much because I've been assuming it will follow Fabian's more or less, but if CBA is impossible it would mean a different entrance to Star World, which would affect the switches present there. So I guess we need to know about CBA before we think too much about switches.
Yes thats true. So I guess SW4 wouldnt be quite as entertaining, but it is a tool-assisted speedrun. I think the timesaver by getting the switches there is big enough to justify the short lack of entertainment it would cause. Plus 4 more exits, not pointlessly restricting the run, yada yada yada.
Hmm, it would be interesting if we could put up a poll, and see what the general community wants, but that's probably not going to happen. Also this debate is treading closely to speed vs entertainment, which is another grey area.
My personal opinion is that...
I still want to stick to a blurb description, and follow that to a T.
Let's say our blurb is "never collects a powerup"
Wiki defines power up as "an object that instantly benefit or add extra abilities to the game character."
And although Wiki isn't the best of sources, it MAY represent a large percent of the community who CARES what a power up is.
Using this definition (which I believe comes from the majority) we can conclude that a power-up does not include switch palace activation. Activation provides power ups, as your character ability is the same after activation.
So include the switch palaces, just don't use them.
Edit: I am well aware than I sound like Nate. ;)
So include the switch palaces, just don't use them.
When you say dont use them, do you mean dont hit them to collect mushrooms/capes from them or dont walk on them? If you mean the latter, it would look weird to have the switches there and not use them for levels like VD1 and SW4. If you mean the former, I agree.
I meant the former for sure.
Although "walking on them" got me thinking... Would using them at all (even touching them) be an improvement to a character ability? I don't think so, but they do make a difference in SW4. If I say "don't even touch them", we would have to make special effort to avoid them in SW4 too.
Heh, this is pretty complex.
Are you kidding me?
What on Earth will completing four more switch palaces do for this run? Add four levels that bring nothing extra to the run, and make other levels potentially less entertaining. If you don't have crazy antics like SW4 and SW5, this run is not worth watching. Watch the regular run instead.
You can't say that the term "speedrun" matters when you are already putting such a game-changing restriction is being placed. Your selling point is that you are doing things in a different way. Do it fast, yes, but don't give up your meat and potatoes to do so.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
I meant the former for sure.
Would using them at all (even touching them) be an improvement to a character ability?
Definately not. Think of this: for CI3, a shell is used as temporary solid ground for Mario to jump off of, getting him somewhere he wouldnt normally be able to reach. Switches fit the exact same definaition, they are, like a shell, just added solid ground to aid Mario. If you dont think the platform created by the switches should be allowed, you might as well outlaw shell jumps as well. And here we going, spiraling away...
You need to keep the definaition rigid and straightforward. You cant (dis)allow some things and not others. The only rule for this is that you cannot collect a powerup. Switches are not a powerup. And I dont think anyone would get mad if a p-balloon was not considered a power either. It is in them same class of items as a p-switch, which is allowed. I'm just gonna throw a list of stuff out there to help reduce confusion:
Not allowed:
Mushroom
Fireflower
Feather/Cape
"Adult" Yoshi
Star
Allowed: Everthing else.
This is the easiest way to classify the run: a concrete list that cannot be disputed.
EDIT: JXQ I didnt see your post. You make a pretty good point. Ahh I hate this debate. Now I think I might change my mind.
Are you kidding me?
What on Earth will completing four more switch palaces do for this run? Add four levels that bring nothing extra to the run, and make other levels potentially less entertaining. If you don't have crazy antics like SW4 and SW5, this run is not worth watching. Watch the regular run instead.
You can't say that the term "speedrun" matters when you are already putting such a game-changing restriction is being placed. Your selling point is that you are doing things in a different way. Do it fast, yes, but don't give up your meat and potatoes to do so.
So you really think a goal of "completes every possible goal as small mario except for switch palaces" will fly around this site (I'm not saying it won't)? Can you say "akward"?
Edit: I'm mainly concern on how the run is going to be described in the movie description. I'm sure we'll get a lot of confusion and maybe a lot of non-enthusiastic voters because of this somewhat obscurely described goal. But then again, the voting system only plays a "part" in if the run gets published or not.
Find a better way to describe it, and I'll agree with JXQ, JF, and Fabian (not sure about Skank's stance on this, as I haven't read the topic too closely).
So you really think a goal of "completes every possible goal as small mario except for switch palaces" will fly around this site (I'm not saying it won't)? Can you say "akward"?
Why bother splitting hairs with semantics, or worrying about what "flies" on this site? Make an entertaining enough movie, and the community will demand its publication.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
So you really think a goal of "completes every possible goal as small mario except for switch palaces" will fly around this site (I'm not saying it won't)? Can you say "akward"?
Why bother splitting hairs with semantics, or worrying about what "flies" on this site? Make an entertaining enough movie, and the community will demand its publication.
I hope that's the case then. Irregardless of if you include switch palaces or not, I will be voting with the fact that chosen goal is to provide entertainment, rather to cause confusion.
And I realize how much of a dumbass I look how because I can't spell "awkward" correctly.
Okay here is what I suggest for a goal descption. They are in order of importance, so the first condition has presedence over the second if the two contradict each other.
1. Does not collect any powerups.
2. Completes every level possible.
Now the definition of "powerup" can be manipulated to fit the needs of this run. The question of "is a switch a powerup?" doesnt really matter since it can be argued either way. The question that matters is "do we want a switch be consider a powerup?", since no matter the answer it could be justified. This should take the semantics of what is and isnt a powerup out of this discussion.
I feel that the "officiality" of the run (and to a lesser extent speed, although that is alread compromised by Rule 1 anyway) is what is driving the pro-switch argument. Added entertainment is what is driving the anti-switch argument. I'm starting to think that entertainment is in fact more important than officiality.
EDIT: I missed like three posts. Since I was pretty much the only person arguing for swiches and I have changed my mind, is it case closed? I think having Rules 1 and 2 clear up any confusion about this run, as long as the fact that switches are considered a powerup is specified.
Okay here is what I suggest for a goal descption. They are in order of importance, so the first condition has presedence over the second if the two contradict each other.
1. Does not collect any powerups.
2. Completes every level possible.
Now the definition of "powerup" can be manipulated to fit the needs of this run. The question of "is a switch a powerup?" doesnt really matter since it can be argued either way. The question that matters is "do we want a switch be consider a powerup?", since no matter the answer it couild be justified. This should take the semantics of what is and isnt a powerup out of this discussion.
I feel that the "officiality" of the run (and to a lesser extent speed, although that is alread compromised by Rule 1 anyway) is what is driving the pro-switch argument. Added entertainment is what is driving the anti-switch argument. I'm starting to think that entertainment is in fact more important than officiality.
No, that's awkward.
I'm just playing with you. I understand what you are saying. We can encompass the reason behind not including the switch palaces because they can be "considered" as a power up.
I guess that works for people who like semantics. But you win on a technicality ;).
Case closed (until BOMF shows up).
