"Warp to Ganon" could just be simplified to "warp glitch" really
Wouldn't a credits warp be just a different kind of warp glitch, tho? "warp glitch" is far too generic
At that point it would be game end glitch, which oh this movie is that.
if "defeat Ganon" is too generic because a glitchless run would also defeat Ganon, then "warp glitch" is also similarly generic bc this run also uses a warp glitch.
Game end glitches are achieved through warp glitches in this game, so if your goal is specificity, then you need to specify "warp to Ganon"
Sorry, I completely forgot that the labelless movie also performs major skips. Indeed, in this case we can distinguish the two run goals only by looking at which one skips right to the credits via a glitch.
Ok, thank you, that's along the lines of what I was asking.
I'm not following the OoT scene closely, so I wasn't implying that the labelless movie is the most common way to play the game. If you think that it isn't the case here, then we can discuss for adding a proper label to that movie.
Yeah, I think leaving the old TAS label-less creates confusion. When it was created, it may have had the sole goal of "complete the game as fast as possible", but if you look at how OoT has changed in the past year or so, that's no longer the case. I think the best label you could find for it is "Defeat Ganon", or some other "defeat the final boss" style text. I say "Defeat Ganon" because that's what the RTA category is called.
Mind that obsoletion management and movie labelling are two separate issues. The judges define the requirements for obsoleting a movie, while the publishers define the label that explains the movie contents.
This is interesting, so basically if I'm understanding it right, the 4 ways to complete the game I mentioned could in theory be considered 4 different branches? I can see how that could be the case, with publication or lack thereof being dependent on how distinct the runs are from each other.
In that case yes, I would suggest, at least for now, the "Defeat Ganon" label for the old publication.
ok, sorry, I now read your previous post
ThunderAxe31 wrote:
For the case of this game, it's very simple: just beat the game without using arbitrary code execution, as it's the currently known way of skipping more than half of the game.
I hope this clears it a bit, but if you still have doubts, feel free to point them out.
But the thing about it is, this is just not true! The old TAS, without stale reference manipulation, absolutely beat the game with VERY little of the game beaten. It used an extremely major skip to warp directly from the end of the first level to the final boss, and was labelled as such! It just was also left branchless, whereas this is branched!
ThunderAxe31 wrote:
Instead, we leave the label blank in order to denote that that movie beats the game without showcasing any glitch in particular, and/or follows a restriction that makes it closer to the most common way of playing the game.
Again, this isn't how you're implementing it! The other one is branchless just because of historical reasons and I don't think it should be. If you want to let people know what the movie is about, I think it should be branched as "defeat Ganon", to clarify that this is what people are signing up for.
There's 4 ways a TAS can beat the game quickly:
1) use ACE to warp to the credits
2) use ACE to warp to the final boss
3) use non-ACE methods to warp to the credits
4) use non-ACE methods to warp to the final boss
Which one(s) would you consider branchless?
EDIT: In case it wasn't clear, my point was that I don't think OoT can have a branchless category anymore. "Defeat Ganon" seems like the best way to solve this imo
To me, it's a matter of what's purely possible in-game. I.E, the branchless run should be the extent of what is possible without outside interference. When you introduce ACE, save or memory corruption into the equation (that is, adding in things explicitly done with the console hardware that isn't necessarily relevant to the game), it makes more sense to branch it as such to make sure it doesn't compete with what can be considered a more standard any% run.
As long as stale reference manipulation (explaining it so that people don't confuse SRM with SRAM) is completely possible within the bounds of the game (no ACE whatsoever), yes it could theoretically obsolete the branchless run, but we would have to see it and decide for ourselves in order to be 100% certain of that. If it ends up being too similar to this run, it may not be published due to the redundancy clause.
If the dividing line is whether or not you use ACE, then GEG is not a good branch name for this run imo, considering you can do a credits warp that looks just as "game ending glitch"-y without using ACE?
To put it as simply and bluntly as possible, the reason "game end glitch" is always a separate category on TASvideos is so there are... For lack of a better term, "normal" TASes of games still published and easily available to watch.
We are not SRC, nor are we any RTA community. We have to define a wide, generalized set of rules that apply to every single game that could end up getting published here. We can't make exceptions for anything just because the specific RTA community does it, because the specific RTA community doesn't have thousands of other games to worry about at the same time. In that way, giving the branch to GEG makes so much more sense, since it's clear that GEG can and will only ever compete with itself, as it should.
[4032] NES Super Mario Bros. 3 "game end glitch" by Masterjun & ais523 in 00:00.78[3922] NES Super Mario Bros. 3 "warps" by Lord_Tom, Maru & Tompa in 10:24.34
If GEG was explicitly treated as any%, the latter run would not be published right now. The current high bar of the publication history that includes the most iconic TAS of all time, the one that literally started the site, would have been obsoleted by less than a second of a title screen followed by immediate credits. Several incredibly entertaining runs would suffer the same fate. A precedent would be set that GEG can obsolete different branches, so we'd be inundated with new, extremely similar runs, just that the subframe input also codes in 100% completion or whatever. Heat death of the site soon follows.
Probably.
Why would that be? Why not call the fastest category "any%" and the categories that do more interesting stuff by actual category names?
If GEG is treated as any%, then you can easily publish the other one as "no GEG", nothing else changes. The only difference is which one you consider "default".
EDIT: why not have category names for all of them? Why not call Bloob and Grunz's run "no SRM"?
So, could what the RTA community calls a "Defeat Ganon (SRM)" run be something that obsoletes the old Grunz & Bloob run?
It uses SRM to warp to ganondorf instead of the credits, and you can do it with or without ACE. (with ACE I think it's basically the same as this run only you warp to the Ganon fight instead of the credits)
PS: As far as I understand, there is no sandbox breaking. There is just a new function in the rom, that usually triggers when the credits are reached, which tells the emulator to stop emulating and play a movie file instead. This function is easier to trigger than normal credits, since normal credits need a few criteria to be set. (but you can trigger normal credits on the GC-rom with glitches as well, they will just have graphical bugs, which is why Nintendo replaced them with the movie file).
The new 7:16 7:13 RTA route does have sandbox breaking (the old uhh I think it was 8:12? one didn't). Instead of running the function in the rom, they discovered a weird thing the GC emulator does that allows them to break out and play the movie file directly, which seems to be faster to implement.
It just turns out that for TAS, that's slower than just straight-up writing the cutscene value with a bunch of instructions with two controllers, by about 5 seconds.
Does reaching the end screen count as completing the game? I apologize for asking a stupid question. These new runs got me confused
Yup - it's a debate that happened a long time ago, when the very first wrong warp to the credits was discovered back in 2012. The majority opinion ended up being that yes, it did count, and it was used in the route for a short period of time before Ganondoor was figured out.
Link to video
I wonder if anyone would be willing to put in the effort to port it to BizHawk and submit it with Homerfunky's approval? Maybe even console verify it?
It kinda sucks that this new crazy stuff isn't getting to be submitted tbh.
Apparently there's a couple of people TASing ABC stars for a possible 70-star 1xA route.
Iwer Sonsch and fifdspence have been posting some videos, this is their latest one:
Link to video
I don't think it sets up anything in RAM - resets clear RAM. What she does is a setup to set the Controller 3 stick to the correct angle beforehand and do the slingshot skip I linked to.
That's definitely not legit for RTA wr yet - people are still discussing it.
In a TAS, you wouldn't do that, you'd just set Controller 3 to the correct angle manually.
Credit warp from graveyard: https://youtu.be/wX-QfHP5LfY
Still needs zora mask but gets it via SRM from the grave. Could maybe be faster than moon warp?
Nice!
I hope so but I'm not too optimistic unless more improvements are found. It takes 4 minutes from the Graveyard, and getting bombs and getting to the graveyard sounds like it would take more than 2 minutes. I think it would be close, though, and with more improvements it could be faster.
I'm still in awe at just how fast the current strategy is without using ACE tbh.
It's ~6 minutes RTA from the start of Cycle 2, split roughly in half between "Setting up the Wrong Warp" and "being on the moon".
if ACE Credits Warp manages to shave, say, 2 minutes off the run, that may sound like only a modest improvement if you compare it to the full 28 (RTA) minutes, but if you only look at the part of the run we can actually improve SRM strategies on then that's a 33% improvement.
...Honestly, I wonder what the TAS of the current route would look like.
You'd be able to get more chus but idk if it would save enough time to be worth it?
- What necessary effect has Return A? Can't we simply do normal "walking while talking", walk to the rock, pick it up and carry it towards the Deku Tree area loading trigger? From what I understood the main benefit of Return A here is, that it makes the camera follow link until we get to the rock. Would the rock be unloaded otherwise without the camera pointing at it?
- Do we have to get Mido out of the way to be able to carry the rock towards the Deku Tree area or would he be unloaded during the "walking while talking" process?
1) Yeah, the rock would be unloaded otherwise, and part of the setup is unloading the rock as you're grabbing it.
Sword may be required to cancel Return A to snap the camera back after picking up the rock (not 100% on that), it's needed to load in the spin attack aura into memory for the heap manip iirc, and for position setups on RTA
2) I think we need to get Mido out of the way to come back from the Deku Baba area, and also for the heap manip, at least that's what I've gathered.
It really does seem like all 3 items are crucial.
