DarkKobold: As noted here, by the original author of this movie, if the goal were to be changed to 'fastest end to input' then this submitted movie is sub-optimal. Thus, this improvement is not actually an improvement. Rejecting for a false improvement.
Secondly, while I'm not going to make any assumptions about the submitters intentions, I would like to say that if you are going to use someone's input, you should contact them first to discuss it, before just submitting the movie. Simply changing the final boss and resubmitting with your name on it, regardless of intentions, is questionable.
Finally, this is not the same situation as this submission. Copying input versus copying strategy are two very different entities. Moozooh's sadly ignored post does a perfect job of explaining this.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11495
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Published run Submitted run
I like the submnitted part better, it is more variative & superhuman (seriously, MORE superhuman than current).
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.
What do you guys think about linking to this submission from the published movie's description, explaining the difference? Something along the following lines:
An alternative ending that postpones the final hit to Shredder, but ends input 40 frames earlier, has been suggested by X2poet and can be seen here.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
I prefer adelikat’s version with hitbox abuse, I think this should be rejected
edit: though that route change adelikat talked about could be interesting…
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3576)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4754
Location: Tennessee
scrimpeh wrote:
Now let me dump my opinion here. Personally, I prefer to avoid confusion and just find the first frame the game needs no more input to self-comlpete. It works for every game, is a clear method for comparison and it results in the shortest movie overall.
Hence arukAdo and I decided not to include Phil's little Dance at the end in Super Castlevania 4, for example. Not that it really makes a difference if we're only talking about a few frames here, but, oh well.
What about this movie? It is an extreme example but still, he saves a few second of input but makes the movie about 5 minutes longer. One could easily argue this movie is a 10 minute tas not a 5 minute one. My point is that this is a subjective issue and that a rule isn't a good one just because it makes things easy by removing the subjectiveness.
Warp wrote:
I like this one the most:
* End input as soon as no further input can make the game ending happen faster.
I have always preferred this too and is almost always my choice in my TASes. That was the choice in this movie which is why I did not choose the this tactic. Keeping shredder further away costs a few frames even though it shortens the necessary number of input frames.
Joined: 6/23/2009
Posts: 2227
Location: Georgia, USA
I haven't had a chance to actually watch this movie, but thanks to feos's awesome little images, I see the main change involved. Each ending definitely has its own merits. x2poet's version makes the battle look really easy, and adelikat's version ends sooner and gives the impression of "How is the turtle not getting hurt??"
I think that, in this case, ending input earlier doesn't seem particularly impressive (especially compared to the early input end in Gimmick!, for instance). I prefer adelikat's manner of ending the run, and I'll vote No on this.
However, x2poet, I thank you for trying your hand at old movies and finding possible improvements! I definitely appreciate the work you've done on this, even if I don't feel it should end up on the front page.
Used to be a frequent submissions commenter. My new computer has had some issues running emulators, so I've been here more sporadically.
Still haven't gotten around to actually TASing yet... I was going to improve Kid Dracula for GB. It seems I was beaten to it, though, with a recent awesome run by Hetfield90 and StarvinStruthers. (http://tasvideos.org/2928M.html.)
Thanks to goofydylan8 for running Gargoyle's Quest 2 because I mentioned the game! (http://tasvideos.org/2001M.html)
Thanks to feos and MESHUGGAH for taking up runs of Duck Tales 2 because of my old signature!
Thanks also to Samsara for finishing a Treasure Master run. From the submission comments:
Shoutouts and thanks to mklip2001 for arguably being the nicest and most supportive person on the forums.
I'm voting no for a couple of reasons.
First of all, from what I understand, this is simply a goal change, not an actual improvement. It's a little like accepting an identical run of a game that's only faster because it used the (J) version that has a faster intro screen.
Second, I'm a strong supporter of the concept that null input is input, even if it's at the end of a movie. If "normal gameplay" hasn't ended, the only time that I am perfectly happy with ending the movie early is when it is being used as an entertainment feature of a gimmick run (i.e. a run that exists to set up a long self-playing ending).
A large part of my reasoning behind this is what a non-initiated person would think if watching the run without any explanation. If they looked at this run vs. the previous, most people would call the previous version the faster run, and it wouldn't be immediately obvious why this one is "faster".
That being said, most of the time the distinction between fastest input and fastest completion isn't necessary. It is reasonable that it be left to preference and only taken into consideration when a run uses a different goal than the previous one.
By all logic that some people are saying this run shouldn't be accepted because of a mere 40 frame improvement, by that same logic, the current Sub 5 Minute TAS of Super Mario Bros. shouldn't have been accepted either as it was only about what? A 1 frame improvement?
There wasn't really any change in that run either aside from that single frame. But that didn't stop you from accepting it. Hypocrites.
I like the submnitted part better, it is more variative & superhuman (seriously, MORE superhuman than current).
