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.
I don't remember every little detail about the TAS, but nowhere does it directly go through walls by using hyperspeed, does it?
Yes, quite a few times.
I don’t remember any. examples?
“doesn’t glitch through walls” wouldn’t be right though as someone else said previously, Chain Chomp’s Gate with the Bob-omb
I think there's no reason to not allow BLJ anywhere in the run. Why not make a run entitled simply "70-stars" or "all required stars" and allow BLJ in the run?
It would be a faster TAS, and also fulfill the whole point of making the run - getting all required 70 stars without completely breaking the game.
As entertaining as this run is, the goal just seems completely arbitrary to me, at least more arbitrary than simply "all required stars" and completing that goal as fast as is possible with all tools at your disposal, including the BLJ
If at first you don't succeed, load your savestate and try again
120 stars is gonna include BLJs, no point in having 70 include them too
70 is the least amount required to beat the game legitimately, it’s kind of a glitchless/low glitch run
I think there's no reason to not allow BLJ anywhere in the run. Why not make a run entitled simply "70-stars" or "all required stars" and allow BLJ in the run?
Because such a run would be substantially different in a way that many people would find less entertaining to watch. By eliminating the BLJ, this run requires a large variety of solutions to problems.
If you want to see BLJs abused to their fullest, then the upcoming 120-star run is for you. It doesn't limit itself.
As for the strict categorization, I don't know that you can come up with a clean, concise category for this run. Who cares? It's awesome anyway.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
INSANE...
Simply insane job guys, this was, with majora's mask, the best TAS I've seen of my life. There's no way I could say no(hmmm...did I say no thrice?). but seriously, I hope to see more run of this kind in the future, like RingRush said, what can happen to you if you have jesus with you :P ? This is an absolute yes ;) .
As for the strict categorization, I don't know that you can come up with a clean, concise category for this run. Who cares? It's awesome anyway.
Then why bother post for submission on TASvideos? A youtube encode would suffice w/ possibly a link to it in the SM64 thread.
I'm just aggravated how they contradicted the reasonable arguments for such a run being worthy of submission and publication here by using HSWK for a star (Boo).
I would suggest you hex edit out the HSWK w/ either another star or...you decide.
And maybe then you can start defining this run in a way that will include the bob-omb wall glitch to "go through walls"...
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
BrainStormer wrote:
Derakon wrote:
As for the strict categorization, I don't know that you can come up with a clean, concise category for this run. Who cares? It's awesome anyway.
Then why bother post for submission on TASvideos? A youtube encode would suffice w/ possibly a link to it in the SM64 thread
Because the site hosts entertaining tool-assisted speed runs, and judging by the feedback in this thread, it is an entertaining tool-assisted speed run.
If you want to see BLJs abused to their fullest, then the upcoming 120-star run is for you. It doesn't limit itself.
As for the strict categorization, I don't know that you can come up with a clean, concise category for this run. Who cares? It's awesome anyway.
Well, I have to say I'm excited to see the 120-star run. But the reason I don't like the BLJ limitation is because you could come up with tons of self-imposed limitations on this or any other game's runs. Like if this run is accepted, what's to stop the site from accepting an Ocarina of Time "No Dungeon puzzle skips" or an NES Super Mario Bros. "No glitching through objects" run?
Both of these would cause an author to come up with new, even entertaining methods of beating the game, but are arbitrary, un-needed goals that only serve the lengthen the run, and like BrainStormer said, would be sufficient as a Youtube encode. But that's just my opinion..
If at first you don't succeed, load your savestate and try again
I think there's no reason to not allow BLJ anywhere in the run. Why not make a run entitled simply "70-stars" or "all required stars" and allow BLJ in the run?
If glitches that could be used to complete the game with less stars are allowed, then the number 70 becomes completely arbitrary. Why 70 and not for example 38, 12 or 0 for that matter? It makes little sense from the point of view of completing the game.
70 becomes more rational when it's the required amount of collected stars to complete the game when no route-breaking glitches are allowed. It becomes a more sensible goal. The number "70" is no longer arbitrary, but imposed by the game.
That being said, if this run uses glitches that could be used to complete the game faster, then it breaks this principle, and collecting precisely 70 stars is rather arbitrary. Personally I would have preferred if it didn't use any such glitches.
Well, I have to say I'm excited to see the 120-star run. But the reason I don't like the BLJ limitation is because you could come up with tons of self-imposed limitations on this or any other game's runs. Like if this run is accepted, what's to stop the site from accepting an Ocarina of Time "No Dungeon puzzle skips" or an NES Super Mario Bros. "No glitching through objects" run?
You seem to be laboring under the misconception that the site runs on strict rules regarding what a run must do in order to be acceptable here, and that any time an exception to those rules is created, it sets a precedent that allows other previously-unacceptable runs (or potential future otherwise-undesirable runs) to be accepted. That's not how it works though.
The "rules" for runs are guidelines, there to help runners figure out if a run they're planning would be likely to get good feedback or not. This saves them from spending a lot of time on a run that would definitely not get accepted, and saves the admins from having to spend a lot of time telling runners "That run might get accepted, but this one definitely won't be." However, being only guidelines, exceptions can and have been made to them for sufficiently entertaining runs. The most obvious simply being any run that has the tag "makes speed/entertainment tradeoffs".
As for precedent, while it's true that the standards for an acceptable run change over time, that has far more to do with changing audience standards than anything else. Generally speaking we're more easily entertained these days.
Your listed examples would probably be accepted if the audience deemed them entertaining. That's rule 0 right there: make an entertaining run.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
That being said, I'd really like it to have an updated version of this to remove redundant content once the big and glorious 120 star run arrives. Do more slower stars that normally use BLJs in the 120 star run. The obvious downside would be that this makes it even more arbitrary (I don't think that's a bad thing) and it wouldn't be a 70 stars no game breaking glitches speed record anymore, but that already isn't completely the case.* The good thing about it would be that there'd be more entertaining footage to sit through, but maybe it'd be the kind of footage that not many people would like to see. It'd explicitely be something like a no BLJ extension to the 120 star run.
The proper place to discuss this would probably be the SM64 thread once the 120 star run is done, I hope I'll remember to bring it up then. The reason I can so easily suggest this is because records on non-BLJ star strategies are already kept.
*) Cause HSWKs are game breaking, but it's difficult to draw the line between HSWKs and normal wall kicks, which to me means the very nature of this game forbids to make this category non-arbitrary. So the authors shouldn't take the blame for it, they should be celebrated for delivering this awesome treat. I am so happy to finally see Japanese and Western TASers work together on such a big and awesome project on this site. The arbitrariness of the goal selection doesn't take away any of the entertainment for me.
I'm hoping for a really impressive 120-stars run, and watching this one did fill my emptiness. <3
I really do love "Swimming Beast In The Cavern", jump on the box and flip over the wall. hahaha
This run has so much spatial abuse that there is nearly no intended gameplay left. I love that.
But I can't help but feel cheated when the run is only for 70 stars.
I haven't seen the 120 Stars video, but I've seen a couple iterations of the Starless category.
Anyway, this run is incredibly impressive throughout, and in doing things most players must pick their jaws up off the floor after seeing, it thoroughly proves that Mario is a ninja. Furthermore, it proves he doesn't need to make any Bacon Lettuce and Jelly sandwiches to do it.
I've not seen the current 70-Star video, but surely this obsoletes it. It must because it is awesome.
Voting Yes, because yes.
1/60 of a second is important; every frame matters.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Normally I would be tempted to argue about arbitrary and unstated goals, but this movie had too much awesome to get concerned with all of that.
Yes vote here.
.png){kind=avatar}
