Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
As I've received no other feedback on this subject, it looks like the majority want to see lapogne36 get this award.
I agree with Memory's reasoning that for this specific kind of situation, retroactively changing the vote should be allowed.
Congratulations lapogne36 on your win.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
The tie-breaker told me that they are fine with retroactively changing their vote to uphold the tie.
Is that fine with everyone else too? One person told me so far via PM that they don't like the idea of retroactively altering the votes. That whatever was voted should remain, even if in error. We don't want to open the floodgates to people changing their mind for all sorts of reasons if they dislike the outcome. Do other people have other opinions here?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Nitrofski wrote:
Well, this isn't the result I expected or wanted. The only TAS I've contributed to has been in equal parts brought to life thanks to lapogne36. As far as I've heard, we were actually tied very close to the end. If it were up to me, I would most definitely share the award with him.
I tracked down the person who casted the deciding tie-breaker vote to find out why they voted the way they did. I asked them if this was a mistake, perhaps they didn't realize you both only had a single TAS which you both worked on?
The response was that they realized there was a single TAS you both worked on. However, the credits to the TAS was listed as "Nitrofski & lapogne36" which is not alphabetical, and therefore you guys at least subconciously determined that Nitrofski did (slightly) more work than lapogne36 for this TAS. Since between the two of you, the work was unequal, the one who did (slightly) more work should be viewed as the best PSX TASer of 2019.
Now, there's every chance that this line of thinking is incorrect, and if you share with us why the naming is what it is, the person who voted the way they did might want to retroactively change what their vote was. On the other hand, retroactively changing votes isn't something we want to go about doing.
So first of all please share with us what you guys were actually thinking regarding the credit naming. Second of all, I'd like to hear from others what they think about retroactively changing votes for this kind of situation.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
nymx wrote:
Nach, I suppose your idea will work now...seeing that I lost power because someone in this house accidentally flipped a switch on the control panel. :(
You never know when you might lose power. Over the years I've had nutjob neighbors who knocked out the power in all sorts of crazy ways.
Then you could have kids who somehow thought it was smart to have every appliance in the kitchen and wash room going at the exact same time.
The list goes on. If you're doing serious computer work, get yourself a decent UPS.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Just watched this.
It's clearly a rip off of the original Super Mario Bros. and The Lost Levels, with absolutely poor game mechanics.
That being said, I found this to be more interesting than I thought it would be. I was actually really entertained by 2-2 jumping from enemy to enemy.
Weak yes vote.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Thank you andypanther, fixed.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
You only get a pop-up on this forum if you enabled "Notify on new Private Message" in your profile, and you received a new private message.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
From December 30th, 2019:
<Dacicus> Who discovered that?
<Spikestuff_> The poor soul you're talking to.
<Spikestuff_> (Also if 60fps, then it's not 4k)
<Dacicus> Do you mean the YT encodes, or all of them?
<Spikestuff_> Yes
<Spikestuff_> Let's see---
<Spikestuff_> feos: do it.
<Spikestuff_> Give that bike boy up.
<feos> give him up? you mean let him down?
* fsvgm777 launches feos to Pluto.
<Dacicus> The bike boy that delivers newspapers?
<Mothrayas> did you just turn him around and desert him?
* fsvgm777 launches Mothrayas to Pluto as well.
<Dacicus> Is that how you say good-bye to people, fsvgm777, by launching them to Pluto?
<Mothrayas> Dacicus: it's his way of wishing us a happy new year
<KennyMan666> It's not even a real planet!
<Nach> Is it even real?
<DeHackEd> the sun isn't a planet, but people are launched to it all the time
<Mothrayas> we do that to wish them a happy new year too
<DeHackEd> see? it's all good!
<Nach> Are the good times over?
<Mothrayas> Nach: almost
<Nach> Who can I purchase more good times from?
<Mothrayas> the brothel?
<Nach> Sounds good
* Nach heads over to Amazon
<Dacicus> Amazon has brothel services now?
<Nach> Dacicus: haven't you paid attention to the name?
<Nach> "Amazon"
<Dacicus> Hiding in plain sight the entire time
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
WarHippy wrote:
For these reasons I do agree with Aran's objection. I didn't put in a level of work that I'd consider award-worthy :/
Despite the level of work not being up to what you consider your personal best, it seems EZGames69 found your TAS to be the best SNES run of the year (or among the best). You yourself also said the movie wasn't completely trivial.
EZGames69 also has a good point that no single TASer had a large body of work this year. Under those conditions, it appears that EZGames69 does find you deserve this award. While others may disagree, that should be good enough for a nomination.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
EZGames69 wrote:
If staff would like to keep WarHippy off of the list that's ok.
We don't want to keep WarHippy off, we just want to ensure the nominations are deserving.
EZGames69 wrote:
I really only gave him a nomination because I liked what he did with FireStrike and thought it was a really great snes game.
Do you think the work he did on FireStrike was good enough that he should be considered the best, or among the best players for SNES of the year?
EZGames69 wrote:
maybe it would be more appropriate to nominate the tas for SNES tas of the year instead of just the TASer.
If you think it was the best SNES TAS of the year, you should definitely nominate it.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Aran Jaeger wrote:
Well, to be fair, I have to say that I am not sure if the judging of the nomination of a TAS or TASer for a given award category to be ''truely undeserving'' is meant (in the original statement by you/Nach from the Nomination rules thread) in an absolute sense for the TAS/TASer together with the award category ''in a vacuum'', or if it is meant in a relative sense, when compared to all other eligible TASes or TASers.
That's a good question.
My statement is a bit of both actually.
In terms of how different TASs / TASers relatively compare against each other each year is a matter of people's own personal opinion and tastes. What one person sees as trash is another person's treasure. Which is the point of the voting. People get to choose their favorite(s) or what in their opinion is the best of the top tier of contenders that year. We don't want to remove the possibility of voting for an option if it's just one member's opinion that TAS or player wasn't that great.
However, given the volume each year, you want to take relativity into account. If there's a couple of users that made dozens of TASs, and some that made multi hour TASs, multiple starred runs and so on, adding someone to the list with just a vanilla 5 minute movie is probably undeserving. The nominations should represent the cream of the crop for that year, not the cream of the crop + random player.
It's important to understand things in the absolute sense as well. If someone made the most entertaining movie ever, he deserves to be recognized for the voting, even if there's other people who overall put out more high quality content providing strong competition for the award.
If it turns out if there are no candidates in the absolute sense. Meaning everything produced in the specified category was mediocre, just boring uninteresting under 5 minute movies, we should probably not be offering the award for that category in that year.
Aran Jaeger wrote:
However, I did interpret or understand your statement from the Nomination rules thread in the relative/comparative sense, as otherwise I'd be confused about the point of the statement, because the statement does not appear to refer to mistakes in the linked lists of eligible TASes or TASers but refers to nominations from member posts in the associated nomination threads
There can be mistakes as well, and people should point it out when they notice them. Also in some situations, like the Speedy TAS award, we get several invalid nominations each year, because we don't have a movie tag labeling movies with high speed movement, so we cannot produce a mostly accurate list for that even if we wanted to.
Aran Jaeger wrote:
Now, if the statement from the Nomination rules thread is meant to be applied or seen in an absolute sense for a given TAS or TASer, without relative comparison to other choices for a given year, then disregard my ''(un)deserving''-related statement on the matter. But in this case, I would actually be curious about what cases should then possibly fall under this rule, where the rule would apply while at the same time the TAS or TASer would be contained in the list of eligible TASes or TASers, respectively.
If someone nominated a TAS with very low ratings, and it's borderline whether it should be in the Moons category, then it's undeserving to get a TAS award.
If someone nominated a player with barely no work done that year, or relatively uninspired work compared to that year's choices, it would be undeserving.
Aran Jaeger wrote:
Now, if this was wrong, then I stand corrected, but in the end it anyway wouldn't be up to me to decide this, I found your appeal (from the Nomination rules thread) to be more meant as a heads-up directed at forum members for when they see something potentially fitting the case, so that members may point such out, so that staff could look into it.
I don't know that you're wrong, as I haven't watched the movie. It'd be good to hear from the nominator as well as the judge of the movie to weigh in whether and why they think this sole body of work warrants an award for best SNES TASer of the year.
Aran Jaeger wrote:
I think but also wonder if TASing efforts besides or outside of producing completed TASes are to be neglected or not considered for the purpose of such categories. Or are they not?
You are correct, it's not about the effort itself, it's about the final product. People should not be nominated solely on effort, as we have no way to accurately assess it. It should be about what we see in the movies they make. I only brought up this second question because you quoted the author as saying it's simple. If the only thing they worked on is too simple as it appears in the final product, that probably does not warrant an award. So I mispoke above, what I meant to ask is how simple does the result appear to be. That there's multiple players and enemy movement and other things, it doesn't look completely trivial. But others should weigh in too.
Aran Jaeger wrote:
Also, I guess it did help to format my post. I didn't think of it, so thanks, and I'll try to improve on that.
A little bit of formatting can go a long way it making it easier for readers to comprehend. Some bolding and underlining of key points are useful too.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Aran Jaeger wrote:
I'd like to point out that for this specific (SNES related) award category nomination I do find EZGames69's nomination of Warhippy, well, ''truely undeserving'' (which may sound rather harsh, but I guess forum members can see and judge it for themselves).
On the [3965] SNES FireStriker "2 players" by WarHippy in 08:17.66submission text
Warhippy noted:
Warhippy wrote:
Other comments
I chose this game for it's simple and unique gameplay and because it hadn't been done yet. It was a fun little project, and I hope to find more like these in the future.
So your point is that you think WarHippy's only SNES related TAS is too simple to warrant an award for the work he created? Okay.
There's two questions we should answer:
1) Was this a good movie deserving of recognition, regardless of how easy or hard it was for the author to make?
2) That he had to deal with 2 players at once, enemy movement, and some other aspects of the game may still make the game difficult to TAS. Just because WarHippy found it to be simple for himself, doesn't mean others would also find it as simple. So do other players also find that movie to be really simple to make?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
nymx, Baddap1, and Tompa.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Matslo123, dadinfinitum, GJJJGJJJ, and LucasWills.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Memory
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
vince1919
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
MrWint
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
In addition to some excellent nominations by others, nymx and grassini.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I've had that exact experience multiple times.
I tried making this amazing clip of running through enemies in a very exciting fashion, spending 20 minutes on it, reloading constantly. Finally got the results I wanted on the first half, figured I'd save it, then come back later for the second, and hit load -_-.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
From December 2019:
<Masterjun> I hope this year I get the GBA Award of 2021 with my Duck Hunt TAS from 2012
<Mothrayas> that would certainly be great to happen this year
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
EZGames69 wrote:
Since it’s unlikely that there will be an award for TAS of the decade, I figured just a thread for this would be good enough.
Why is it unlikely?
Mothrayas wrote:
Contrary to popular belief, award nominations do not consist of my list of personal favorites. Nominations are actually Nach's list of personal favorites /s
I don't know why that's sarcasm.
Everyone knows I use mind control in order to determine the nominations.
For some reason though I just happen to agree with your list, what a coincidence?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Warp wrote:
Nach wrote:
Therefore when rating, I don't care about what effort was put in, I care about the results seen. I look for qualifications within the movie itself that show technicalities, such as complicated routing (which is not present in many run right games), get exactly enough powerups to complete the level as fast as possible, nothing unnecessary (which is not present in games without powerups), and so on.
I think Arc gave the perfect counter-argument to this:
Arc wrote:
[4032] NES Super Mario Bros. 3 "game end glitch" by Masterjun & ais523 in 00:00.78 is the most extreme example of low entertainment and high tech. The technical rating allows the rater to express that although this movie is not enjoyable to watch, the rater respects the diligence of the author to produce a movie that demonstrates expert-level knowledge of the game
Ok, perhaps "counter-argument" is too strong of a word, but I couldn't think of a better one.
I don't see that as a counter-point, because in my opinion, that's movie does not get a lot of tech points. Sure it excels superbly at hacking a part of the game and jumping to the end in less than a second. But it doesn't plan a route through the game's levels. It doesn't manage powerups. It doesn't beat any of the bosses with high precision attacks at the earliest frame. It doesn't show off perfect jumping to get 99 lives. Etc...
I could perhaps give that run 4 maybe 5 points for the one area it excelled in. But I have no further points to award to it, because it didn't do anything else. Therefore, under the system that I currently use, that run would get a low technical rating.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Warp wrote:
The recent NES Arkanoid warpless run is a perfect example of a TAS that deserves a very high technical rating. The author developed an entire simulator in order to be able to brute-force an optimal path programmatically. This is the kind of hard work I'm talking about. It's not just the perfection of the end result, but the path there, the technical work that had to be put in order to achieve this. The impressiveness of that work.
Of course you are free to interpret "technical rating" as you wish, but this is how I would see it.
I agree with everything you wrote except this last section here.
While this particular TAS is easy to determine what work was put in, because he showed it. Most often for a TAS we only have the results. An author can claim they put in all kinds of work, but we do not see the work. Also despite the amount of effort they put in, other people may be able to achieve better results with less effort.
Therefore when rating, I don't care about what effort was put in, I care about the results seen. I look for qualifications within the movie itself that show technicalities, such as complicated routing (which is not present in many run right games), get exactly enough powerups to complete the level as fast as possible, nothing unnecessary (which is not present in games without powerups), and so on.
Some of the best games have several things to consider for how technical things need to get for best speed, other's are simpler and don't. At the end of the day, for a game which shows off precision in many different ways, I'll give a high technical rating to. For say a card game where of the 300,000 possibilities you brute forced the most optimal one, I'll give a low technical rating because you only showed off one area of precision and optimality.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
