Isn't rerecording allowed? I thought it was... Is there a function in the emulator on this site called "Frame precision", because the emulator I used, the one from speedruns.net didn't have that. I think you should verify if that emulator is OK.
I think you misunderstood what I said. Rerecording IS allowed and highly recommended. What I was saying is that while my first impression was that it was done wrong, I started to change my mind when I noticed you DID use rerecording and doing it right. Actually, I never TASed in Gen, so someone would need to help you with that, but I do know the Gen version I linked to do have frame advance. There is a key listed as frame advance in the default configuration.
So it won't be accepted because of that particular reason? That would be such a shame since I've worked for quite some while on this run and I really don't feel like making another run.
Thank you Aktan for your kind words.
Well, that's what the poll is for. People will vote if it will be accepted or not. I know it does suck that you put a lot of work into it, just to have it rejected, but people here strive for perfection. If there is a lot of known improvements, the chances are slim. All I can say is, good work, and don't give up!
Edit: I want to note my first impression was that it wasn't done right because you didn't use the Gen version I posted above. Usually all TASes here are done via an emulator listed here: http://tasvideos.org/EmulatorResources.html. After I looked more closely, I am now unsure how did you play. You have rerecord counts which means you did go back to redo things, but did you play with frame precision? If so, then you have not done anything wrong.
First off, I must congratulate you on a very nice improvement. 25 secs is a lot!
I think what theenlishman is trying to say is, even though you have played this tool-assisted via slow motion, you can even optimize it more with the re-recording version of Gens available here http://code.google.com/p/gens-rerecording/ where you can step frame by frame to perfect all your moves. I took a brief look at your video, and it does look pretty good, and while I admit I have not played the game, I thought some areas looked sloppy, meaning could be done better.
A nice job on your first submission though!
Edit: Upon closer look, the Gens you used might be the same one as the link I posted. My bad, if that is my mistake.
Let's just vote no on any submission not submitted by the author themselves. Btw, am I correct in assuming that we don't have a single female author on this site?
I see this as a bad idea since the votes are suppose to cut towards how good the movie is, not that because someone else submit it. Though, I might need to rethink this.
So who's going to submit Glitchman's megaman run for him? It beats the published run by 30 seconds, IIRC.
Sure, I'll do it. Let me ask first.
So we have a policy to accept whatever version beats the current TAS? This sure won't drive people to go that extra mile and get it as perfect as possible. I especially think it a horrible idea considering that Glitchman plans on making a lot better version, both more optimized and with more new strategies. Publishing it would only take away some of the awesomeness the final movie has to offer. I state again, posting a wip/testrun on the forum is not the same as submitting a run... sure, it can both be seen by everyone, but posting it at a regular topic in the forum and not as a submission is done for a reason.
Although I think even asking is a bad idea, at least you are asking first. If you ask, hopefully you will wait for an answer first.
If we allow people submitting TASes without the author's consent, we shouldn't be against people making a site of their own and posting all of the content here also. I personally wouldn't like it at all if someone took my TASes and posted them on their site without asking me.
Oh? It is a WIP? I didn't know that, why didn't you mention it mmbossman? I'll PM Glitchman it was a mistake.
If this isn't sarcasm, this proves my point quite nicely. Without communication, you don't know what is going on with a movie file. Consent should be acquired beforehand to avoid things like this.
Except consent is not the same as asking what is going on with a movie. Meaning "Can I submit this for you?" is not the same as "Is this a WIP movie?"
So who's going to submit Glitchman's megaman run for him? It beats the published run by 30 seconds, IIRC.
Sure, I'll do it. Let me ask first.
So we have a policy to accept whatever version beats the current TAS? This sure won't drive people to go that extra mile and get it as perfect as possible. I especially think it a horrible idea considering that Glitchman plans on making a lot better version, both more optimized and with more new strategies. Publishing it would only take away some of the awesomeness the final movie has to offer. I state again, posting a wip/testrun on the forum is not the same as submitting a run... sure, it can both be seen by everyone, but posting it at a regular topic in the forum and not as a submission is done for a reason.
Although I think even asking is a bad idea, at least you are asking first. If you ask, hopefully you will wait for an answer first.
If we allow people submitting TASes without the author's consent, we shouldn't be against people making a site of their own and posting all of the content here also. I personally wouldn't like it at all if someone took my TASes and posted them on their site without asking me.
Oh? It is a WIP? I didn't know that, why didn't you mention it mmbossman? I'll PM Glitchman it was a mistake.
Maybe no one got my point: If you do not know what the purpose for which something was created, assuming that you best know how to present that creation is both discourteous to the author and could possibly misrepresent the original meaning of the work. And with that, I guess I've said what I wanted to say, and won't argue anymore.
Good points, but of course, as usual, there are exceptions. One example I already gave. If the author is dead. You can't get consent anymore, right? That's an extreme example. In this case, what FF did, it doesn't seem so "criminal". He tried to contact veup first, so he was being courteous. Also, the input file link was posted on a rejected TAS of the same type. So the likelihood of misrepresenting is minimal.
Fundamentally, the way that TASVideos treats the material it publishes is beside the point. We don't have permission from the authors. That should be the end of it.
Then of course you forgot what defines as permission. Just because it is submitted through a submission forum, it means you have permission from the author? I myself have not submitted a TAS, so I may be wrong on this, but I doubt this is some kind of agreement an author makes when submitting a TAS.
Quick question for those who disagree with asking an author permission before using their work: If someone were to take your TAS and use it as an example on their website entitled "People cheating at video games", would you not mind if they credited you properly for the creation of the movie?
How about a little change to the question and instead of using 1 TAS for the example, just point to TASVideos? Basically, why not just take any already published TAS and say the same?
So why post it if you can't even grab it? It's like here is my work, but don't look at it, nor touch it, not until I say so. The act of just posting it on the net is already "publishing it" really.
Another example I can think of is releasing unpublished works after the author is dead. Of course there is two differences though. One, since the author is dead, you can't ever get consent, and 2, if it was unfinished, it wasn't ever posted on some public forum for people to see =p.
I don't know how this ended up as a copyright discussion. What FF did is not the same as copying a book and posing as your own. What FF did is more like an author still writing a book, and then having someone else take that book and publishing it but still gave credit to the author. It is not a copy and claiming to be your own work (hence not a copyright infringement).
Now if veup didn't want the world to see, why would he post it on the forum. Usually someone post for a reason, for people to see. Usually if it gets recognized, the author is even more happy. Now there are cases where it doesn't want to be published, but then note so, or don't post it. This, again, is not just plain copying without giving credit. Credit was clearly given and, no surprise, veup was very happy about it.
Hmm...Aktanusa's encode has some sound issues. I tried both the mp4 and the mkv and somewhere around three and a half minutes in, the sound switches to a monotone buzz. Anyone else experiencing this issue?