Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
JXQ wrote:
I think the most effective way to broaden the site or bring in new viewers is to keep up fresh published material, as it is the main goal of the site. So by debating about publications, I am thinking about exactly those things you say that we should.
That's a good point - I can see what you mean here. Really, the main issue for me was the harshness of arguments regarding (in my opinion) trivial issues, and the "Bisqwit bashing" going on. But, I'm glad we could discuss this without reaching that level. I appreciate your answers, JXQ, and how you responded to my points in this discussion.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
JXQ wrote:
Chef Stef wrote:
Remember, first of all, that this is his site, and he has say over what goes on in it.
I hate this retort, always have. It says nothing.
The point isn't that what Bisqwit says is law; the point is that this site exists because Bisqwit decided that it should. This whole process for submitting and publishing movies on this site is all because Bisqwit started the site. I think users here believe that they have a right to a site without inconsistencies, while forgetting that they ultimately are not and do not have authority over what happens here. Bisqwit can and does listen to the users here to construct the site and the movies here, but people shouldn't take comparitively insignificant things like this so seriously.
JXQ wrote:
I think the users here need to calm down and think about what the general goals of this site are, rather than nitpicking for inconsistencies.
The arguments on both sides were aimed toward the good of the site (those opinions differ in some cases though), so I'm not sure what you are referring to specifically.
I'm just saying that users should spend their time thinking about "how do we broaden this site" or "what new features should we add in the future" rather than always complaining about things like "X movie was published, why wasn't Y movie published?" It's a waste of energy, in my opinion.
JXQ wrote:
Admins and other authorities should be ready for reactions on decisions regarding site content. People should be ready to argue their point if they feel the situation is bad for the site, instead of keeping quiet for politeness's sake, as the site would presumably suffer in the long run.
Debate isn't inherently bad for this site (i.e. I'm not saying that we should stay silent whenever a controversial decision is made). I'm just noticing that debates here are not usually discussions and are instead very harsh arguments, sometimes against the person and their general outlook rather than on the specific issue.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Wow, I never thought my comment/improvement suggestion would incite so much debate.
I'm not really sure how I feel about this issue... On the one hand, it is a somewhat significant improvement (when "only" (I use this term loosely) 23 seconds were saved overall), but on the other hand, 23 seconds is a very good improvement and certainly warrents publication. I think the key issue for some people is, Why do you take the time to save 5 frames here, 10 frames there, etc. from various tricks, but won't redo in order to add a 32 frame improvement? Are you waiting to create a v6 of this movie that would implement the trick? Because it seems to me that redoing the movie would be much easier than making another version.
Also, I wish people would stop attacking Bisqwit for making decisions like this. Remember, first of all, that this is his site, and he has say over what goes on in it. Now, he may make mistakes, or very unpopular decisions, but I think people are getting worked up over insignificant matters. I think shouting in his face, even when he rejects a movie for a (supposedly) trivial reason, is a rude and absolutely unreasonable way to respond.
Is Bisqwit a person? Can he make mistakes? Can he make unfair decisions? Can accept one movie but reject another, even when they both have possible improvements? Bisqwit is not a robot who always makes the fairest and most balanced choices. I think the users here need to calm down and think about what the general goals of this site are, rather than nitpicking for inconsistencies.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
I haven't discussed this with Tompa at all... It just seemed obvious that the Yoshi hatched much faster in jimsfriend's version. I did some frame comparisons, by the way, from when the Yoshi egg first appears to the first frame when Mario gains control again - the length in jimsfriend's movie is 92 frames, and the length in this movie is 124 frames. So, 32 frames could be saved by activating a !Yoshi when you get the "real" Yoshi.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
When you get Yoshi in Misty Star Road, I remember that jimsfriend saved some time by activating a !Yoshi (is that what they're called?), since the "real" Yoshi hatches from his egg much more quickly when you hatch a glitched Yoshi at the same time. Is this a possible improvement, or is there no time difference?
But, anyway, I really enjoyed this run, as it held a lot of small improvements that made the whole product seem much more tight and fluid. My only real complaint is that the Misty Star Road p-switch juggling seemed forced, since you had to keep going back to grab them constantly. I think this run great, so I'm voting yes.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Could you change the screenshot for Link's Awakening DX? I'm not exactly sure what significance the current screenshot has (it's just a text box, after all... I think it could be changed to something more representative of how glitchy the movie is). What about one of these:
Chef Stef wrote:
A few more screenshot ideas:
Frame 144264
Frame 199624
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
This TAS was entertaining to me because it demonstrates many interesting things from a very simple game. Not only was the game pushed to its limits (which is not saying that much, unfortunately), but there was some extra time for playaround and to show the bonuses. I definately laughed when the third triple jump attempt went past the sand pit, and when the poor guy missed the high jump :) The only boring part was the archery event, simply because it was repetitive and there wasn't much possibility for varying entertainment.
I'm giving this a solid yes vote.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Fabian wrote:
Instead, what I feel is the right approach is to compare run A to run B, then decide which one you like best (=is better), and publish that one.
But how would you decide if there was no other OoT run already published? I think there would be more users giving negative feedback towards this run if it was the first to be submitted. Instead, what's happening is that some are saying "it's not optimal, but it utilizes more tricks than the published run, so let's publish this." Sure, a better version could be published later, but why not try and make the current movie as good as possible before submitting? I personally think that examining a movie without comparing it to any other leads to more motivation to strive for perfection (since the movie has to stand by/for itself).
Also note that, if this movie is published, it will set a standard that others will start to compare to (which is not a good thing, in my opinion).
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
The concept of waiting for 3 minutes for the game to finish itself is an amusing idea, but it certainly wasn't very entertaining to watch. It would have been much better to watch you fight the boss rather than just watch him kill himself.
Otherwise, I thought that the battles had too much lag to enjoy properly (not just the first one, nearly all of the battles seemed to have way too much lag), and I agree that it seems like this 2-player TAS didn't utilize enough interesting 2-player action (i.e. watching two players complete the game wasn't any more interesting than watching one).
Even without the early input ending, my opinion is barely on the "no" side of things (it just wasn't that entertaining to watch). So, I'm voting "no" on this submission.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
"Yahoo! Yahoo! Ya-ya-ya-ya-ya-ya-ya-ya-ya-yahoo!" is how I feel about this run. Incredible new ideas and execution in this TAS, I can't believe a 1-star route was finally found. I'm giving this a yes vote (of course).
We are seeing history being made here!
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
I've never played this game before, but I did enjoy watching this run. It looked optimized, and you did the best you could for entertainment during sections where you had to wait. The game itself doesn't seem that great, but it has good graphics and music, and the TAS shows off a lot of fast-paced jumping, shooting, etc. I'm giving this a yes vote.
Congratulations on your first submission!
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
That wasn't very nice, my movie was only just published :P
I'm actually not that surprised that an improvement like this was found... This was such a simple game that I felt sure I was overlooking something. This makes me wonder, is a "4 lines at once" strategy possible? Or is it simply impossible to clear out all the garbage blocks using this process?
I'm giving this a yes vote because 1) it looks cleaner, and 2) it's a great improvement (read: it crushes my movie). It's great to see this game pushed to its limits.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Excellent improvement to an already good movie. A few interesting points about this movie:
-I noticed you used music 3 :)
-Once or twice, a block landed so that it was partially above the screen top, and that part of the block was absent when it appeared lower on the playing field (interesting glitch/oversight)
-I like how you managed to keep the music going at 2x speed for most of the movie (the previous movie kept switching between 1x and 2x speed because of the changing block levels)
-Ending with no blocks left on the side was a very nice touch, it must have required a lot of planning.
Also, after making my own tetris run, I've come to appreciate the amount of work and planning necessary. This gets a yes vote from me.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
While making this movie, I discovered that holding down as the current block hits the ground will sometimes change the order of blocks. It seems to have very limited application, though (since you can only choose from one extra block). I used it once or twice in this movie.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Yes, my other movie was like that as well. In order to clear all blocks, I have to make one extra line (otherwise I'll have a remainder of 2 blocks). Otherwise, I think the blocks are all used optimally, so the time that could be saved from not making that line would be quite small. I think it's worth it to be able to clear every block from the playing field :)
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
I'm giving this a yes because the concept (and execution) was entertaining (although the long part in 6-8 wasn't so interesting...). I think this is worth publishing, but I agree that it should not obsolete the other run already published; there's just too much of the game skipped here for there to be any comparison.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Wow, I didn't think there would be a left/right glitch for this game...
Okay, I'm going to cancel this submission, since it can be made much more entertaining using alden's trick. I might submit another version later (unless alden wants to submit his) if I can minimize the manipulation needed (and save some extra frames).
Edit: Are enough users interested in a new version of the movie? I just want to make sure before making and submitting another movie for this game.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
First of all, the music change wasted 1 frame, not very much in the grand scheme of things... Regarding the pausing, I agree that it gets a little intrusive at times. I wasn't sure if I should submit this run because of all the pausing, but I decided to submit it anyway to hear what viewers had to say about it.
Lex wrote:
If you want to make a version with luck manipulation without pausing, try just waiting (with the game unpaused before holding down. I think that works to manipulate luck. If not, never mind.
Hmm, I'll have to investigate that... since I'm not going for a high score anyway, it won't matter that much whether I hold down all the time (unless it starts to waste a lot of time from the blocks moving slower).
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Though I wasn't signed up here when the forums were created, it seems that, at one point, non-registered users could vote on movies:
Movie Poll wrote:
Because of abuse that has happened, lurkers can't vote anymore.
What about introducing a separate poll specifically for these users? I think that feedback from casual movie-watchers is often forgotten since they cannot vote in the main movie poll.
Although I can't say whether a bias already exists, it appears that the current voting system has the chance to introduce one - the users who have been here longer will usually have higher standards about technical performance. While I agree that feedback from users experienced with this site's standards will generally be more valuable, feedback from lurkers/casual users can be important as well.
If any abuse occurs, it would be isolated from the "regular" voting system. I'm also not advocating that this separate poll be treated on equal ground as the regular movie poll - I'm just suggesting a way for others to express their opinions about a movie.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Okay, I tried to make a better version (read: less pausing), but I couldn't replicate the result of this movie without a roughly equal amount of pausing.
About the choice to end with a tetris: If I didn't get a tetris (and simply got the lines any other way), there would be extra blocks remaining. As every piece that falls consists of 4 blocks, and the number of garbage blocks is preset, there is no way to avoid this except by getting a tetris. So, the "get's a tetris" goal is not necessarily arbitrary - it is in fact required* to achieve the much more entertaining goal of "clears all blocks."
I hope this information clears up some of the controversy...
*Note that I could simply get two 2-line clears instead of one 4-line clear to achieve the same effect. But, it would waste time from having to watch the animation twice.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Playing the movie back again, I think I can see how the constant pausing interferes with watching the movie... I'm going to try and make a new version with less manipulation (but I don't know how successful it will be, so I'm going to leave this submission here for now).
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
I decided to give this a bump to post a short movie I made of the first "planet":
http://dehacked.2y.net/microstorage.php/info/1798970337/GyrussTest.fcm
The movie stops after the Neptune bonus level. I think this game has enough action to warrent a TAS, but there is one factor that may make a run of this game less entertaining; it seems that a group of enemies will only spawn after the previous group has either been destroyed or flown to the center. Since the first option is much faster, a TAS of this game aiming for speed would have to destroy enemies as quickly as possible, reducing potential for "playaround" entertainment. (You can delay killing enemies for a short time without losing any frames, but they all have to be destroyed by the time the last one flies in.)
Note that I do waste time in the bonus level to make it more entertaining. An optimal (speed-wise) version would kill all the enemies as soon as they fly in... but I did want to give an idea of what possibilities there are for entertainment in this game.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player
(467)
Joined: 5/23/2006
Posts: 361
Location: Washington, United States
Zurreco wrote:
4.8 = Just slightly below average. Do people not understand how 5 is supposed to be the mean value there?
I see I'm a little late in giving my input here, but please note that only 28 movies on this site (out of almost 900!) are rated 5.0 or below (based on http://tasvideos.org/MovieStatistics/LowestAverageRating.html). Altered Beast is the 21st worst rated movie on this site. The movie might be rated as merely slightly below average, but when compared to the standards of this site, a 4.8 is indeed a poor score.
If the game is good, I can't see it by watching this TAS. If the game is popular, the ratings certainly don't show it (either that, or viewers think the game is unsuited for a TAS).
Frame 144264
Frame 199624