Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Not the most entertaining run, but it did do a nice job with what was provided. I ended up liking it overall.
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
Derakon wrote:
Personally I find the DOOM speedruns to be nigh-incomprehensible. Understanding those runs (and runs of Wolfenstein, etc.) requires too much familiarity with the source material due to the rapid motion, samey-looking levels, and constant strafe-running. Nightfire still has straferunning, of course, but it's a lot easier for a knowlessman to follow, so it gets my vote.
I find this line of thought extremely important. Anything that is on the recommended list should be showing a game where the viewer who is not familiar with the game should understand the basic idea how the game is played - and then see that vomited upon. It's important that every game chosen establishes the mechanics of play early on so that viewers know what should be expected from the game, not be left wondering the entire time what the heck they are looking at.
Hetfield90 wrote:
I just meant if that's the sole reason for them being there, and if they do it in a way that can hardly be distinguished from real-time runs.
There is no sole reason for any game on the list. Every game that is recommended for newcomers needs to hit upon multiple qualities.
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
A lot of good options this year. People should vote for multiple.
Personally, I'm going with 3358 for best ACE and 3492 for best regular.
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 my mind, this was pretty close this year, but in the end, ThunderAxe31 was a well deserved win. Congrads buddy!
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
Congrads to the winner, well deserved.
Mothrayas, runner up again. You did great 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
Challenger: You beat the best regular run on the site. It was replaced with the now best regular run on the site.
<TASVideoAgent> Post edited by Mothrayas (Awards: NES TAS of 2017 - Castlevania by Challenger!): http://tasvideos.org/forum/p/463284#463284 [a:44]
<Zeupar> Why the excitement about Challenger's win that's missing in the others, Mothrayas? :P
<Mothrayas> Zeupar: because I wasn't paying attention, put it out later, he deserves the excitement though imo
<Nach> Zeupar: he deserves it, I'd leave the ! in
<Zeupar> Well, most do!!
<Nach> Zeupar: the best normal TAS on the site just got better, thanks to Challenger!
<Zeupar> Nach: That's saying A LOT
<Zeupar> Nach: Do you seriously think NES Castlevania is the best normal TAS on the site?
<Nach> Zeupar: it is saying a lot, IMO (as well as several other people), NES Castlevania is the best normal TAS on the site
<Zeupar> Who else?
<Nach> I believe Mothrayas agrees
<Niamek> Nach, I'd be interested in an explanation.
<Mothrayas> it's definitely up there
<Zeupar> Best in terms of entertainment or technical prowess?
<Nach> Niamek: Castlevania is not too long, not too short, so it's good for a best which has stuff without getting boring. The mastery of the precision and planning throughout the entire game is practically unparalleled. It's also really entertaining. Practically every other TAS on the site has more down time, too long, too short, not as entertaining, entertaining but not as precise. Etc...
<Niamek> Look like I'll have to give Castlevania a chance. I never played one.
<Nach> Niamek: Like I find other TAS overall more entertaining, but then they are too long, or they have a lot more room to not be precise and much of the TAS isn't as compelling technically
<Nach> Niamek: meanwhile other TASs which are more technically developed are way too long to be a best or just don't have the same entertainment throughout
<Zeupar> Nach: For me, Sonic Advance 2 is among the best TASes on the site
<Nach> Zeupar: I think it's a good TAS, but it's too long to be a best, it also doesn't have as much planning into it as others do
<Zeupar> You don't know Mukki heh
<Niamek> Nach so Castlevania has the best balance in terms of entertaining, planning, etc.?
<Nach> Niamek: yes
<Zeupar> Nach: I mean, Dashjump improved it afterwards, but Mukki really pushed it
<Nach> Zeupar: that's not what I mean by planning
<Nach> Zeupar: for me planning is the best spot to use each unit of health, just the right item choices for the fastest strategy. Sonic games often lack any sense of that
<Nach> typically for planning, for a game to be a contender, it has to have either health/weapon management, or an open area like Legend of Zelda
<ais523> Nach: hmm, I'm not sure NetHack counts as either of those and yet it's been the most planning-heavy TAS ever
<Nach> this is why I found a bunch of Mega Man TASs among the best, they have to plan where to take damage and how to spend each unit wisely, and entertaining too
<ais523> Lemmings is another good example
<Nach> ais523: I think Lemmings is a great TAS due to insane planning and simultaneous completion throughout!
<ais523> but seeing the planning in action is one reason why I like Megaman any% runs and dislike buster-only
<Nach> ais523: and isn't NetHack open area?
<ais523> Nach: technically speaking the dungeon is tree-shaped but you can teleport around in it more or less at will under TAS conditions so you can do things in more or less any order
<ais523> the game has very few hard "you need item A to enter area B" gates; there are plenty of /soft/ gates like that but they're easy enough to work around under TAS conditions
<Zeupar> Nach: RE:SA2 Yeah, I can see that
<Nach> Zeupar: therefore to me, SA2 isn't in the same league, and most of the other Sonic games, I don't care for at all
<Zeupar> I am really happy to see Challenger so happy. He provided lots of entertainment last 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
I really liked Zook Man. But if Zook Man wins, I have to give out a lot of trophies, which is more work for me. Decisions decisions...
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
Stop rocking the boat, you're making me seasick.
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
Kill Hitler!!!
Oh wait, we did that already. In any case, Billy Blaze would be proud!
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
Based on what I'm seeing here, I don't even know why we didn't give out the award last week.
I still want to congratulate everyone on trying though. Please submit more exotic runs!
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'm disappointed by the list I'm seeing here this year. The rule is: "Vote for the TASes with the fastest running or fastest zipping characters that you have ever witnessed. Note that "speedy" here refers to a character's movement speed, not just to a game being beaten in a short amount of time."
Some of these runs do not feature any quick character movement / zipping at all. It's kind of late in the process now to weed out the options, but we are still not going to give an award to a run it was not eligible for.
If there's a single winner which is not eligible, we are going to be resetting this poll with the ineligible options removed. If multiple win, we will only give the award to those that are eligible.
If you want, you can explain why you think certain runs are eligible, and the staff will take it under consideration.
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
Normally choosing between Mega Man IV and Mega Man V would be a very touch choice. But this year it's easy, I'm going with Pokémon Yellow - Gold - Super Mario Bros. - Tetris - Link's Awakening.
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
Castlevania and only Castlevania. Best run on the site in my personal opinion.
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
Challenger, doesn't look like you're going to win. But you improved like the most perfect TAS on the site, so you have my 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
Fog wrote:
Mothrayas for being crazy enough to TAS a 10 hour game
Thirded!
I don't know how I missed this run during the year. You guys should alert me when we publish something this crazy.
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
Spikestuff gets in the last word with:
Spikestuff wrote:
In one ear.
Redhotbr wrote:
o Bobo pediu que você usasse o botão de editar ao invés de criar múltiplos posts sem alguma informação.
Out the other.
Redhotbr wrote:
Lembrando também que spam/flood são cabíveis de punição dentro da TASvideos.
You wrote back to red and didn't take any of that to heart.
Adios.
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
Proof it's an algorithm bug?
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:
Requesting rule changes just because you like a run is a bad way to judge.
On the other hand, if a particular run shows a potential defect in the rules, it's good to discuss it, and perhaps consider if the rule could benefit from some fine-tuning.
You are 100% correct. In this case I found the rule was ambiguous and added some clarifying remarks.
Warp wrote:
By the way, if my tone has sounded a bit aggressive in some of my posts, it wasn't my intention. Sometimes I fail to express my opinions in a manner that doesn't come out as feeling a bit pushy and aggressive-sounding. It's not my intention.
I know. I've been here long enough to know you're one of our non-selfish members and aren't trying to be pushy. I enjoy reading what you have to say.
I've also been around long enough to know that your avatar makes some people think you're aggressive.
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
ThunderAxe31 wrote:
For the sake of the conversation, I think at this point I should make it clear what I think about this submission and about my judgement: I like this run, and I'm the first one that got sad in seeing it rejected.
A key point dissenters often fail to realize is that we judges actually like some of the runs we reject, but do so for valid reasons. They instead like to spread disinformation and invent absurd reasons for why we rejected something beyond the reasons we specified (or do know it, but then they just like sewing the seeds of chaos). We pity these miserable individuals who humiliate themselves in public without realizing it.
BTW, it's good to be transparent. I often mention in judgments that I liked a run, even if I had to reject it.
ThunderAxe31 wrote:
But nevertheless, I think I've followed the current rules correctly. I think I don't have the right to raise an exception and accept this run, unless the specific Vault rule gets changed or adjusted.
You could also continue to follow the rules correctly if you change your mind due to new evidence or new arguments presented.
ThunderAxe31 wrote:
I didn't request for a rule change because I think it's quite an overkill to request for a change just for the sake of a single, low entertaining run, especially since a run with a much more entertaining goal would likely to get accepted with the current Moon tier rules.
Requesting rule changes just because you like a run is a bad way to judge. Judges shouldn't be attempting to constantly create/alter rules for their own personal preferences, but instead enforce the ones we created with the input of the masses.
It's also ridiculous to require a rule change when the rule is incredibly lax as is. As is, based on comments in this thread the rule was further clarified to show how lax it is. Nothing more is required.
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
DrD2k9 wrote:
Nach wrote:
Therefore we have strict rules to discard software which isn't real games or too trivial to be taken seriously, or so messed up that some call it a game, but no serious TASer would.
What does it take to be considered a 'serious TASer'?
A serious TASer is one who only creates TASs for software which is a real game, non-trivial, which is not messed up (unless the TAS is meant as a joke or some kind of technical accomplishment).
DrD2k9 wrote:
Alyosha seems to think this game/software is TAS worthy....is Alyosha not a serious TASer?
Those who are and aren't serious TASers know who they are.
Regarding this game/software, there are those who correctly know what it is, and those who are on the fence. It would be useful if those who correctly know it would articulate it for those on the fence. But aside from feos, no one here so far seems to be able to articulate anything.
DrD2k9 wrote:
Just because some of the more senior members of the site may not consider games such as this to be serious, other serious TASers may.
I fear this discussion has offended individuals on both sides of the debate. I do hope none of the offense was intentional.
Let me draw you a picture:
|----------------------------------------|
| Those who know the truth |
| and can articulate it |
|----------------------------------------|
| Those who know the truth |
| but cannot articulate it |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|----------------------------------------|
| Those on the fence |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|----------------------------------------|
\----------------------------------------/ These are the serious TASers, containing nearly all the site players and viewers.
|---|
| |
|---|
\---/ These are the non serious TASers who do not even attempt to articulate it and just want to be difficult.
Since they either only care about numbers or dislike how we assign numbers, they truly dislike our publication system and they are outside any debate and can be ignored.
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
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
Since I don't know the game nor watched it, let me ask can the player just shoot everything and still win? Because if they can, the math isn't important here.
If you shoot the objects math tells you to shoot, you lose time. If you shoot other objects, you save on time but lose health and eventually die. The author trades as much health as he can on that, this is why he takes an extra life in the menu. Playing the unintended way is faster and results in "Takes damage to save time".
So basically he throws the math out the window, and just finds the fastest combination that makes you win. Although for the viewer to understand what's happening, you have to pay attention to the math?
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
feos wrote:
Same as the above, you get a hint where to fly not to die if you do math, but you need to control your character optimally regardless. So again math is just a secondary indicator here. If it was replaced with colors, all the gameplay would remain the same, even though it'd be as basic as on A2600.
Can this be done with just simple trial and error by a regular user till they got it right? If so, I would agree the math is actually secondary to the game play.
I dunno if numbers switch around preventing blind winning;, if they don't change, it's clearly possible in real time.
Knowing the answer is important to determine if the educational bits are primary or secondary.
feos wrote:
But regardless, my main point here is that the game has lots of TASable gameplay if you discard math, while Elmo has none. In the end, it's not math itself that we want to avoid with Vault rules, but trivial games whose TASes don't impress anyone.
While I agree with you we want to discard TASs that don't impress anyone, the point of the vault is to allow publications of TASs which don't impress anyone[1]. Therefore we have strict rules to discard software which isn't real games or too trivial to be taken seriously, or so messed up that some call it a game, but no serious TASer would.
So we have to look at it not as discarding math, but rather if the education in the game is actually an essential component of the game or not. If it isn't we can accept this.
[1]It should be noted that a small minute fraction of our viewers are defective humans who think some math number slapped next to a video is the only determination for impressiveness. The rules clearly don't work for these individuals[2], and since they're not part of the highly esteemed real TAS loving group (nearly everyone here), we honestly do not care about their opinion.
[2]These defective humans basically end up being either A) Impressed by mere numbers, in which case they don't actually watch anything anyway, they can find the same number in the submission list and be impressed by that without a publication; B) They actually watch it, but then notice how our numbers don't line up with their expected way to play the game, in which case they don't like the number and don't want it published. In either case, there's no point publishing anything for these people and we can ignore them
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
feos wrote:
This sounds like an average basic game from something like Atari2600 era. Except there you can tell that your shooting is correct by the sprite of the object: it is supposed to look like an enemy. Or something otherwise harmful. In this game, you need to do basic math to know which object to shoot.
My personal opinion is, if you have to fight enemies anyway, and math helps you to make sure you're fighting the right enemy, otherwise you'd have to make random guess each time, math is a secondary factor in such a game. But even that can be totally ignored with some basic luck manipulation: you just shoot random objects and compare your time loss. For real-time play you need to see the numbers. For a TAS you don't care, yet you still have to play the game the usual way. And in addition, there's this optimization factor where you need to plan out your route the way the author did.
I see you are actually trying to conform to the rules to get this game published, and I think you're on the correct track.
Now, just because a TASer can use RAM watch and other tricks to avoid normal play doesn't actually relegate the math component to being secondary.
Since I don't know the game nor watched it, let me ask can the player just shoot everything and still win? Because if they can, the math isn't important here.
feos wrote:
Same as the above, you get a hint where to fly not to die if you do math, but you need to control your character optimally regardless. So again math is just a secondary indicator here. If it was replaced with colors, all the gameplay would remain the same, even though it'd be as basic as on A2600.
Can this be done with just simple trial and error by a regular user till they got it right? If so, I would agree the math is actually secondary to the game play.
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
Yes Radiant, that's the general idea.
The rules lay out a minimum standard for some of these types of software that usually don't make good games. If something comes along that meets the minimum requirement, it can be published.
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:
Just watch the run, please? You'll see what I'm talking about when I say this is an actual video game and I don't see any reason why it should not be eligible.
If you think it's an actual video game, make a case that the educational elements are secondary. If your argument is good, the judges will reverse their decision.
Warp wrote:
By saying you want to accept this game anyway, are you implying you agree this game is non-serious?
What I'm saying is that if this is rejected solely because a rule says so, then perhaps that rule could benefit from some changes.
Changing the rule means accepting non-video games. That's not going to happen.
We have no goal to throw away rules just to make everything become acceptable.
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:
Ok, that's clear. My proposal was, however, to change that rule so as to make it possible to accept games like this one in Vault.
The rule as it stands exists to disallow non-serious games. To change the rule would mean to allow non-serious games.
By saying you want to accept this game anyway, are you implying you agree this game is non-serious?
Warp wrote:
You stated earlier, rather adamantly, that the rule will not be changed, period, even though you haven't even seen the game or the run
Because we have no intention of accepting non-serious games.
Warp wrote:
(thus, I think, you don't have the full perspective of why I consider this particular game to be perfectly fine for Vault.
Why not just tell us why you consider it fine?
If your reason is you dislike our rule, it's not changing.
If your reason is that it's a serious game, then all you need to do is work within the framework of the existing rule which I reiterated a number of times already.
Warp wrote:
I don't really understand why you are being so strict here.
Being a video game is a key tenant of TASVideos. We are not looking to host the whole array of software that can exist. The rule as it stands is to allow publication of real video games, not other kinds of software.
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.
