Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
I got the same input termination bug (resulting in a paused game) at the end, and that is currently the only thing that is keeping this from being accepted.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
There were several parts that I thought could be improved. You clip against a wall in the first level, which slows you down slightly, there is a lot of lag which I think possibly could have been dealt with better, and the second to last boss (around frame 40,000) looks somewhat unoptimized to me. Also, I'm unsure how the bonus game works, but it doesn't seem to me like you need to collect all the items, because you waist a lot of time getting powerups that you don't need (1 up especially). So I don't believe this is as technically polished as many of the previous posters think.
However, it is by far the most entertaining game that you have chosen to TAS, max. It was a pretty entertaining movie, and a good choice of game. I'll give it a 4 (tech) /7 (entertainment), but because I only have theories about improvements, I don't see any reason to not accept this for publication. Congratulations on your first accepted movie.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
stickyman05 wrote:
6/6
I would have rated entertainment as a 4, C-/D+ range, until I noticed that every level had a ridiculous name that did not describe what the empty box looked like. I mean, "snow" looked like a fucking staircase XD! I STILL laugh my ass off at that shit XD
That word they use is the password system. It doesn't have anything to do with the shape of the next piece.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Since you sent me the WIP, I decided to spend a few minutes to watch this. Unfortunately, as I told you on IRC, I don't think this game is very well suited for TASing at all. The long cut scenes are offset by action that gets repetitive after the 7th or 8th level, and there isn't much to really get excited about this game. It looks pretty well done, but with games like this, there is often a lot of frames to save with different techniques that aren't immediately obvious. Rated it 2|6.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Hyena wrote:
After reading your submission guidelines, I'm curious. I didn't notice many instances of saving time from the landing animations. Did you find some kind of a workaround? For instance, when those zombies throw axes at you in Hobgoblin's stage, I tried to time my jump so I'd get hit right as I land to cancel some of the landing animation.
It's been a while, but from what I remember, the animation may look faster, but you don't actually regain control over Spider-man any quicker, and the damage actually decreases your speed to 1px/frame, as opposed to 2 for normal walking.
Hyena wrote:
I noticed immediately the green block mysteriously disappeared in Sandman's level. Did you plan that, or was it completely by accident? That's pretty great.
It was totally by chance, and I have no idea what causes it to (dis)appear.
Glad you enjoyed it. Since it's such a short game, I may be trying to further improve it in the near future, since it was somewhat hard to frame-whore with the large improvements that I found.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
There's also the issue of all movies receiving a "0" for technical, although the actual ratings seem to still be accounted for in the average rating.
Ex: http://tasvideos.org/rating.exe/946/details
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
I didn't have any problems, but I can see how smaller screens would have the format all chopped up.
One request: Would it be possible to view an enlargement of the entertainment/tech/average chart by clicking on it? It's rather small, and my old eyes aren't what they used to be ;)
Overall though, I like it a lot. I'm sure there will be speedbumps, but I think this is a much needed refresh, and a good improvement to the system.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Phil wrote:
It seems the editor only works when saving and overwriting the same file. "Save as" feature fail.
I've had this problem when I still have the movie running while trying to edit it. Try closing FCEUX (or whatever emulator you're using) and try to "save as" again. If that doesn't work, I'm not sure what to suggest.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Derakon wrote:
What this says to me is that a lot of people on both sides of the argument are not accomplishing anything useful. How do we get people to participate in informed debates instead of just screaming across the divide?
Science and religion tend to be always be at opposite ends of the spectrum, since science is based largely on facts and theories, and religion is based largely on faith and spirituality. It is possible to get people to calmly debate the two, but it's a rare sight;)
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Warp wrote:
Bezman wrote:
If there were only one rating to hand out, I'd probably rate a lot more stuff.
Another idea which came to mind when I read that: What if voting on the technical rating was made optional? In other words, you could vote on the entertainment rating and leave the technical rating "blank". Basically it would mean "I have no opinion".
It may cause some problems with the average score for each submission if a workaround isn't implemented, but I think this is a pretty good idea. But I don't think that the ratings should be reduced down to one category. I can see the possibility of having a technical category helping to initiate some more critical thinking when it comes for rating/voting that might not have been present before (for the voting system, at least). And having to have the viewer provide a little more thought into their vote could help to reduce the syndrome formerly known as "weak Yes-itis"
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Hmm... good timing with my edit to my above post. Here it is again:
Warp wrote:
We must be Politically Correct and avoid all constroversies and anything that might cause disagreement. This is, after all, the current PC trend here.
Obviously you were being sarcastic with the above quote, and think we need more conversation, and shouldn't be afraid of controversy or disagreement. I agree. Which is why I wrote why I disagree with your idea about technical ratings. If you disagree with me, that's fine too! I'm not trying to start a flamewar, I'm just was pointing out that your system makes very little sense to me. If you want to continue thinking in that particular way, feel free.
However, your reaction to my criticism makes me believe that you are very open to new discussion, as long as it's in agreement with how you think. And I simply think that's wrong.
EDIT: And I don't think I'm presenting new ideas, or new material, since I've always seen the "technical" rating as a way of saying how close to perfect I think the current movie is. And you apparently have been thinking your way for a long time also. So neither of us are presenting new material to the discussion.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
You're the one that has recently been complaining about how new suggestions should be listened to, and that discussion and argumentation are good things. So I pointed out my dislike of yours system. If that hurt your feelings, I apologize. But you can't have the site work both in favor of all discussion when you agree with it, and against discussion when you disagree with it.
EDIT: And I never said I wanted the technical scale to be eliminated. I think it serves a good purpose, and the fact that you have the opinion that my definition of technical isn't very good is fine with me.
EDIT2: For your reference:
Warp wrote:
We must be Politically Correct and avoid all constroversies and anything that might cause disagreement. This is, after all, the current PC trend here.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Warp wrote:
I thought about the technical score to be an evaluation of the *techniques* used in the run. In other words, rather than being a pure optimal-frames/actual-frames-in-the-run score, it's an estimation of the quality and diversity of techniques used in the run. A bit like figure skating: The judges don't estimate how fast they are skating, but how well they perform their techniques (and how many there are).
Does it perform heavy luck manipulation? If so, does it do it to its great advantage? Is it "cool"? Does it zip through walls? Is the zipping performed with good style and technique? Does it "look good"? What kind of tools were used to make the run? Was lua scripting used to aid in making the run? Was a bot written to create part of the run? Was the game disassembled in order to understand how the rng works? That kind of things.
Even a frame-perfect run may deserve a low technical score if it doesn't show advanced and well-executed techniques. Perhaps the game in question just doesn't lend itself to awesome techniques, but then it's simply a poor game choice.
I have suggested this a couple of times in the past, but always shot down. For whatever reason I cannot comprehend, people don't want this. They want the technical score to be a pure optimal-frames/used-frames score, and nothing else. Interpreting it like that makes the whole technical score kind of moot and uninteresting. It has no value. It doesn't say anything.
I personally find your idea of technical rating being judged like ice skating to be one of the worse explanations given, due to the incredibly vague descriptions of criteria you use. Glitches like zipping and very game specific, and have become commonplace for the games that do utilize it.
Regarding technique used, I'm sure there are a large number of people who simply download the AVI and rate, without reading through the submission thread. How are they supposed to know that techniques like lua scripting and memory watch are used? Or if they disassembled part of the code? Many tools that used to be rare are commonly utilized today, such as RAM watching. Sure you can always make the point that "informed raters" should be reading through the submission thread, but often that information isn't even mentioned there. So then it's not only the raters fault, it's the authors.
Overall, I find very little I like about this view of "Technical" achievement. I may not be able to imagine a theoretically perfect run, but I have a much clearer idea of what the perfect run looks like than trying to imagine some of the things you've suggested.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
nfq wrote:
mmbossman wrote:
XKeeper, what is your opinion on the death penalty?
sometimes it can be good to kill some people (like hitler). i don't consider death to be a punishment though. i think if we kill a murderer he might actually go to 'heaven'. but i think the reason there is death 'penalty' is to eliminate dangerous people. also, if someone kills someone you love, there's a natural instinct that makes you want to kill that person, so it might be a good idea to let that person kill the murderer.
i'm not sure if murdering murderers solves the murder-problem though... perhaps all this murdering just makes more murderers be born.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
I personally would use a system divided by .5, but probably wouldn't find much use for any differentiation below that. I agree with moozooh that the degree of precision I'm able to give a rating simply doesn't need to be divided into tenths of a point. But perhaps some people do rate that precisely.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
BoltR wrote:
On an unrelated note. Baring a few less than stellar posts off the start, that new submission is doing pretty well without votes if you ask me. (Though i'm sure after I post this, the childishness will attack to try and prove their point)
[childish] The old one did pretty well too, even with a poll [/childish]
Interestingly, the main argument from that thread stemmed from a "meh" vote, but quickly moved on to attacking a players opinion of the improvement, which seems to be the type of argument you were advocating earlier in the thread. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Experienced player
(822)
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Zurreco wrote:
No, that was a simplified argument to get rid of your bullshit 'only publish things above 5' concept.
The whole idea that everything we publish is above average negates the concept of an average in the first place. If we are to assume that every run published is above a 5 already, why even give the option to vote less than 5?
As we discussed over IRC, we give the option to vote lower than 5 on published submissions because some movies slip through the cracks, and get published when they shouldn't, just like some movies that end up in the grue probably should have been published. Such is life. I know you don't agree with me, so we'll just agree to disagree.
