Link, Fox, Mario Bros., and Pikachu-- generally uses a combination of dashing and reflector. Because of the very hard difficulty, these characters require edge guarding.
Yoshi, Kirby, and Fighting Polygon teams-- stays close to the ground when attacking so to save time, but sometimes it is advantageous to jump and attack (like say for the last of them). Character and pokemon spawns are manipulated through movement.
Break the Targets and Board the Platforms-- skips so to save time.
Samus-- because the lava rules out bottom vertical KOs (fall through glitch does not occur until around 20 seconds) and top vertical KOs take too long, damage is built up with a combo so to execute a horizontal KO.
Giant DK and Metal Mario-- Giant DK is easy to manipulate and dies relatively fast, but Metal Mario does not suicide, despite what Fox does, until around 15 seconds through the match.
Master Hand-- Uses most damaging and quickest attacks along with lasers when Master Hand is too far away.
Stick around for the credits and post credits.
The toughest measures are comparing jumps, as there are many different ways to jump. Along with that, many of the decisions depended on exact frame timing because the CPU will change their attack path according with the inputs nearly every frame.
Phil: Movie is repetitive and not impressive which is too far from what this site aims for, entertaining movies.
it appeared to me the judges had all ready decided on not publishing this run half a year ago. the only reason i saw phil had grave digged it up was just to find a way to put it in the grue, which he succeeded:
Phil wrote:
If you have problems with people's negative opinion about your movie and you only submit this movie for yoursel without caring about nesvideos community then it will be instantly rejected. Final verdict is clear.
an entirely elaborated attack. i don't care about the nesvideos community? come on. anyway, it's insulting you had to kick the thread when it was all ready down. i'd prefered you to just put it in the grue if you were so set on doing it anyway.
if you say you were giving me a chance by posting, then you're full of it. you voted no, and as a result, two other people voted yes. your attempt on me swinged in the opposite direction (not the direction of the grue).
Phil wrote:
If you don't like the forum rules, you know what to do.
this submission has my name on it. if you're saying i don't have the right to defend my work, that i should just bow down to your selective enforcements without saying what i think , then yeah-- i should definitely know what to do-- call you ridiculious. nesvideos is lucky people submit their work. you shouldn't accept everything, no-- but you shouldn't treat a community like you own it.
it appeared to me the judges had all ready decided on not publishing this run half a year ago.
Who? I don't see comments from any judges before me about this game.
List of current judges(I think there's a new one that wasn't there 5 months ago):
Bisqwit, Truncated, BoltR, DeHackEd, Nach, Omega and me.
nico wrote:
it's insulting you had to kick the thread when it was all ready down.
You don't have a good point. You should elaborate more because this thread wasn't down. I think your attitude is such selfish and you feel hurted because some people don't love watching your movie
nico wrote:
if you say you were giving me a chance by posting, then you're full of it.
Yes, so people that are saying that your movie is not entertaining are wrong. So, I am and should feel guilty.
nico wrote:
this submission has my name on it.
Now, this topic is copyrighted.
nico wrote:
if you're saying i don't have the right to defend my work, that i should just bow down to your selective enforcements without saying what i think , then yeah-- i should definitely know what to do-- call you ridiculious.
I don't say you can't defend it. There's a large difference between defend and offend.
nico wrote:
nesvideos is lucky people submit their work. you shouldn't accept everything, no-- but you shouldn't treat a community like you own it.
I don't like watching this movie and because of that I am owning this forum. What's next? I am owning the universe?
Your attitude let me think you think are the boss of this topic.
Might as well give my opinion about this...
The movie wasn't judged yet, so everyone may vote what he thinks on it. I always like it when people tell what they voted, and write down a line or two about why they voted this.
I would agree with nico if this thread was already at 'eaten by grue'. Then, there would have been no need for someone to say they didn't like the movie. Constructive criticism would be appropriate in this case.
However, since this movie wasn't judged yet, I don't see a problem with Phil voting no, and explaining why.
nico: If you already lost all fate in the movie, then why didn't you cancel the submission?
nico: If you already lost all fate in the movie, then why didn't you cancel the submission?
Thanks for pointing out that question that I forgot to wrote. I was also wondering why he didn't cancelled it.
nico: Btw, if I would be the owner, all movies would be accepted. And we wouldn't have this discussion. But here, it's not the case. We must respect Bisqwit that uses his bandwith connection to share those movies and this site.
As part of judge duty, we must have that in consideration.
i hate to go nitty gritty like this, but that's where you seem to want to take the conversation....
Phil wrote:
nico wrote:
it appeared to me the judges had all ready decided on not publishing this run half a year ago.
Who? I don't see comments from any judges before me about this game.
List of current judges(I think there's a new one that wasn't there 5 months ago):
Bisqwit, Truncated, BoltR, DeHackEd, Nach, Omega and me.
i've submitted twice for this game-- the first, I cancelled. despite this, the fact that no judge published (even if they didn't vote) is why i would say "it appears to me the judges had all ready decided on not publishing this run half a year ago."
Phil wrote:
nico wrote:
it's insulting you had to kick the thread when it was all ready down.
You don't have a good point. You should elaborate more because this thread wasn't down. I think your attitude is such selfish and you feel hurted because some people don't love watching your movie
the thread was down-- a year down and stagnant. i feel insulted by you-- not anyone else. i think your little agenda to ressurrect and destroy was selfish.
Phil wrote:
nico wrote:
if you say you were giving me a chance by posting, then you're full of it.
Yes, so people that are saying that your movie is not entertaining are wrong. So, I am and should feel guilty.
here, you plainly avoided the rest of the paragraph. i never had a problem with people saying my movie was not entertaining. i'm saying you're full of it for an entirely different reason, which you'd know if you could read. you said i should be happy you posted instead of sending my thread directly to the grue. i'm saying that was not your agenda, since two people voted yes and you voted no-- and you still sent it to the grue. please mind the context next time.
Phil wrote:
nico wrote:
this submission has my name on it.
Now, this topic is copyrighted.
once again-- plainly out of context.
Phil wrote:
nico wrote:
nesvideos is lucky people submit their work. you shouldn't accept everything, no-- but you shouldn't treat a community like you own it.
I don't like watching this movie and because of that I am owning this forum. What's next? I am owning the universe?
Your attitude let me think you think are the boss of this topic.
the way you threatened me (twice) and someone else (once) in this thread, i'd think you have a strong sense of owning things around here.
