Umm, no Phil. It's precedent here.
If you can't beat my time, then my run is better.
Don't mix potatoes with bananas. How old are you? 10 years? because the " He did this, why can't I" is so childish. Btw, now I know you are an hypocrite.
I wish you good luck in your career as politician.
Speed is not the only thing we measure here.
Phil has every right to attempt to beat this movie. Nothing changes that.
Also, this is such a short movie at only 1 minute that there's not even an issue of lost effort to consider.
Umm, no Phil. It's precedent here.
If you can't beat my time, then my run is better.
Don't mix potatoes with bananas. How old are you? 10 years? because the " He did this, why can't I" is so childish. Btw, now I know you are an hypocrite.
I wish you good luck in your career as politician.
Don't be a dumbass. If your theory is correct, I could obsolete nearly all your movies by copying 99% of your strategies and then doing more entertaining things while waiting for a boss to appear, etc.
Borg Collective wrote:
Negotiation is irrelevant. Self-determination is irrelevant. You will be assimilated.
Laughing_gas: I didn't want to obsolete his run. I just wanted the movie to looks better. Theoritically, it should be "Played by Hero of the day and Phil. Côté" but reality is different.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Phil wrote:
an hypocrite.
God there's that word again. It's like the batsignal for JXQ. It's a JXQignal.
Oh, and a one minute movie can't very well be improved in the entertainment area. IMO, the entertainment from a movie like this is the speed at which it's beaten. In longer movies, there may be time for other 'entertainment factors', but gimme a break. Jumpman doing something different for 2/10s of a second is supposed to be more entertaining? Not even if he bent over and mooned me would I be more entertained. (Ok, I'd be entertained at that, but only that).
I'm sciencing as fast as I can !
______________________________________
<adelikat> once more balls enter the picture, everything gets a lot more entertraining
<adelikat> mmmmm yummy penises
Phil, even though it seems like I'm mocking you, I'm not, this is a 100% serious question and I'd appreciate a serious and honest answer.
If I took your warpless SMB movie, copied it frame by frame except I added in one "new" event which was considered more entertaining than what you and Genisto did, then submitted it as "by Fabian, Phil & Genisto", would you have a problem with that?
If I took your warpless SMB movie, copied it frame by frame except I added in one "new" event which was considered more entertaining than what you and Genisto did, then submitted it as "by Fabian, Phil & Genisto", would you have a problem with that?
I don't have any problems. But I would want it to tell me before like I did with herooftheday. I could even help you if you want.
Btw, do you have some ideas to make it look better?
If I took your warpless SMB movie, copied it frame by frame except I added in one "new" event which was considered more entertaining than what you and Genisto did, then submitted it as "by Fabian, Phil & Genisto", would you have a problem with that?
I don't have any problems. But I would want it to tell me before like I did with herooftheday. I could even help you if you want.
Btw, do you have some ideas to make it look better?
No it was only hypothetical, I don't have any ideas and I'm not planning on it.
Thanks for the answer.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Bisqwit wrote:
mmbossman, so you're saying, because you think this movie cannot be made more entertaining, so nobody should even try?
Not at all, people can try all they want. But it's a minute and 10 seconds long. If someone, Phil included, can put something in there that makes me laugh or think "wow, that really was entertaining", I'll certainly vote yes. But I have strong suspicions that there can't be much done to dramatically change the movie for entertainment purposes, while still achieving the same time. As I said, the inherent entertainment from a run this short is the speed at which it is beaten. But anyone can feel free to try, I'm certainly in no position to tell them what they do with their time.
Phil: You should go ahead and try to make donkey kong more entertaining without losing speed. If you succeed, people will vote yes, and it will obsolete hero's version. If you do not succeed, the movie is so short that very little of your effort would have been lost.
Also, since it seems as though Hero of the Day would not want his name on such an improvement, you could take full credit.
Edit: Since I do not expect to be voting yes on such a run, myself, I would like to note for the record that I did not vote yes on this run, either.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
because everybody knows the only thing important on tasvideos is if you're faster than the guy before you!!111!17
Note to future self: remember that posting while overheated is dumb
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Xkeeper wrote:
mmbossman wrote:
while still achieving the same time
because everybody knows the only thing important on tasvideos is if you're faster than the guy before you!!111!17
Note to future self: remember that posting while overheated is dumb
Because I'm relatively new, I'm asking this in all seriousness, and not sarcastically: How many times has a movie been obsoleted by a movie that is longer, but more entertaining? I assume this would fall into a similar category, and if it has been done before, then you certainly have a point that speed isn't all we care about. But speed certainly seems to be the one criteria that is considered above all others.
How many times has a movie been obsoleted by a movie that is longer, but more entertaining? I assume this would fall into a similar category, and if it has been done before, then you certainly have a point that speed isn't all we care about. But speed certainly seems to be the one criteria that is considered above all others.
It has happened before. The major criteria, as I see them, were that the successor movie was better both technically and entertainent-wise. Going on a harder difficulty would prevent such a movie from being faster than the previous in actual length.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Because I'm relatively new, I'm asking this in all seriousness, and not sarcastically: How many times has a movie been obsoleted by a movie that is longer, but more entertaining? I assume this would fall into a similar category, and if it has been done before, then you certainly have a point that speed isn't all we care about. But speed certainly seems to be the one criteria that is considered above all others.
Unfortunatley, never (as far as I can recall). Mostly because the only thing anybody aims for anymore is speed.
So obviously, if they do not beat the speed, regardless of entertainment level, they self-reject it or simply give up.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
I agree that speed should not be the only aim for a movie, not at all. However, when you have a movie that is 70 seconds long, almost (and I say almost because I don't want to sound like I'm discouraging anyone from trying) any entertainment thrown in will make the run noticeably slower, which IMO looks sloppy and actually less entertaining (although I know there are bound to be people who disagree with me).
However in a longer movie, say one that is 15 minutes, the few seconds spent on entertainment may not even be noticeable because of the extra length of time the person is paying attention. 4 seconds spent for entertainment in DK is 6% of the entire movie, whereas 4 seconds of a 15 minute movie is less than a tenth of a percent. The ratio for entertainment vs speed is just wrong for this movie (still not dissuading anyone from trying).
The game is the same no matter how you play it. You walk, then you climb up ladders. It cannot be "more entertaining" simply by getting closer to a flame. I achieved the current best time. I even told you that if you improved my run by a single frame, I would be the first person to vote yes.
I can only agree with that. How can this run be ever more entertaining without losing speed?
You can't just make ANY changes in the run except of jumping around on different frames while running into a direction, and that would by all means not increase any entertainment. In fact, it could even look silly, repetitive, and therefore annoying in the end.
And IMO this game is that short, that it absolutely should have speed at 1st priority. It just can't offer any reasonable entertainment-increment by slowing intentionally down. Only the fastest run is worth being published for DK, everything else (at least without a totally different concept) would be dumb and a waste of space.
And it should be obvious that as long as this run can't be beaten by a single frame, it should not be obsoleted in any way. The one who is the first to achieve the record is ALWAYS in higher claim for it than the one who duplicates it. That should always be obvious.
In this case, there is a problem though. Hero got the fastest possible time (and most likely not possible to improve anymore), but level 2 and 3 should be direct copies of Phils work, in case it was indeed frame-perfect that time already, so maybe giving Phil credit for level 2 and 3 examples would be ok.
I however am sure from the facts in the past, that hero is a good enough TASer to be able to get the last both levels frame perfect without any problems, even whithout having the possibility to compare to the previous run, because DK is a pretty easy game to TAS itself, and should be a piece of a cake to get it frame-perfect for any experienced and high-quality TASer as hero is.
