I've read through most of the posts from the last 24 hours, and didn't really see this important thing mentioned.
I've watched live for the past 2 years, and this was smoothest, most polished presentation you've ever done. I remember in previous years that we'd have to wait several minutes as you did hardware setup and switching between games. This year it felt like there was less than a minute of wait time between each game, and you never encountered any unforeseen failures. (With the NES classic situation being disclosed in advance, it wasn't a problem) Some of this is due to the fact that you had to have everything hooked up in advance since you were running 3 consoles at once, but it still made things look like they were really well planned.
As others have said, content-wise it wasn't as entertaining as previous years, but you did a really great job making everything run quickly and without problems this year.
The most obvious problem to me with the GDQ events has always been the setup times, which often take much longer than estimated. I don't understand why it sometimes takes as long as 25 minutes between games and then they end up having technical difficulties. They should have the next hardware / game staged already on a rolling cart, so they just need to roll it over and plug in power + audio + video cables and be ready to power up the next system in a minute or two after unplugging the previous one. I don't know how the actual process works, but it feels like they're setting stuff up for the first time and plugging cables both into the consoles and the output whenever they switch games instead of having everything ready except connecting to TV/video capture/power. Obviously there are some exceptions to this like your TASBot stuff and races, but in general it feels like there's room for improvement in their setup process. I always bring a projector, tripod, game console & controllers with me to the annual holiday party at work and it takes me less time to set that up than they spend switching games and it's not staged ahead of time.
Looking forward to whatever you do at future events.
I know there's been a lot of criticism in here about the video streaming, but I actually think it worked really well. The basic problem is that regular, non-ACE TASes that aim to beat the game have often been received badly at GDQs in the past, especially if they're being played back via prerendered video. Using a SNES as the video player was a good way to trick the general audience into accepting them. I think my main criticism here is that the runs were too fast-paced and there wasn't really time to explain what was going on.
Perhaps for a future year it'd make sense to have some sort of luck manipulation demo (maybe an RPG) that's slow enough for the commentary to explain everything that's going on. (I seem to remember there are RPGs or at least categories for which ACE is possible but only halfway through the game, which means that you could explain how the game works, everything that's going on in a regular run, etc., but still come up with a ridiculous ending if you want to.) That said, I fear that any run that really shows what TASing is about will get rejected due to not having the entertainment / donation-pulling levels required.
Also worth considering is a TAS versus human race in terms of ILs (or something similar that makes the runs easy to compare); I assume you'd pause the TAS run while waiting for the human to catch up. That'd give a very clear view of what TASing is capable of, because we could see the TASbot do a trick trivially and the human talk about how hard it is, difference in the levels of swag, etc.. It might be worth giving the TASbot a minor handicap (e.g. "all coins" in a Mario game) that slow it down to the extent that the race is actually interesting.
-How close are we to console verification on stuff like Playstation?
If I understand correctly, that's never going to happen. At least not with unmodified hardware.
AFAIK PS games can only be run from CDs. Reading from a CD has pretty much random timing (that can vary by a lot). Syncing with that is probably impossible (unless, as mentioned, you modify the hardware somehow, which tends to be a bit of a no-no in terms of TASes and console verification).
Although, I suppose that if there is some PS game that's fully loaded to memory and never reads from the CD after that, it could possibly happen. I don't know if such a game exists.
(Disclaimer: I have zero knowledge about PS TASing and hardware, so I may be talking complete BS here.)
Joined: 10/12/2011
Posts: 6336
Location: The land down under.
Kinda... Just bit more on the PSN side of things.
The PlayStation allows users to purchase the Classics on the store and the loading times are consistent enough to warrant a run.
The PSTV is considered the fastest with fast disk speed enabled out of the bunch with the PSP behind in a close second.
So if you look into either one of the two (Both have games the other doesn't have... Oh yeah... PSP store is dead. Homebrew away~!) you'll have a more consistent result compared to the likes of an actual console.
WebNations/Sabih wrote:
+fsvgm777 never censoring anything.
Disables Comments and Ratings for the YouTube account.Something better for yourself and also others.
PSX is the console that has ACE runs which aren't verified. With the dramatically increased data feed rates, it becomes possible to make a takeover chain. But as no ACE was found for N64 (just yet), PSX verification might be a way forward.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
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.
While I was really impressed by the technical details of what was happening (once it was finally explained), I'm disappointed by the lack of good commentary for the SM64 and Portal TASes. I actually thought about getting out of my seat in the stream room, running up to the stage, and asking for a headset to tap in for commentary since I discovered most of the tricks in that run (along with imanex for the rest of them). If the fact that portal was up for consideration was mentioned literally anywhere in this thread (that I checked multiple times leading up to the event), I would have gotten in contact with you and written/practiced something. Instead the run commentary was essentially "here you fly across the room because cameras and portals".
In my opinion you would have been better off instead playing a video like We Are Number One or Gangnam Style or some other meme, because this was possibly the worst possible way to show off such impressive and optimized TASes.
edit: I'm realizing this is coming off really negatively. The technical aspect of the TAS block was insane. I didn't realize that each ACE step was setting up for the big finish until it all came together, and none of what happened seemed even remotely possible to me even as I was watching it. I don't think any of it was "ruined" in any way, I just feel like the commentary could have been better, and I think the decision to show off two very highly optimized TASes at low framerate/quality was a pretty bad call. I would have personally preferred to just see the Skype bit (which was legitimately really flippin cool) and then maybe console verify the SM64 TAS.
If the fact that portal was up for consideration was mentioned literally anywhere in this thread (that I checked multiple times leading up to the event), I would have gotten in contact with you and written/practiced something. Instead the run commentary was essentially "here you fly across the room because cameras and portals".
Whaaat? Keeping things a secret? Why would we even do that? To surprise people with the fact that we run a PC TAS on an SNES?
Who needs that element of surprise anyways right?
And not being able to explain glitch-heavy TASes in realtime, which usually require several pages of submission text to get all the details in? Like that's easy and reasonable to do right?
Warning: Might glitch to creditsI will finish this ACE soon as possible
(or will I?)
If the fact that portal was up for consideration was mentioned literally anywhere in this thread (that I checked multiple times leading up to the event), I would have gotten in contact with you and written/practiced something. Instead the run commentary was essentially "here you fly across the room because cameras and portals".
Whaaat? Keeping things a secret? Why would we even do that? To surprise people with the fact that we run a PC TAS on an SNES?
Who needs that element of surprise anyways right?
I feel like a thread planning for the execution of the TAS block is an okay place for "spoilers" for the TAS block. Also, being condescending and sarcastic is unnecessary. I'm trying to provide constructive criticism, and the lack of good commentary has been a sore point of the TAS block for a very long time, and I'm sure a lot of people would agree with that.
Masterjun wrote:
And not being able to explain glitch-heavy TASes in realtime, which usually require several pages of submission text to get all the details in? Like that's easy and reasonable to do right?
Before jumping immediately into the TAS, a brief moment could be taken to explain the essentials of what's happening. I don't know all the specific details of SM64, but I'm entirely confident that with a 1 minute lead-in to portal I could explain basic movement and the escape from the relaxation vault, and then keep pace with the high points for the rest of the run.
Joined: 12/28/2013
Posts: 396
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
If in a future GDQ a similar situation happens, in case the authors don't desire to tell in this thread the content of their work, I suggest telling privately only the ones who have worked in the involved games.
I'm the one who suggested keeping my Pong and Snake run a secret, even from the TASVideos community. I personally still want to keep that element of surprise.
In general the reaction and feedback from the crowd is really great, but I'm especially anticipating the reaction from people that actually know about TASing. They know what's possible, they know what's impressive.
However, with the recent events, people from this site made less feedback on what they thought about the block, and more about how well it represented us as a site and TASing in general.
These blocks are made for you, too, so please enjoy them as much as I do.
I just can't think of completely spoiling the whole event for everyone here.
Warning: Might glitch to creditsI will finish this ACE soon as possible
(or will I?)
Overall I enjoyed the TASBlock this year, you guys are able to show new technical stuff every year which is something really hard to do, so congrats to everyone involved. However, I'm sorry but as z1mb0bw4y said there are a few things that I didn't really like and I feel like posting my personal opinion too.
Masterjun wrote:
I'm the one who suggested keeping my Pong and Snake run a secret, even from the TASVideos community. I personally still want to keep that element of surprise.
Yes exactly, you suggested keeping your run a secret. The authors of both SM64 and Portal runs didn't even know about it. I know the main purpose was streaming a video on this case but I don't think it'd be harmful to inform the authors about it (PMs do exist) to avoid misleading commentaries. (Specifically talking about SM64, we even suggested to send Tyler to AGDQ at the end of page 3 of this thread, but we were completely ignored, guy who discovered most of the new tricks and his name wasn't mention even once during the whole run).
Masterjun wrote:
And not being able to explain glitch-heavy TASes in realtime, which usually require several pages of submission text to get all the details in? Like that's easy and reasonable to do right?
It's not about being able to explain every detail about the TASes in real time, it's about giving commentary according to what it's happening during the TAS. I can't personally talk about Portal because I don't know about the run, but I could make a list about some explanations given during the SM64 run that shows that the commentator doesn't really know what is going on during those sections in the run.
And again, I don't know why it's so hard to properly credit TASes that aren't directly involved or made for the TASblock. You can clearly see the difference between the DS Brain Age TAS last year where every single person that contributed to it was creditted at the end of the run, and the SM64 run in 2014 referred to "A bunch of TASers", or this 2 runs with literally no credit.
Again, I think everything else in the TASBlock was really good and I'll keep watching and supporting it every GDQ, but I really wanted to give my opinion about this one.
-How close are we to console verification on stuff like Playstation?
If I understand correctly, that's never going to happen. At least not with unmodified hardware.
AFAIK PS games can only be run from CDs. Reading from a CD has pretty much random timing (that can vary by a lot). Syncing with that is probably impossible (unless, as mentioned, you modify the hardware somehow, which tends to be a bit of a no-no in terms of TASes and console verification).
Although, I suppose that if there is some PS game that's fully loaded to memory and never reads from the CD after that, it could possibly happen. I don't know if such a game exists.
(Disclaimer: I have zero knowledge about PS TASing and hardware, so I may be talking complete BS here.)
I think if it hasn't been already, that's something that would be good to discuss in a separate thread.
Is modifying a CD-based console to make it deterministic going to far to be considered valid console verification? I have a drive emulator board in my Dreamcast, which produces very fast and consistent load times as long as the SD card it's reading from is consistent as well. I know there are a few other consoles that have drive replacements to read from other media as well. I recall during one of the runs last week that a runner mentioned that they don't count load times towards their times, because some people install the game to their console and others run from disc. Does that make it okay to use modified hardware as long as a human could perform the same thing on the same hardware?
Regarding games that load and never read from the disc again, Animal Crossing on Gamecube was well known for doing that.
Moderator, Senior Ambassador, Experienced player
(898)
Joined: 9/14/2008
Posts: 1007
mkdasher wrote:
Masterjun wrote:
I'm the one who suggested keeping my Pong and Snake run a secret, even from the TASVideos community. I personally still want to keep that element of surprise.
Yes exactly, you suggested keeping your run a secret. The authors of both SM64 and Portal runs didn't even know about it. I know the main purpose was streaming a video on this case but I don't think it'd be harmful to inform the authors about it (PMs do exist) to avoid misleading commentaries. (Specifically talking about SM64, we even suggested to send Tyler to AGDQ at the end of page 3 of this thread, but we were completely ignored, guy who discovered most of the new tricks and his name wasn't mention even once during the whole run).
This is something I need to directly and honestly apologize for, without excuse. I did get permission from Jukspa to show Portal but things went horribly wrong with SM64. I planned to surprise the SM64 authors and before the run I spoke with the GDQ organizers about showing the names of the authors after the run transitioned from LoZ to SM64 (I had sent them the link from the SM64 publication well in advance). The console text was also supposed to change to "SuperN64" as soon as the SM64 run started, but unfortunately none of this ended up happening. Shortly before the run I was in the process of making sure the tech crew had the correct information when the person I was working with was called away and I did not get an opportunity to talk to a staff member about it again before the block started. My failures did not stop there as I did an overall poor job of attribution pretty much everywhere both for runners and members of the TASBot team, including in the spoken commentary.
This lack of proper attribution along with other poor time management choices I made caused massive damage to those who were slighted as well as collateral damage to others around me. After every GDQ I always end up feeling bad about something, but I cannot state strongly enough how awful I feel at this moment for the mistakes I made before and during AGDQ 2017. There was one last casualty that has been the most painful - my own family, who was left empty while I was constantly gone working on one thing or another over the past months. It turns out that for all my business of trying to move things in various directions and get things done that I've hurt nearly everyone near to me in one way or another, and this has struck me with a severe blow.
The site deserves better, my fellow team members, friends and family deserve better, and I can only hope that through self-reflection, a bit of counseling, and the passage of time that I can mend the damage I've done. I do not take my failure and the effort it will take me to repair the damage lightly, and while it may mean that there is a gap for a bit during my absence while I take this journey I feel it is the right thing for me to focus on these issues rather than allowing the problems to fester.
It's abundantly clear through the harsh criticism here that at least this community wanted and wants something different than what we did (no matter how successful it was in the eyes of the public). If I again organize something I want to approach it an entirely different way that may upset a different subset of people including Masterjun - namely, I plan to fully discuss everything openly, even payloads, both here in threads like this and in #tasbot / http://chat.TASBot.net to ensure everyone with an interest has an opportunity to contribute. I do not yet know when I will next attempt to lead an effort to represent the site at a GDQ or other event, and in the meantime I welcome others who wish to step up to the plate to do so with my blessing. I have always described myself as merely the keeper of TASBot, not his lifelong owner, and if there is someone else more capable than me who wants to take that on please let me know.
Finally, please know that just because the severe reaction from the regulars on this site stings, it does not mean that I hold a grudge against anyone. I do ask that people please consider their tone in feedback by being a bit more constructive for next time, but I want everyone to have the opportunity to speak their mind and offer suggestions on how to continue to improve. Thanks again for those who supported these massive undertakings over the last few years, and here's to an eventual bright future with or without me.
Is modifying a CD-based console to make it deterministic going to far to be considered valid console verification?
It's hard to say.
I have a dream of eventually making a hardware-based ODD emulator and software plugin for some console, with matching timings and emulation matching an ideal "perfect" disc (yes, ultimately culminating in an emulation of the rotation of media and head seeks...), or at least an emulator and plugin with matching consistent performance.
Ultimately, if emulation is so accurate all we have left is the ODD, I think that in and of itself is the biggest part of victory. It's up to the community to accept something like this though.
----
Re: payloads and exploits, I understand secrecy of the payload and the argument can go either way. I'd like to think that a resolution isn't necessarily binary.
Re: work for this event, practically everything was kept very secret. Things were discussed in isolation, privately only amongst the rockstars. Previous years didn't have the level of secrecy and isolation that the TAS demoscene did this year. Before my real life issues started I offered to help and was snubbed with no real substantive response. What I offered help for wasn't figured out, so who knows, maybe things could have been different? Still, a solid "yes" or "no" would have been nice.
edit: didn't finish writing
I do not take my failure and the effort it will take me to repair the damage lightly, and while it may mean that there is a gap for a bit during my absence while I take this journey I feel it is the right thing for me to focus on these issues rather than allowing the problems to fester.
I wish you all the best. I know very well how easy it is for an online community to start taking time away from your family and face-to-face community, and sometimes that balance needs to be re-calibrated. I hope you are able to find that balance.
I plan to fully discuss everything openly, even payloads, both here in threads like this and in #tasbot / http://chat.TASBot.net to ensure everyone with an interest has an opportunity to contribute.
I think that is a good idea. Prefacing any discussions with a spoiler warning should be enough to keep away those who would like to preserve the surprise.
Thanks again for those who supported these massive undertakings over the last few years, and here's to an eventual bright future with or without me.
Please know that your hard work is appreciated. You succeeded marvelously in what you set out to do, and I hope you can take solace in the truth that when you set your mind to something, you have the drive and determination to see it accomplished. May that determination bring you to where you want to be in life.
Dwango, I just wanted to let you know that I have nothing but respect for you for the big effort you put into organizing the GDQ events within the last years and especially how openly you confront the criticism here without trying to hide your own mistakes.
Good luck with all your future plans!
Dwango, I'm an author of the SM64 run and I want you to know that although our run was presented very poorly (PU memes spam, just straight up wrong stuff) and without asking anyone about it, I forgive you, and I actually still respect you a lot. In fact I really hope you're gonna attend future GDQs because I know how good your knowledge is, and I beg you not to be too hard on yourself because the huge effort that you put into presenting TASes on GDQs is very very significant and you should be really proud of it =)
Sorry for possible bad English too :s
I beg you not to be too hard on yourself because the huge effort that you put into presenting TASes on GDQs is very very significant and you should be really proud of it =)
Very much this.
Dwango, there can't be damage, if the mistakes are honest, and the downsides of novel and supremely technical work can't be considered damage either! Damage starts when one thinks he's doing everything perfectly and ignores the feedback, which is nowhere close to your attitude.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Moderator, Senior Ambassador, Experienced player
(898)
Joined: 9/14/2008
Posts: 1007
feos wrote:
Dwango, there can't be damage, if the mistakes are honest, and the downsides of novel and supremely technical work can't be considered damage either! Damage starts when one thinks he's doing everything perfectly and ignores the feedback, which is nowhere close to your attitude.
Just because I'm apologetic now does not mean I did not cause pain and discomfort for others earlier in a form that has resulted in persisting "damage". By far my biggest concern for this community is the wounds I caused by not being more diligent in handling attribution, something I have always been sensitive to but really messed up this time. The subtext here is the fact that I got too wrapped up in reactively responding to every small request people had for things that involved dragging TASBot around the event, delegating various technical aspects and polishing things to the rest of the team. I now see how big of a mistake this was as it resulted in bitter feelings that I was completely oblivious to.
Having said all of that, the largest damage was to my family - not paying enough attention to my team members at the event is one thing, but not paying enough attention to my wife and children over the past several months is another entirely. This is what I must change, and why I must step away for a good long while. I have to take the time to realign my way of thinking and re-focus on the things that are really important.
Having said all of that, the largest damage was to my family - not paying enough attention to my team members at the event is one thing, but not paying enough attention to my wife and children over the past several months is another entirely. This is what I must change, and why I must step away for a good long while. I have to take the time to realign my way of thinking and re-focus on the things that are really important.
Right, that's why I kept suggesting dropping SGDQs. But still, your "damage" to the gaming community completely fades before your contribution.
PS: Will you be available for the Demo tier conversation in the next months? I can delay it as long as needed with no problems, if your break also includes abstaining from posting on forums.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Skipping the TAS block at least in the next GDQ marathon could be a good idea. If it's taking way too much of your time, nobody deserves a break more than you!
It may even be a good idea to skip the next GDQ even if somebody else would be ready to take your place and organize it. There are several advantages:
- Six months might sound like a lot of time to the uninitiated, but time and again it has proven to be a surprisingly short amount of time, and it has become really hectic and stressful to the people planning, executing and running the TAS block. A year would allow for a much more relaxed and stress-free pace.
- Rather than leaving most rehearsals and the final contents of the block to the last minute, there would be much more time to do those things weeks and months in advance, and to refine the contents based on test audience feedback.
- It gives more time to come up with good ideas, rather than having to rush them.
One slightly negative aspect that perhaps would need to be addressed somehow:
The TAS block appears to have become, for good or bad, an integral and expected part of the GDQ events (so much so that R.O.B. even appeared in one of the event promo banners a few marathons back). If the next time there is no TAS block, rumors will probably start flying. Sure, we could just ignore them. On the other hand, maybe we could think of some kind of announcement done well in advance so that the lack of a TAS block doesn't come as a surprise to anybody.
I honestly think it's because we're trying to do too much in each marathon. If we're going to do new hacks, modifications, etc every time, then sure, it's going to take time. But what if we didn't do everything from "scratch" all the time? Some people have already suggested showing off traditional runs in the blocks, not just take-overs and stuff. I mean, like, that a Mario 64 run and show it off if we have N64 console verification. That should leave much more time for some other stuff for AGDQ. Don't miss out on SGDQ!
We don't need to stress so much. Let's do something plain and simple for once so that so much time and creeping deadlines don't hurt so much.
I've thought for a while that we should be skipping a GDQ some time. The pressure to keep 1-upping ourselves is too much, and a large minority of the watchers are going to be unsatisfied if we don't. Better to give it a break until we can come up with something truly special to impress the easily impressed, whilst also managing to convey what TASing is actually about.
(Also, rumours fly every GDQ, regardless of what's actually happening.)
