Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Major skip glitch is a movie class describing a phenomenon that was used in "glitched" branches initially. About 40% of the viewers liked it that way. Another 40% said that it's not descriptive. So we came up with something more descriptive.
First of all, the very term "major skip glitch" was used because it was already common to use the term "major skip" in the RTA world. But that alone doesn't tell anything about glitches such skips originate from. So we used "glitch" to indicate fundamental difference from intended major skips.
Major skip commonly means that some huge chunk of gameplay is skipped entirely. Independently from each other, TAS people and RTA people used to have branches with and without major skips. It is obvious that it's impossible to strictly define the term "major" here. So I added a mention to the movie class description that movies using such techniques skip something like 50%+ of the run that avoids the techniques.
It is also important to know that when 2 runs are judged to be published alongside each other, they are required to represent compelling differences in how they are played. No strict definitions again. But when all other aspects are factored in, we usually end up with a branch that we used to call "glitched" (and RTA people describe it "with major skips") along side a branch that avoids such glitch (or a set of glitches). They indeed have significant differences in gameplay and in final time. In most obvious cases it's more than 50% of the movie.
"Game end glitch", "warp glitch", "SRAM glitch" are branch names. Whenever it's not possible to classify the glitch, we invent a name for it or borrow the name it already has. Like I said, it's important to understand what is accomplished: major chunk of the game is skipped by using some glitch. Avoiding that glitch results in a completely different movie that is usually accepted as a separate branch. This difference is described by the word "glitch" in the branch label: it means we are looking at something fundamentally glitched that isn't even trying to look like regular play.
When the word "warps" (or "warpless") is used as a branch name, it describes intended gameplay element. When the branch name is "warp glitch", it describes unintended gameplay element. I don't understand how it can be confusing to anyone.
klmz wrote:
So "major skip glitch" = "game end glitch" + "warp glitch"? It would be weird to me that "glitching-warping to the end" is not a "warp glitch".
EDIT: And then hypothetically:
* You skip a large chunk of levels with a double-damage-boosting trick in midair, and it's not a "warp glitch".
* Later you start over and skip the same large chunk of levels by the same with a double-damage-boosting trick in midair, this time using a glitched out healing item between the two boosts to survive from dying due to skipping an armor earlier in the game, and now it's a "warp glitch".
That would sound kind of... inconsistent (my vocabulary is limited).
It only makes sense to compare it to a run that avoids this technique, even if it doesn't yet exist. "Warp glitch" doesn't describe game engine mechanics, it describes the result: the glitched major skip. And it skips to something other than game end.
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Nach wrote:
As Bisqwit wrote:
As for objectivity, the thing is that we aim for a subjective measure: entertainment. Entertainment is not a mathematical formula. It cannot be objectively measured; it needs a number of subjective components, the human audience.
Speed, etc. are just devices to create entertainment. Even though speed can be measured accurately, entertainment cannot. This is a fact, and we have to live with it. Our method of judging that is a variation of something called "consensus". Your mileage may vary.
And from our old Why and How page:
Our primary goals are to create art and provide entertainment.
A movie is entertaining when it is:
* Interesting (not slow, boring, or repetitive)
* Surprising (does the unexpected)
* Skillful (handles awkward situations efficiently and creatively)
and our main goal is to create movies that are beautiful to watch.
I only joined in 2010, but this is what made me fall in love with tasing. I was very naive and excited, but some time later I came up with a page describing how to make art while tasing:
http://tasvideos.org/TasingGuide/TASArt.html
I've put all the best knowledge, feelings and ideas into that page, and some people that have created top-notch tases expressed that that page inspires them.
It isn't about a page. It is about what you feel and what you end up doing as a result. Creativity and art has always been praised here. But technicality and research have been praised just as much.
What I'm trying to say, some people keep this excitement over the years, they just grow, and let their hobby grow with them, reaching new levels of skill and inspiration. Standing ovations at ADGQ 2014 TAS Block, is it a clickbait that keeps repeating the same thing over and over? No. It is a revolution in people's mindsets. How many people remember annoyances between RTA and TAS communities? I also remember how RTA people started pulling off TAS strats in real time. It was also a revolution in people's minds. Nowadays TAS Block is a major highlight of a GDQ event, people wait for it and most of the time they love it.
On the other side, there are people that have lost this inspiration. They don't feel any soul behind TAS art anymore. It's sad, but it is more sad when they feel like pushing for some ideas that are impossible to implement on a huge scale.
I've been dealing with controversial cases for all these years, in some way or another, with different level of absurd involved. I happened to come up with ideas that have worked for all the conflicting camps. And I can assure you that it is not possible to enforce subjective and arbitrary ideas like absolute and objective policies. It does not work, it never did, it never will. No one will be happy if we start doing that, and we will not.
It is only possible to enforce something that can be objectively defined and evaluated. Yet it only makes sense to enforce it if it encourages productivity. Want to fix some policy that is imperfect? Make a thread dedicated to that problem specifically, and get ready to dig into the problem for as long as needed, as deep as needed. Stating that things just don't work anymore is not just unhelpful, it's disrespectful to all the people that are still inspired themselves to handle all the jobs, and happen to inspire others that contribute their works. If you're getting old, it's fine. If you're being counter-productive, it's a problem. Because it resolves nothing and makes nobody happier.
This quote describes how we deal with things that can not be enforced objectively. We rely on how much the users have been entertained. I listed a bunch of other criteria earlier in this thread, but they were ignored due to selective reading.
Regarding RTA people. Speedruns.com is a site dedicated to record keeping. They do not care how many absurd and ridiculous categories people happen to speedrun. Because they do not have to handle them the way we do. TASVideos has always been about publishing the best pieces of tool-assisted work. It will stick to this principle. It will keep its standards.
Think of how much effort is required to manage a community that allows you to verify and publish your own run, simply by adding a record entry (and optionally a video). Compare it to all the job we do for every submission, in order to only publish the best ones.
Of course it doesn't mean that we artificially raise the barrier to only cherry pick the best of the best. For record keeping we have Vault, it stores all the any% and 100% runs whose goal can be clearly defined and that have speedrun value even to minorities. For old-stile runs that aim for speed or entertainment, but nonetheless look impressive and superb, we have Moons. Moons is very close to old TASVideos, where boring speed records were rejected (because only the best examples were appreciated). But when tiers were introduced, we expanded this in order to publish more branches that are just as impressive. Old TASVideos required to keep branches to minimum. We allowed for more branches, but we test them quite a bit before accepting, to make sure the standard doesn't downgrade.
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Do you have actual examples?
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: 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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Is anyone planning to work on this anytime soon? Rumor about scissorman skip hasn't been confirmed so far.
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
When I first suggested the term "warp glitch" I used this logic:
- We're getting more and more runs that skip directly to the game end using some glitch. Let's call it "game end glitch".
- What about runs that use glitches to skip very far ahead, but not straight to the game end? Let's calls it "warp glitch".
I don't think it matters how you skip to there precisely. You arrive to a point you weren't supposed to visit that soon, and it's not a game end. Even if it happens consecutively instead of instantly, you still do skip to there. So you effectively warp. The key here is not whether physics engine is used or ignored, but the result of arriving to some completely unrelated area. Does it make sense?
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
It would have worked on win7 if MS didn't decide to kill all the needed features eventually. Warepire didn't feel like developing for a dead platform (win7 isn't officially dead yet, but it's the first candidate).
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Nah, this project went through a lot of brainstorming but never left experimental phase, because win10 destroyed all the principles behind it, effectively making hourglass-like approaches useless.
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Kill screen in this game is the same of on the NES original. Same reason, slightly different memory addresses. Legend: you only have 4 seconds to beat level 132 (count starts from 0). It's not possible, you die.
Language: asm
; Set up level timer, called before every level
; level counter - how many loops you've completed (shown under L)
; level timer - remaining time (shown under BONUS)
$CB8A: A4 54 LDY $54 ; load level counter into Y register
$CB8C: C8 INY ; increment Y register
...
$CB94: A9 80 LDA #$80 ; load 0x80 into A register
$CB96: 88 DEY ; decrement Y register
$CB97: C0 04 CPY #$04 ; perform Y - 4
$CB99: 10 03 BPL $CB9E ; if result is positive, skip to $CB9E
$CB9B: B9 07 C2 LDA $C207,Y ; otherwise load value from memory into A register
$CB9E: 85 2E STA $2E ; set from A register into level timer
If level counter is from 0 to 3, the game will read remaining time from memory. If level counter is from 4 to 127+4, the game will force remaining time 8000. If level counter is from 127+4+1 to 255, the game will read remaining time from memory it wasn't supposed to read it from. This is because NES CPU 6502 uses signed numbers when preforming comparison. So starting at level 123 the game reads level timer from memory again, and it offsets the source address farther from what it's supposed to base on - $C207.
Here's the dump of that memory area, it is inside ROM:
Level counter 132 makes it read remaining time from $C28B which is 4. Greatest possible level counter value is 255, it makes it read from $C306, which is 0. You can see a few more 0 values in-between, so even if you cheat your speed or something, you just instantly die in some levels.
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: 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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
It saddens me that you repeatedly ignore the fact that all the needed methods of making sure it's the right decision were used before officially establishing it. It saddens me that you ignore the actual intellectual work we do to handle judgments properly. It saddens me that you blindly call our reasons lame excuses. It saddens me that you invent arbitrary requirements and cargo cults. It saddens me that you switch to personal accusations. It saddens me that you have zero arguments regarding the actual topic at hand.
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
p4wn3r wrote:
However, I should tell you that I have never seen any serious institution that gives someone simultaneously the power to enforce and change the rules without some due process, which you refer later as "those formalities". You can of course disagree, indeed a member seems to be discontent with democratic ideas. In any case, if you don't sympathize with it either, I suggest that you specify how seriously you take your own rules in the Front Page, it would save the members the trouble to figure out how things really work.
We are able to discuss things before enforcing and changing. And we are able to express disagreement with how the rules were changed. The discussion did happen. No disagreement was present before, during, or after the rule change. What else do you want from people who are able to discuss things before, while, and after changing the rules?
p4wn3r wrote:
As I said previously, it was my expectation for any place that wishes to be taken seriously, which I assumed were commonplace. Also, most of the time it's the practice of formalizing that stops abuses. For example, I was in a student union where there were elections, and it was required that the exact date and time of the election should be published in a given manner that made it easy for all students to see, and that it should stay there for a given period, because there were cases where the guys in power would suddenly say that the election was the next day at 2 in the morning, and only his friends would go to vote. After the formalism, it stopped.
How many cases of judge power abuse at tasvideos can you list?
p4wn3r wrote:
From the community, why not? If the input does not matter, why don't you request that the Workbench be abolished, while we're at it? Just tell people to send emails to the judges and things show up published.
Quote input pieces that didn't matter.
p4wn3r wrote:
Abscence of disagreement does not imply agreement.
Absence of ice-cream doesn't imply elephants. Quote disagreement that you evidenced regarding sanity of the updated rules.
p4wn3r wrote:
And also, could you clarify to me why you think discussions in IRC are a transparent way of discussing rule changes?
Because it is a way to collect all the relevant staff members in one place and discuss things in real time. And you are probably underestimating discussion abilities of other members that are present on IRC. The #tasvideos IRC channel is a public and transparent discussion environment by its nature.
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
p4wn3r wrote:
The issue is: a judge does not change the law, never. This violates the principle of separation of powers.
Is TASVideos suddenly a country?
p4wn3r wrote:
What I have think you should have done is state that the current text is not appropriate and would make you cast a bad decision, and request the change explicitly. Then, only after theach following discussion, if the staff approves in a transparent way, give the verdict.
Is it just your thoughts, or some approved set of meta-rules TASVideos has been obeying for all these years? Because from what I've seen, this is exactly what happened, just without imposing all those formalities you pretend we have.
p4wn3r wrote:
and request the change explicitly
Request it from whom? Moth is an admin and a senior judge.
p4wn3r wrote:
I read a bit of the Math Blaster thread and it's the exact opposite of what you're implying it is.
Essentially, a judge decides something and people protest after many pages demanding to reconsider the rule. Then the rules get changed, the dicussion is acknowledged in the change, the decision retracted and the judge casts a new verdict. No problems in the process.
It took so long to fix the rules because there was disagreement among staff members (and among users). Here, no disagreement was present. Do you disagree with the updated rules? Do you think the movie would have been judged differently by the older rules?
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
You haven't been around since we added the tier system, have you?
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
klmz, what definition of "warp" are you using, and where does that definition come from?
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
About SM hacks, here's a brilliant piece of research by ED that helps to see basic qualities of SM hacks (List_of_all_existing_rated_SM_hacks.txt document):
Post #449604
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
p4wn3r wrote:
I have abstained from commenting on this submission, as I do for most controversial movies, but there's one aspect of the verdict that I find a bit troubling.
It looks like the rules for the Vault were updated before accepting the movie. Not commenting on the merit of the movie, it seems disturbing at an institutional level that the person in charge of judging something is capable of unilaterally changing the rules that determine how the judging should be done.
Wouldn't it be more appropriate to retract this decision and create the discussion about rule changes to the Vault to see what people think of this? The way it was done it's hard to escape the conclusion that the rules were changed to legitimize the acceptance of this movie, which hampers the credibility of the judging process.
We don't change rules in order to justify our whims. We discuss everything among staff and only update the rules when we have consensus.
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.
"All kills"? I think only aiming to kill enemies that spawn as you progress through the game is implied, it doesn't make sense to keep respawning the same enemy for eternity in order to kill literally everything possible. Or maybe "maximum kills", since it's impossible to kill literally everything? And it's clearly not full completion and not vaultable.
Memory wrote:
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
FatRatKnight wrote:
To break things down, the method is "password", the effect is "final round", in some terms that makes sense to me. We're preferring the effect in this case, then?
We prefer the end goal, something that represents the primary condition and implies the secondary ones.
ThunderAxe31 wrote:
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
FatRatKnight wrote:
I still say "password". Any particular reason why I would think "warps" means I aim to take the maximum number of warps possible in a run? I agree that "password" has a minimum of description, but I ask to be convinced that "warps" is enough to specify fastest path using warps but "password" isn't enough to specify fastest path using password.
I think it also has to do with how traditional the "warps" goal is: it's instantly clear to most of the people who understand what warps do in the game.
What do you think of simply "final track"? It's inaccessible without a password, so the latter is implied. And it seems we can't formalize in a branch what is it's goal about equipment, so we can rely on mentioning that in the description.
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.
The DSS sumoning glitch is not a warp. It is just a high-speed movement that ignores any obstruct in the path. You can tell this with frame-advance, memory watch and/or just the exploration status (colorization) of the in-game map.
Neither are the OoB room-transitions using the DSS sumoning warp glitches. These normal room exits are always working just as expected, in-bound (see below). It's the DSS sumoning glitch that catapults the character out of bound.
There are indeed glitched warping spots in this game but they are all located in a particaular room in the Arena Area, and this run has nothing to do with them.
Yeah, you can safely assume that I am an expert of this game. ;-)
I think I was confused by the movie description, it says "allowing the player to warp directly to Dracula". However, "warp glitch" describes any way to get into later in-game point in a moment, warping around the map at the light speed delivers you to such points, so I think the branch is correct.
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
It's quite strange how you completely ignore the fact that we only publish unvaultable goals if the result is entertaining enough.
If we stop preferring more entertaining runs for such goals, and instead enforce arbitrary opinion of arbitrary "majority", how will it become more fair to any runner?
The line about creativity perfectly answers your questions. If someone comes up with creative ideas that don't fit into this arbitrary rule set that you want us to start enforcing, we are being unfair to them, because by your suggestion we will need to reject their highly impressive and entertaining movie simply because it doesn't fit into arbitrarily picked rules. And you want it to happen in a tier where entertainment is the fundamental goal.
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.
I will play devil's advocate as well. Must the cartridge be "mass-produced?" Does "mass production" in this case refer to production method or production volume? There are services which will create a cartridge (complete with artwork and box) from a custom ROM, for a reasonable cost. These services will create multiple copies of a cartridge, but each is still hand-made--not mass production method, strictly speaking. If one were to have such a cartridge created, would it satisfy the "homebrew" criterion, even if only 1 such cartridge had been created, and created solely to satisfy this criterion?
I'll quote my IRC note:
02:58 <feos> I think the only part that wasn't clear in the rules is when something is a hack AND a homebrew
02:59 <feos> then we'd need to figure out what it is primarily. for physically distributed builds it's primarily a homebrew, for web distributed patches it's primarily a hack
But f you never ever distribute your rom-hack of SMB, and then release a single cartridge, then it's arguably a homebrew. But no one does it simply to mess with tasvideos, people release hacks and homebrews independently of us, so we have solid chance to know for sure what it is primarily.
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Warp wrote:
feos wrote:
Keep in mind that we're talking about cases when it's not even possible to be objective with things like full completion. Whenever something subjective, even if it is an opinion of the (currently active) majority, it doesn't make sense to enforce such opinions blindly. It's not a democracy, it's art, it involves being creative, overcoming expectations and surprising the viewers. We want innovative thinking!
As said, it works for regular speedrunning. Why wouldn't it work here?
Because
feos wrote:
It's not a democracy, it's art, it involves being creative, overcoming expectations and surprising the viewers. We want innovative thinking!
Warp wrote:
It's not a question of whether the goals are sound and logical. It's a question of consistency and fairness.
We are consistent and fair about only publishing the most entertaining side goal branches.
Warp wrote:
I don't think it feels fair for a runner to do a lot of work on a run, just to have it become obsoleted by another run that's shorter or "better" because of choosing a different set of rules.
If it is better because it is more entertaining, it feels fair for a runner.
Warp wrote:
If the rules for a branch are agreed and fixed, it becomes fair for everybody, and ostensibly leads to healthy competition where everybody is on an equal playground.
Are talking about the same completely arbitrary set of rules? Because when I say "arbitrary set of rules", it means it makes no sense to enforce them. When you say "arbitrary set of rules", you want us to enforce them. But you do not like it when we enforce entertainment requirements. Are you seriously expecting the site to stop asking for entertainment in Moons?
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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11302
Location: RU
Memory wrote:
Now while I don't disagree with this, for devil's advocate purposes, what if I were to take what the site would currently consider a hack and release it in a cartridge format? Would it then be eligible for vault?
I asked myself this question as well.
Since Vault wants clear cuts as opposed to figuring out subjective enough-ness, having been released in real world on a physical media, as opposed to web releases of patches, sounds like a clear cut for me.
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.
