Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
OgreSlayeR wrote:
JXQ wrote:
Being obsoleted by someone is just the way TASing goes. People who don't like that fact have left over it. Perhaps they shouldn't have been here in the first place if they were to get so upset over an obsoletion. Play for entertainment, not ego.
Agreed, if someone was to obsolete all my TASes on here I wouldn't bitch or moan. I actually would encourage people to because I just want to see my favorite games destroyed.
So you'd be happy to wake up tomorrow and see the front page littered with 100 movies published each one exactly 1 frame faster than the previous version (and most of these because of something stupid like stopping the movie 1 frame sooner).
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.
Agreed, if someone was to obsolete all my TASes on here I wouldn't bitch or moan. I actually would encourage people to because I just want to see my favorite games destroyed.
So you'd be happy to wake up tomorrow and see the front page littered with 100 movies published each one exactly 1 frame faster than the previous version (and most of these because of something stupid like stopping the movie 1 frame sooner).
Destroyed does not equal 1 frame faster.
Destroyed means using interesting and surprising new tricks to beat games in ways no one else would think.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
FractalFusion wrote:
Nach wrote:
OgreSlayeR wrote:
Agreed, if someone was to obsolete all my TASes on here I wouldn't bitch or moan. I actually would encourage people to because I just want to see my favorite games destroyed.
So you'd be happy to wake up tomorrow and see the front page littered with 100 movies published each one exactly 1 frame faster than the previous version (and most of these because of something stupid like stopping the movie 1 frame sooner).
Destroyed does not equal 1 frame faster.
Destroyed means using interesting and surprising new tricks to beat games in ways no one else would think.
Yes, hence it should surpass an x% of time less than the previous one.
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.
Nach, no, I wouldn't care. If someone puts that much time into it, then hats off to them. That's the way TASing goes and anyone who gets mad otherwise is just bitching because they want their name to be plastered on the movies page. If that's your motivation, that's sad.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
I think the main issue why we wouldn't take 1-2 frame improvements on 10+ minute movies is that it's a waste of time for the encoders. Also, imagine if all you had to do to improve a movie was do it at least 1 frame faster. You see some people doing the bare minimum just to get there name on the site. Sad really.
I usually look forward to great improvements than new games TASed. You get to see the progression and real creativity. I find it very interesting and a good example of this is Mega Man X or Super Metroid. The first movies sucked, but each one after that improved greatly on play and strategy.
These are my feelings with encoding aside. It's probably apparent by now that I actually am not the least bit interested in the encoding and publication side of this site - except for the fact that the focus on it affects other operations around here. Note: I do realize I'm in the vast minority when I say that I'd prefer the site without AVIs.
Obsoletion percentage / different author bullshit: This has been argued over and over, I don't feel like stating my points yet again. The short version is: No I wouldn't care if all my runs got obsoleted tomorrow, yes I'm serious, and I'm glad people like Sleepz get pissed off and leave because of it, because playing for ego is absolutely retarded on this site.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
There's a problem with "x% required to re-publish".
Think about SMB: To improve by a publishable margin, you'd have to have the requirement set to 0.15% (roughly), about 27 frames (for the 21 rule + some minor improvement I'd guess).
It should be done on a case-by-case basis, not just by a percentage. If it's obvious that it's just to get the name on the site, reject it or vote no. If it makes an honest attempt to obsolete a near-perfect movie, fine.
Well I often saw, auto accept because it's faster. And sometime runs are rejected because they lack of entertaining. There should be a middle, of it aims to be as fast as possible, or it aims to be as entertaining as possible. But the line that separate the two in the same movie is not really traced.
And I would also like to see one movie for every game, and not reject those "boring" game, because boring for someone might be fun for someone else.
There's a problem with "x% required to re-publish".
Think about SMB: To improve by a publishable margin, you'd have to have the requirement set to 0.15% (roughly), about 27 frames (for the 21 rule + some minor improvement I'd guess).
It should be done on a case-by-case basis, not just by a percentage. If it's obvious that it's just to get the name on the site, reject it or vote no. If it makes an honest attempt to obsolete a near-perfect movie, fine.
When I suggested that there's maybe an unwritten "should improve by x%" rule, I meant that it's a rule of thumb, ie. a generic guideline. There are exceptions, of course. Sometimes a game (with a relatively short run, such as 5 minutes) may be the subject of a "competition" among several runners, each of them trying to surpass the others by squeezing out even the last possible frame from the run. Such exceptions are just fine, and do not nullify the rule of thumb for most other games.
Also, as I said, there are no specific numbers for the percentage. Just what the judges feel fit. It may even change depending on the popularity of the game. A 5-second improvement of the run of a certain game may be accepted, but of a completely unknown game it may well not be enough to bother (especially if the run is long).
As for "I wouldn't really care if someone obsoleted my 1-hour run by 1 frame right now", imagine that the other guy just takes your recording and simply redoes the last few seconds to get the 1 frame improvement, and submits that. Do you think it should be published?
Even if he did it all the way through from scratch, without doing anything really differently, I still am very dubious about accepting such an "improvement".
I think the main issue why we wouldn't take 1-2 frame improvements on 10+ minute movies is that it's a waste of time for the encoders.
That may be a big reason, but the biggest reason is that I want to provide a safe haven for those who _want_ to make entertaining movies that maybe sacrifice a few frames for better entertainment.
If such tradeoffs can be freely (and acceptably) neglected by a competitor who only aims for frames, why would anyone want to make those tradeoffs at all?
As for "I wouldn't really care if someone obsoleted my 1-hour run by 1 frame right now", imagine that the other guy just takes your recording and simply redoes the last few seconds to get the 1 frame improvement, and submits that. Do you think it should be published?
Yes. In fact, it is better for everyone. The movie will be entitled, done by X and Y authors. Where X is precedent author and Y new one.
Maybe you should have to promise that you went over the whole game and didn't find a single other improvement anywhere, even though you tried really hard. Yeah.
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Warp wrote:
Better for everyone? Even those who would have to redownload the tens-of-megabytes-long movie again just for a 1 frame improvement?
If people are going to throw a fit over such a small improvement, they can go ahead and NOT download the movie files, since "the improvements doesn't merit showing interest" (or whatever argument they have).
Better for everyone? Even those who would have to redownload the tens-of-megabytes-long movie again just for a 1 frame improvement?
No one force someone to download videos. Do you know that?
If your preferred software got a "bugfix" that repair some minor bug. Will you wait or download it?
As for "I wouldn't really care if someone obsoleted my 1-hour run by 1 frame right now", imagine that the other guy just takes your recording and simply redoes the last few seconds to get the 1 frame improvement, and submits that. Do you think it should be published?
I would really like to see my runs improved, even if they are improved only by a few seconds. However, if someone just took my recording and, say, ended the recording a bit earlier, I would be pissed. But taking someone else's work is really a whole different thing and is not allowed here.
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3599)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4739
Location: Tennessee
This obsoletion debate is silly.
Hypothetical scenario:
I wake up, eat my morning hot pocket, and go to the submission page to see what is new. I find to my suprise, a guy named joseppi submits 347 runs. He has obsoleted every run on the site by 1 frame. "Wow, this guy has too much time on his hands." Here is how I would judge some of those runs:
SMB2 (U) princess only: There are a lot of new tricks discovered in this game and surely a lot more than 1 frame can be saved, probably like 30 seconds. There was even a 5sec improvement rejected for being sloppy.
Marble Madness (U): I have a wip of this that is 16 frames faster in level 2. Plus I know of two more optimizations. *Posts wip* This needs more work and those new tricks should be included in a new run.
Random NES game: I think brushy has a wip that is 2 frames faster at the first level. Try harder and find some more of these optimizations to clean this up more.
SMW96exit. The previous author sacrificed a few fadeout lag frames for the sake of doing impressive stunts. did the new author simply take these stunts out? If so, this movie is less impressive and probably be rejected. At the very least it should be debated, and the time saved should be weighed against a potential entertainment loss.
Mario 64 120 star. Ditto about sacrificing time for entertainment. These have been established as good choices. The new run would probalby need to include these. Also, in such a long movie surely more than 1 frame of improvement is possible.
SMB: wow, this movie was supposed to be perfect. Unless it is from the controversial "early input" that has already been decided as not acceptable then this movie will be accepted.
Donkey Kong: The last one was a 1 frame improvement. And it seemed unimprovable. This may be an impressive optimization.
Also, where/why the 1 frame of improvement has to be looked at. Did he saved 30 frames only to lose 29 in the next level? If so, this is sloppy and would need to be improved. IF every segment of this game is equal to the previous except for this 1 frame and there are no other known optimizations, then kudos.
Many runs on this site are to the point where only frames are left. This is a good thing because we are striving for perfection and achieving it. Putting a cap on the amount that a run will be improved will a) prevent some games from being pushed to absolute perfection unless they happened to get there the first time b) Encrouage minor frame sloppiness by authors who know that the movie is in no danger of obsoletion by mere frames.
Lastly, Someone doing such a thing is not trivial. Improving a run by 1 frame and ensuring that no segment of the movie is slower than the previous takes many hours of hard work. It bugs me that people think that someone who did this put no effort in. Also, this isn't going to "just happen" to even 1 run without good reason (it is short and nearly optimized already) due to this work load.
P.S. Sorry for contributing to the derailment of this thread.
Random NES game: I think brushy has a wip that is 2 frames faster at the first level. Try harder and find some more of these optimizations to clean this up more.
Getting back to the original topic of this thread for a moment, something like this idea occurred to me before as well. I don't think the "let the viewer play around here" part is very important, since they can already do that if they want to, but providing a way to string together interesting alternative outcomes throughout a movie would be very neat. I've run across countless funny things that I wished I could show but didn't have any good way of compiling them. S3&K would make for a hilarious and varied "blooper reel", for example, and plenty of other games would make for good ones too.
providing a way to string together interesting alternative outcomes throughout a movie would be very neat. I've run across countless funny things that I wished I could show but didn't have any good way of compiling them. S3&K would make for a hilarious and varied "blooper reel", for example, and plenty of other games would make for good ones too.
That's a nice idea. I share your sentiment (wish for a manageable way for the player to publish those along with the actual movie).
No one force someone to download videos. Do you know that?
If your preferred software got a "bugfix" that repair some minor bug. Will you wait or download it?
Using that logic we should never reject a video under any circumstances. What? That Donkey Kong Country run is 8 hours long because the author didn't want to hurt any of the baddies, doesn't use the run or roll buttons, and dies six times? That's fine! No one is being forced to watch it!
As for your bugfix question, that is way to open ended. If it's some minor bug which will doesn't actually make a difference, running on a production level service, you bet your ass I probably wouldn't bother to update. Downtime hurts. Plus, what if this bugfix causes more issues? I'll let other people test that out before I do before I risk my money on it.
Hell, on my personal PC I have in the past read a changelog and straight out decided not to bother getting the update. Instead choosing to wait until a change is made that actually matters. As they didn't come that rarely.
This obsoletion debate is silly.
[ *TL;DR* (Ok, I did read it, but I'm still taking it out of the quote) ]
P.S. Sorry for contributing to the derailment of this thread.
Who cares if you derailed the thread? you're absolutely right.
As for the "what if they just edited the already-published movie and saved a single frame?" comment. It's been done before. I'm aware that it was probably just Bisqwit editting one of his old NES Rockman runs for resubmission, but point being, It's not unheard of. Generally though, asking for permission wouldn't be a bad thing. ¯~¯
