Posted: 9/7/2004 8:31 PM
Post subject: Publishing taking damage vs not taking damage
Quote
Blechy
Former player
Joined: 6/27/2004
Posts: 550
Location: New York
I know it's a contraversial issue, but this isn't a question whose answer will be based on opinion. In general, if a movie is published which purposely avoids taking damage, and a movie of the same game is submitted having the same goals EXCEPT that it takes damage to save time, is the general policy that the latter movie will be published in addition to the first, or will it overwrite it? Kid Icarus comes to mind: why is it that bobwhoops' run was never made into an avi where sleepz' was?
Posted: 9/7/2004 8:35 PM
Post subject: Re: Publishing taking damage vs not taking damage
Quote
Bisqwit
Editor, Active player (296)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 7469
Location: Arzareth
I prefer to avoid this question completely and to not have many different movies for the same game. Of course, I can't decide what people are going to submit.
Posted: 9/7/2004 8:40 PM
Quote
Bob_Whoops
Former player
Joined: 3/19/2004
Posts: 710
Location: USA
Well, mine did have an avi, but it was taken off. Sleepz was much faster because he used glitches, took damage, and didn't get 100% items. I used to not like taking damage, but I have changed my mind. Don't know about the policy on overwriting though.
Posted: 9/7/2004 8:42 PM
Quote
Zurreco
Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
This is all based on what I've seen in the past: The conditions in which a player takes damage should play a big part in whether taking hits is better than not taking hits. If taking damage can lead to fluent and efficient time savers, and doesn't seem to detract from the movie's entertainment, then it is a better movie. Think about it; would you rather see someone spend time/speed avoiding hits, taking damage in an obviously speedy way, or taking damage despite saving time or style? If there is an enemy that can't be avoided/defeated without sacrificing an obvious amount of time, taking the hit is usually the best idea. I thought bob's movie wasn't published as an .avi because it was obviously longer due to 100% item collection...
hi nitrodon streamline: cyn-chine
Posted: 9/7/2004 9:54 PM
Quote
Blechy
Former player
Joined: 6/27/2004
Posts: 550
Location: New York
Alright... well for the sake of ease if I do a movie in the future with the above conditions, I'll just stay with no damage taken... but alls I have to say is if some clunker comes along and takes damage, it shouldn't be overwritten. Not that I want to get into a debate, but I'm with zurreco. But if we want to stay simple and just try to stay with whatever rules are included in the first made movie of a game, that's okay.
Posted: 9/7/2004 9:57 PM
Quote
Bisqwit
Editor, Active player (296)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 7469
Location: Arzareth
Generally, I prefer take-damage movies over no-damage movies, but in some cases (Batman for example) when a no-damage movie is really impressive (instead of just an arbitrarily chosen goal) I choose the no-damage version. I prefer take-movie movies especially when health is a clearly limited resource - when the author must be creative and intelligent to judge where to use the resource and where to save it.
Posted: 9/7/2004 10:42 PM
Quote
Kyrsimys
Former player
Joined: 4/16/2004
Posts: 1286
Location: Finland
Personally I think it depends on the game. If the only effect of taking damage is losing health, I think it's okay. But if taking damage for example knocks the player back, I don't think it looks good. Sleepz's MM3 run is a good example of how I wouldn't like thingsto be done. But then again, it was obviously faster than it would have been had he not taken any damage, so basically even if I had the energy to do a no-damage run of MM3, it would be in vein because it would be longer than the existing run and probably wouldn't be published.
Posted: 9/8/2004 9:43 PM
Quote
kopernical
Former player
Joined: 3/24/2004
Posts: 132
Location: Indiana
Kyrsimys wrote:
Sleepz's MM3 run is a good example of how I wouldn't like thingsto be done.
I used to think that no damage was the only way to go but oddly enough it was this run that changed my mind. One of the most important factors (at least for me) for a good movie is to be in complete control of the game. I think that taking damage when it is benefical to you only reinforces that.
Posted: 9/8/2004 9:59 PM
Quote
Phil
Active player (410)
Joined: 3/16/2004
Posts: 2623
Location: America, Québec
When I have watched a no-hit run like Conquest of the Palace, an unpublished submission, I felt bored by watching someone always waiting or taking the time to kill monsters instead of taking damage. Today, this movie is in refused status.