1. I wouldn't make my own site to use the J rom, I would make my own site because the rules on this site seem to be worth about as much as dog shit...
2. Yeah ofcourse someone else would make a great OoT run, because in the past 4 years so many people have done so. *rofl*
Btw. this run has been excepted for days now. When will we finally get a good encode? Nico video is really crappy.
Why do you care about encode quality if you think this run is terrible anyway, and you don't care for the site because you can't accept the landslide vote?
Joined: 11/4/2007
Posts: 1772
Location: Australia, Victoria
compucomp wrote:
Why do you care about encode quality if you think this run is terrible anyway, and you don't care for the site because you can't accept the landslide vote?
Because encode quality has nothing to do with the run, barring console.
Why do you care about encode quality if you think this run is terrible anyway, and you don't care for the site because you can't accept the landslide vote?
Because encode quality has nothing to do with the run, barring console.
No, but for some reason everyone has completely missed the irony of him talking shit about the site and how this run shouldn't be published in one sentence yet demanding that the site produce a quality of the run quickly in the next.
Why do you care about encode quality if you think this run is terrible anyway, and you don't care for the site because you can't accept the landslide vote?
Because encode quality has nothing to do with the run, barring console.
No, but for some reason everyone has completely missed the irony of him talking shit about the site and how this run shouldn't be published in one sentence yet demanding that the site produce a quality of the run quickly in the next.
Maybe the problem is that you can't read. I never said that this run shouldn't be published. I only said that the next run should also be allowed to use the J version and I did clearify that multiple times now. And yeah I'm talking "shit" about a site that doesn't consider it's own rules to be relevant. Do you have a problem with that?
Why do you care about encode quality if you think this run is terrible anyway, and you don't care for the site because you can't accept the landslide vote?
Because encode quality has nothing to do with the run, barring console.
No, but for some reason everyone has completely missed the irony of him talking shit about the site and how this run shouldn't be published in one sentence yet demanding that the site produce a quality of the run quickly in the next.
Maybe the problem is that you can't read. I never said that this run shouldn't be published. I only said that the next run should also be allowed to use the J version and I did clearify that multiple times now. And yeah I'm talking "shit" about a site that doesn't consider it's own rules to be relevant. Do you have a problem with that?
I have a problem with you being a douche and talking shit about the site in one second but in the next demanding the site do something for you. Somehow you expect that by insulting someone, you'll get them to do you a favor?
If you have a problem with the "rules", it's obvious you don't want the run published. But you're on the wrong side of a landslide. If someone lost an election 80-20 typically they can't find a hole in the ground fast enough to hide in.
I'm just trying to wonder what exact rules you think the site has broken. Let's look at the list of submission rules:
Acceptable Movie Files
The movie must begin from console power-on:
The games must be real
The ROM must be good
Use the correct version
The PAL/NTSC settings must be correct
The BIOS must be real
The movie must be good
Cheat-keys and debugging codes are not allowed
The movie must be complete
Play games that are emulated
Obsoleting a published movie
I can see issue with the way the 'Use the correct version' rules are written. It actively discourages (J) ROM use when it doesn't give a saving in terms of time, or tricks that aren't possible in other versions. The way I see it, the rules dictate that (J) ROM submissions should be allowed, assuming there is a good reason to do so.
There are provisions however, where the (J) ROM would be allowed without argument outside of the current situation:
'If you decide to start to a run using a version other than (U), make a post on the forum detailing why — this is to prevent future complications.'
So I would see this as 'if the (J) version is the naturally better choice for TASing reasons only, then it should be accepted.' By TASing reasons, I don't mean for the shorter text that comes from Kanji, but for possible tricks that can only be done in J versions, or perhaps if U/E versions are technically worse and less precise (ie introduces more lag). This case is slightly different since the TASer himself is Japanese, so it would be natural for him to choose that to do initially. While it doesn't necessarily conform to the letter of the law, I don't think it should be rejected on that basis alone. Rules do have to allow for some flexibility, after all, no rule is ever perfect.
Under the 'The movie must be good' rule it states 'A speed-oriented movie must beat all existing records', and as I am aware the previous record was held by a movie over twice as long as this TAS. It also beats the real time run.
In 'Obsoleting a published movie' it states: 'When obsoleting a published movie (that aims for fastest time), the goal should be to minimally match its speed and impressiveness throughout the entire movie, not just in final completion time. Meaning, if you found a 30 second shortcut, that isn't an excuse to waste 10 seconds elsewhere due to sloppy play. If you found a 30 second shortcut, try your best to improve the movie by at least 30 seconds.'
While entertainment factor is often in the eye of the beholder, it is clear that TASers who are familiar with TASing the game are aware that the run itself is sloppy in a few places, suboptimal in some of its tricks and uses a less-than-optimal route through the game. So there is clearly an issue with the run itself being sub-optimal.
However, directly below this it states: 'Site rules still apply even if the published movie breaks them. We make mistakes sometimes, that doesn't provide a green light for you to do so.' It is a nice catch-all proviso that covers a number of situations where the admins etc make mistakes, and mistakes will happen - no-one is perfect after all. Prevention however is better than cure.
More pause for thought comes from this: 'However, if a rule is broken for a specific reason and it was allowed, then it is okay. If not sure, ask a judge or admin before making the movie. (An example would be movies that start from SRAM, use passwords, etc.)'
I hate to come down on one side or another, but it is true by the letter of the rules that this run SHOULD NOT have been published.
I call an end to the bickering, sniping and trolling here and now, and perhaps start a logical thought out debate over the site rules itself. Not here, but in a seperate topic. This thread should be used for discussions about the TAS itself, not about site policy.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
Anyone looking for consistency in enforcement of the rules is going to be disappointed. They aren't hard-and-fast rules; much like English grammar, there's always at least one exception. The rules are things that TASers should keep in mind if they want to have a better chance of their run being accepted on this site, but ultimately if one of the judges thinks you've made a good run, then it'll get accepted (assuming you submit it).
If we tried to make the rules not have any exceptions, then either we'd end up rejecting good runs, or they'd be a gargantuan tangle of legalese and everyone would always be complaining about how complicated they are. It's much simpler to leave the rules as 90% accurate and then let the judges handle the grey area. That is, after all, why they're there: to judge. If the rules were perfectly accurate, then any run that met the rules would automatically get accepted and any that didn't would be rejected, and we'd have no need for judges. Usually the judges' job is to see if the TASer obeyed the "is it entertaining" rule (and, if not, whether or not to ignore that rule), but sometimes they have to judge on the applicability of other rules as well.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Maybe the problem is that you can't read. I never said that this run shouldn't be published. I only said that the next run should also be allowed to use the J version and I did clearify that multiple times now. And yeah I'm talking "shit" about a site that doesn't consider it's own rules to be relevant. Do you have a problem with that?
Slowi, I've tried many times to explain to you why not allowing the (J) ROM for the next run is in line with the rules. The rule that you insist forces the (J) ROM to be used is this one.
"If there already is a published video, do not use a different ROM than what it uses, unless the new ROM is obviously better, and you can show how it should be compared to the existing movie."
Now, let's look at that exception clause. It says that the ROM should be changed if you can show that...
1) The new ROM is better
2) There is a way to compare the two
To prove part 1, I give you this, which is also in the rules.
In addition, English text is preferred. Thus the use of Japanese text in the movie would be a negative aspect towards a switch to the J version.
The only difference between the (J) and (U) ROMs here is textual. The rules define English text to be better than Japanese text. Thus, the (U) ROM is better.
For part 2, comparison is simple. We time the relevant cutscenes, and that gives us an exact measure of the time difference between the two versions.
Now, I know you're going to respond with some variant of "But the (J) ROM is better because it's faster." To which I respond, what makes it faster? That's right, the text is the only thing that makes it faster. And, once again, the rule quoted above says that English text is better than Japanese text. It does not make an exception for the case that the Japanese text is faster, and that is because the purpose of that particular rule is to prevent people from using the Japanese ROM purely for faster text. You may not like it, but that is what the rules say.
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
compucomp wrote:
But you're on the wrong side of a landslide. If someone lost an election 80-20 typically they can't find a hole in the ground fast enough to hide in.
Allow me to clear up a misconception here: The raw results of the poll do not matter. Far more important is being able to provide your detailed thoughts supporting your position in the discussion thread - it is that type of analysis which greatly benefits the judges in the making of their decisions.
It is up to the judges and (to a somewhat lesser extent) the queue manager(s) and site admins to enforce and therefore interpret the rules as they apply to submissions. Here adelikat has explicitly set out how they apply in the situation that led to this discussion being triggered. People are of course welcome to criticise the rules and how they are being applied, but this generally involves constructive criticism which has a chance of eventually leading to the rules being changed for the better as opposed to mindless slagging and name-calling.
Be very careful with how you (the general you, as in everyone watching this thread) proceed in the discussion here. As I have said elsewhere, I will not put up with unnecessary crap.
If you have a problem with the "rules", it's obvious you don't want the run published.
I'm afraid this does not follow: if proposition A is the causal condition of proposition B, one's opinion of proposition B has no bearing on proposition A. Therefore, one can have no opinion on whether or not the run should be published while still feeling that if the run is published, it should set some kind of precedent for later runs with regards to language. Nor do I think this is at all an unreasonable position.
The problem here is that people have been getting angry. And where you have angry people, you have other people getting angry because they don't like having to deal with angry people. And so the situation escalates. Worse, because anger is simply a form of aggression behavior, people begin to veer away from addressing any coherent dialectic that might otherwise resolve their mutual dispute.
I for one would like to hear people make their case for either side rather than just reiterate their interpretations of the rules. When such interpretations are the very thing in dispute, this will not suffice. If you think that publishing a Japanese ROM in one case ought to set a precedent for that language according to the rules, please explain why you think the adoption of the Japanese is superior, or why being made to run the (U) version places an unreasonable burden on future runners. If you think that the adoption of the Japanese run is a special exception from the rules that should not set a precedent, do try to explain why the (U) version is superior and what test should determine those exceptional cases when runs never even intended to follow site rules should be adopted as well as how future runs ought to compare themselves to them.
I generally prefer to think that people's opinions are not merely the result of bald caprice; rather, I tend to think that people have reasons for feeling the way they do. I'm sure that if people would simply take the time to articulate why it is they think a certain way, and what reasons they have to think contrarily to other people, it would go along way towards making such disputes constructive. Otherwise, we shall continue to have pissing contests by which either side tries to prove itself the angriest and most self-righteous.
If you have a problem with the "rules", it's obvious you don't want the run published.
I'm afraid this does not follow: if proposition A is the causal condition of proposition B, one's opinion of proposition B has no bearing on proposition A. Therefore, one can have no opinion on whether or not the run should be published while still feeling that if the run is published, it should set some kind of precedent for later runs with regards to language. Nor do I think this is at all an unreasonable position.
In theory you're right but absolutely not in this instance. In this case, it's like saying "We should check out Obama's birth certificate" and then denying that you are a birther because you never said "Obama was born in Kenya." No matter how much Slowking wants to deny it, he thinks the run sucks and shouldn't be published, got shot down by the voters and the judges, and so then switched his focus to trying to deny the run via rules technicality (not even a real rules violation, mind you, like the previous OoT run which was invalidated because it was beat by a console run).
He's entitled to his opinion. But then he whined for a faster encode after flaming the site, quite a douchebag move which he deserves to get called out for.
In theory you're right but absolutely not in this instance. In this case, it's like saying "We should check out Obama's birth certificate" and then denying that you are a birther because you never said "Obama was born in Kenya."
Birther? You'll have to forgive me here, I'm afraid that the esoteric particulars of American politics elude me. My best guess at what you're trying to say is that wishing to verify the facts of a given case is equivalent to making an accusation of wrongdoing, but you couldn't possibly mean that (Unless you feel that having to go through airport security is equivalent to being charged with terrorism.) In any case, I fail to see how this analogy relates to the situation at hand.
No matter how much Slowking wants to deny it, he thinks the run sucks and shouldn't be published,
Thinking a run sucks is within his rights. We all have runs we think to be shitty. Furthermore, because he's worked with this game himself its to be expected that he'd hold the run to different standards. Relativism and subjectivity, that's all it is; nothing to take exception to.
Even if he feels the run shouldn't be published (And he is entitled to his own private conscience.) the fact of the matter is that he didn't actively obstruct its publication; there is, after all, a difference between thinking someone ought to be punched in the face and in fact punching them in the face.
...switched his focus to trying to deny the run...
As has been stated, his position was that, in the event of the submitted run being published, future runners should be given equal treatment by also being allowed to submit a run using the (j) ROM. Such a position has no bearing on its causal antecedent, the publication of the submitted run.
But then he whined for a faster encode after flaming the site,
Lots of people were asking after that encode. Given his plans to run the game himself it makes sense that he'd want an encode as a reference for his own work regardless of how crappy he thinks it is. Just as a scholar can't afford to simply ignore every periodical he has an aversion to, neither would a TASer forbear a proper screening of previous runs while undertaking their own project.
Nor should his opposition to how the rules were applied in this case deter him from this. It would be a terrible world if every time I found myself vehemently opposed to something the government was doing to the public healthcare system I was prohibited from using it. Regrettably, as so often happens in any community the civic dialogue here quickly became sidetracked.
quite a douchebag move which he deserves to get called out for.
"Deserved," is one thing, but was it reasonable, constructive, useful and intelligent to act in this way?
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3576)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4754
Location: Tennessee
The rules written on this site were never intended to be interpreted with the strictness that is being discussed here. If the wording can be taken that strict I apologize and will try to word it in a more flexible manner.
However, I want to make a more important point. And that is that a submission must be compared to the movie it obsoletes when judged. Rejecting a new submission is statement of the existing run's superiority.
Choosing to keep Guano's run also breaks a site rule (must beat all known records) by losing to an unassisted record.
Both movies pose a problem. So which published movie do you want? One that loses to an unassisted speedrun or one that uses the not preferred ROM choice? We went with the latter. Sometimes judging is "icky" business.
The rules written on this site were never intended to be interpreted with the strictness that is being discussed here. If the wording can be taken that strict I apologize and will try to word it in a more flexible manner.
However, I want to make a more important point. And that is that a submission must be compared to the movie it obsoletes when judged. Rejecting a new submission is statement of the existing run's superiority.
Choosing to keep Guano's run also breaks a site rule (must beat all known records) by losing to an unassisted record.
Both movies pose a problem. So which published movie do you want? One that loses to an unassisted speedrun or one that uses the not preferred ROM choice? We went with the latter. Sometimes judging is "icky" business.
I'd rather have the latter on this site. Unless I was the unassisted runner. Beating a TAS is kinda awesome, really. (Go go ActRaiser speedrun!)