Top 5 reasons why this should be published: 1) It's the first of its kind (a game in Chinese). Firsts of their kind are always good publication material. 2) There are more people (and hence more potential viewers) in China than in your country. (Unless you are Chinese, in which case there are as many people in China as in your country.) 3) The main character is a stereotype. Stereotypes are always fun. 4) TASes of quiz shows have always been well received. Heck, many have even got awards. It's probably the game genre with the highest amount of awards per publication, by a large margin. 5) The music rulez.

Top 5 reasons why these reasons don't justify: 1) It's not the first quiz game, it's not the first shooter, it's not the first side-scroller, it's not the first quicklevel, ... and I don't think Chinese is a category, since European, Japanese and American aren't. 2) Yeah, of course, that's why we have a Mandarin-only session, that is open since way before April 2011. [/sarcasm] 3) I don't think any video has been accepted in the site because of the main character being a stereotype, unless he has a big series of games, like Link (I'd say he is sort of a stereotype..) 4) The only one I remember now is Family Feud, that was only accepted because of the 'letters-in-the-middle' glitch. 5) Yeah. the music rulez, for 15 seconds, then it starts to become boring too x_x

I assume you understand I was not being serious.

I'm going to make the same post I always post (or maybe I sometimes just think about posting and and don't actually): [tl;dr -- It is sad that TASVideos does not have room for quiet archival of things like this, and that so few users seem to feel that such a thing would be of value. Read on only if you really enjoy words.] The current publication model is broken, because it leads most serious users of this site to believe that this is a trivial joke submission with no merit (quite possibly including its author). There is legitimate value in runs like this. Here is the value I derived from it: a) I gained a data point about the aesthetics and contents of Chinese NES games, a field with which I have little experience. b) I was briefly amused by the little dude running around and making his little noise. c) I enjoyed the credits music a lot. Other people might derive other bits of value, like nostalgia, or an unexpected similarity to another game with which they are more familiar, or direct experience of gameplay they have heard described but are uninterested in experiencing (or unable to experience) themselves. There is (or, could be) no cost to the users or owners of this site to publishing this video. Several people in this thread do not seem to be aware that most modern video players, including the one embedded in the first post (Thanks, Flygon!) have the ability to play back many parts of a video without playing back the entire thing from start to finish. One even seemed to be under the impression that watching this multiple times was somehow a good idea(!). I spent about one minute interacting with this video, and I am very content with my return (in entertainment/interest) on investment (in time). Of course, under the current publication model, there *is* a cost to both the users and maintainers of the site: the large majority of the site's users are uninterested in this content for obvious reasons, and there currently does not exist the facility to publish this video more meaningfully than it already has been without forcing it to the attention of the mainstream audience for whom it holds no interest. My vote as things stand should obviously be no: it is clear that having this show up on the front page, while not disastrous, would do little to further the goals of TASvideos. So, there should be a way to publish things without putting them on the front page, or claiming that they are entertaining, or bringing them to anyone's attention who doesn't care to seek them out. Yes, this will be archived in Gruefood, but as a mere forum post it is immune to all of the wonderful features that a publication page offers: better searchability, an obsoletion history, ratings, etc. Okay, I'm done ^_^ Please return to your regularly scheduled not reading long, ineffectual posts by me. Oh, and Aqfaq: Thanks for making this. Keep it up!

It has been suggested several times in the past that all games should deserve a published TAS (at least if it's technically without obvious flaws) because all games have value to some people, and at least some people would enjoy seeing a TAS of a game they once played, or are otherwise curious about the game in question (or about a TAS of it). The rating system is there for people who want to see the most "entertaining" and "technically awesome" TASes if they want to. Don't remove the fun from those who would want their obscure childhood game being TASed. This plea has always fallen to deaf ears, so the policy is not likely to change anytime soon.

I haven't ever particularly minded this argument. However, I think we do have a good runner-up for this function in the blessed shrine.

One even seemed to be under the impression that watching this multiple times was somehow a good idea(!).

Hey now, I wouldn't say it was a good idea. I was just scouring the run for something I could say yes to!

I assume you understand I was not being serious.

Sadly, no, I thought it was serious ^^' I did it mostly because I read it and went there to search all categories, and couldn't really find these in particular, but... xP

[tl;dr -- It is sad that TASVideos does not have room for quiet archival of things like this, and that so few users seem to feel that such a thing would be of value. Read on only if you really enjoy words.]

It has been suggested several times in the past that all games should deserve a published TAS (at least if it's technically without obvious flaws) because all games have value to some people, and at least some people would enjoy seeing a TAS of a game they once played, or are otherwise curious about the game in question (or about a TAS of it). The rating system is there for people who want to see the most "entertaining" and "technically awesome" TASes if they want to. Don't remove the fun from those who would want their obscure childhood game being TASed. This plea has always fallen to deaf ears, so the policy is not likely to change anytime soon.

I've seen some real pearls in this Gruefood section, and some really good TASes, too .. but if they publish only those that reach a high standard, I see their point .. some games look more impressive when they were completely explored to the nucleo (?), and other games, even when bested, completely optimised, don't look that impressive .... but: ... I was seeing these highly standarded (?) TASes on Youtube to see what people comment about them, and this one on Rockman 12:23.34 ... really put me to think... the person said something like "If TASes break a game so badly, what's the point, just jump to the ending" .... and the conclusion is that when we put 'Heavy Glitch Abuse', or 'Heavy Luck Manipulation', or even 'Uses Death to Save Time'... it looks more like cheating to regular people... o_o (I myself still don't believe in some of those Rockman tricks, floating around the screen, accelerating a level with green background, delaystageclear, it's just my favorite TAS because I love glitches) I probably divaged already, but ... my point is .. there is a Gruefood section for us to look for these Not-highly-standarded TASes .... and it could have a better name, and its own standards too ... there is a nice set of TASes in 'bad game choice' category, that would impress people that played the game in question, and they serve as tool assisted world records, even ..... ok, where is the section for suggestions, again? +D QUICK EDIT: Even voting no, I really think this topic will become a pearl, in the forgotten section of Gruefood, if the rules don't change..

... I was seeing these highly standarded (?) TASes on Youtube to see what people comment about them, and this one on Rockman 12:23.34 ... really put me to think... the person said something like "If TASes break a game so badly, what's the point, just jump to the ending"

That isn't the perspective of a "regular person." I'd say he's the minority. I grew up with lots of friends of various levels of geekiness and nerdiness. I was the first of us to stumble upon TASVideos, and I've slowly spread the word, but not once has anyone watched even the most broken of videos and said "I don't like this because there's too many glitches." I think on the internet you just get people who like to disagree for no particular reason. This is a pet peeve for me--people somehow seem to think that their voices are unique if they provide dissent, like the kind of person who goes around on YouTube posting "dont be stupid thats obv. fake" in comments. These people are trolling, intentionally or seriously... they are cynical shadows in the forms of human beings, offering nothing but negativity as though that somehow helps in mass amounts. Not that they give a shit about helping anyone. "Laugh and the world laughs with you; cry, and you cry alone." Well, bitch at everything, and everyone will think you're a bitch. In other words, while it's good to stop and think about someone else's viewpoint when it doesn't level with yours, it's important not to forget that some people's opinions are only worth the substance behind them, and I don't think a post complaining that a game is "too broken" was a post that was really thought out.

Warp -- Yeah, I've always known you felt similarly to me about this. I vaguely remember there being one other regular poster with some related ideas, maybe it was Tub? Anyway, it's nice that it's not just me, but I agree completely that things are unlikely to change any time soon. Still, I think it's valuable to keep putting the idea out there. Who knows what good may come of it in the future?

I don't understand the argument here. All submitted runs-- published and unpublished alike-- are accessible via the search function. Here's Myst, Desert Bus, and Front Line. I could also link to obsolete runs and April Fools runs-- they're all here. Instead, the focus seems to be on the (largely arbitrary) distinction between published and unpublished runs. True, published runs get a small, brief boost in visibility, before being relegated to the archives, but are otherwise almost indistinct from unpublished runs. In fact, perhaps a moderator or someone who's knowledgeable could explicitly list all the differences between published and unpublished runs. I doubt there are all that many. The most valid complaint, in my eyes, is that the decision whether to publish a run is binary. A run is either published or it isn't. While it would be nice to have different "levels" of publication, this would seriously complicate the process and I think it would cause more disputes, not fewer. The system isn't perfect, but it's the world we live in and I think it's implemented very well here. I think the judges are very fair, there's lots of communication among members, and community response isn't the sole factor for publication. I wouldn't have it any other way. A Q Lian Huan Pao won't be published, but it will still be here.

Okay, so I didn't understand a word of it and it had literally zero entertainment or technical value. Even if I understood it, it'd probably still be not much more interesting. No vote, this doesn't deserve a publication on the site.

Voted no. But it was an affectionate no. I'm assuming Aqfaq did this as a joke and it was fairly amusing but I don't think I need to explain why I had to vote no.

Oh, Aqfaq, never change. (voted no).

No just no...

I don't understand the argument here. All submitted runs-- published and unpublished alike-- are accessible via the search function. Here's Myst, Desert Bus, and Front Line. I could also link to obsolete runs and April Fools runs-- they're all here.

Unpublished runs cannot be rated, nor can you build a list of TASes (those pages which consist of the info boxes of a list of specified TASes) which includes unpublished ones. Also, they don't have a short description, category tags (which could be used to narrow a search), an obsoletion history nor other such related info.

I think the only positive thing I can say about this TAS is that it acknowledges this game's existence.

Another major difference is that publications consistently get encodes. I know these days pretty much everything gets youtubed, but there's no guarantee of ongoing availability. Also, yes, you can technically find rejected submissions but you are far less likely to stumble upon them than published movies. I remember the first time I realized there even was such a thing as rejected submissions and marveled at all the runs I was missing. Sure, they're not usually as entertaining as published movies, but sometimes they were! TL;DR Anybody interested in reject visibility can help out with this ever more well known page: http://tasvideos.org/Movies/GruefoodDelight.html (btw in case it wasn't clear I voted yes on this submission)

I loved the part where the guy shouts "bantilla!" three times in a row, that was pretty great. The space invader clone was too messy though, too much going on at the same time. Still, I think overall it was a nice TAS. I vote Yes.

No points for guessing the correct answer. Nice little game. Almost all of it consists of quiz questions about things like Hong Kong geography, females, computer-related stuff, babies, and a Go board, but the one thing that makes it stand out is the Space Invaders clone. Not one person would have expected something like that. Too bad it's only 5 seconds long. Interestingly enough, the game has some modes resembling card games, minigolf, track and field, and others. They all suck though. Anyway, congrats to Aqfaq. He is the emperor of joke TASes. 萬歲! 萬歲! 萬萬歲! On a more serious note, since this game is a quiz game that has very little TAS merit, I vote no. P.S. And just as I post this, Aqfaq does it again.

om, nom, nom... crunchy!