The game changes the set of minigames once every second. It's always the same set of minigames on the same seconds no matter what you do, which means there's 59 different sets of minigames to choose from. The set I choose features six of the eight most high scoring ones.
Minigame by minigame comments
Barrel-roll Bridge Blast: There's an annoying glitch where if you shoot the barrels too quickly the game goes to an infinite black screen after the score has been calculated, so I had to add a 2-7 frame delay between each barrel. Score: 54680
Zero-gravity Target Practice: Some minigames has targets you don't have to shoot, like the guy. Shooting them always give you 10 points. So whenever there's nothing else to shoot those targets will be shot. Score: 34240
Clock Torture: Very invisible clocks. Very boring mingame. Score: 45376
Can Collector: In the end I shoot cans that doesn't have enough time to make it into the tray. You get some points from shooting the can, but the majority comes from hitting the tray. Score: 49088
Bonus Stage: I waited 4 seconds before the minigame to change the chests so I could get a heart + points. There's a 13 second wait time after shooting the chest where you can still shoot. I tried to make a melody but failed horrible. So since it seems to be a theme for this game, I instead went with annoying repeating sounds.
Low Score Minigame 1: Boring and low score. I wish it was possible to get a perfect minigame set. Score: 9610
Low Score Minigame 2: Not as boring as last minigame, but still low score. Score: 10688
Animal Abuse: This minigame is unique in the way that it's the only one that lets you hit several targets with one bullet. There's 37 sheeps that gets piled up in 3 piles and repeatedly hit for a total of 2925 hits. Score: 45457
UFO Gangsters: Very repetetive. Score: 44700
After the final stage I got a total of 314288 points. If it was possible to get a perfect set of minigames another 100000~ points could be gained.
Nach: This game seems annoying to watch and to listen to. Rejecting.
Nach: As I said above this one is unwatchable. Not even worth the vault.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I'm putting this response here for people who followed some of the ideas above which have been properly handled on IRC but have not been responded to here. The response here is a bit late coming and is not intended to start an argument, but is meant to prevent future complaints.
FractalFusion wrote:
The re-rejection message currently reads:
Nach wrote:
As I said above this one is unwatchable. Not even worth the vault.
I would like to know what "unwatchable" means. Right now, I interpret "unwatchable" as "no entertainment value" so it seems it was re-rejected for the exact same reason for which it had to be un-rejected in the first place (since the Vault specifically says that entertainment is pretty much of no significance as a requirement).
I have to say you're using methods 7 and 8 here: Wiki: Nach/Arguing
You've stated that you have a hypothesis to interpret:
FractalFusion wrote:
Right now, I interpret "unwatchable" as "no entertainment value"
You then end up with a conclusion that:
FractalFusion wrote:
(since the Vault specifically says that entertainment is pretty much of no significance as a requirement).
Which should immediately debunk your hypnosis. Yet you write it as if your obviously incorrect interpretation is somehow correct, and are therefore attacking me in the process.
Please do not assume the least likely possibility which does not fit and use that as a negative statement. A simple:
FractalFusion wrote:
I would like to know what "unwatchable" means.
Would suffice.
I used the word "unwatchable" which denotes something negative. I did not say "no entertainment" which denotes the lack of a positive.
To quote the Wiki: Tier: "Conversely, if the audience is utterly repulsed by a movie, or the movie is for a non-serious game, such as education by rote, or board game runs with little to offer in serious gameplay, it is rejected.
And more from the Vault: "However if a movie has entertainment significance which is deemed negatively, such as sickening camera angles, seizure inducing activity, and other rectifiable presentation decisions within it, the movie is ineligible for this category, or any other category for that matter. "
To back it up in this case:
miseiler wrote:
WOW those sounds are annoying.
Onyx3173 wrote:
I'll be honest, that was a very irritating TAS. If you changed some of it to make it less irritating...
Pointless Boy wrote:
I'm pretty sure this TAS just won my all-time prize for "shortest span I was capable of watching it before desperately closing the browser."
Therefore, this run has negative watchability, and is unpublishable. One might even suggest a public flogging for putting this on the workbench without a massive warning label.
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.
My first language is not English, so please excuse myself if I write something wrong. I'll do my best do write as cleary as I can, so cope with me here =)
(ﾉಥ益ಥ）ﾉ
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.
