Locked



1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Radiant wrote:
Nach wrote:
Yet in the early DOS games, "My own tetris clone #24601" would be featured prominently for sale in computer stores, and possibly even bought up by a larger company.
Sure. But if a game is featured prominently in computer stores, then it should easily be notable enough for a run on the site here. Likewise if it got bought up by a larger company. My point is that these aren't criteria to exclude large amounts of games, but rather that games must show a reason to be included on the site. An official license (e.g. Super Metroid) is such a reason. Being extremely famous (e.g. Cave Story) is another such a reason. If a game is neither licensed nor famous, well perhaps there's another reason to include it anyway, but if we can't find such a reason, the game doesn't get a run on TASvideos. Here's some precedent for that.
Well said. I'd just point out that some very early DOS games that were from what later became real companies, like the Kroz series, is a poor game compared to say the Skunny series, by authors who never developed into a reputable game publisher. I'd be more likely to accept a TAS of a Skunny game than a Kroz, so I wouldn't blindly just look at who the publisher is for early DOS games. But overall, I agree with you.
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.
Joined: 2/21/2008
Posts: 255
Radiant wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
Radiant wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
Air 1 and 2 showed their reason to be included by getting published.
Please show me a source for that. Published by whom, and where?
It got obsoleted.
You didn't answer my question. You've just implied that Air 2 has been published by some commercial entity equivalent to Apogee or Activision. I'm really curious as to when that happened, please show me a source of that.
http://tasvideos.org/ Refer to "Latest Publications"
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames." Frames 16:26
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Nach wrote:
I'd just point out that some very early DOS games that were from what later became real companies, like the Kroz series, is a poor game compared to say the Skunny series, by authors who never developed into a reputable game publisher. I'd be more likely to accept a TAS of a Skunny game than a Kroz .
Good point; although I would argue to allow both games. Kroz did get published by Softdisk, not just by its author or just by the publisher founded by its author (i.e. Apogee). Aside from that, Skunny was created six years later and takes advantage of newer hardware; it's true that Skunny is technically better, but in the same sense that any SNES title is technically better than any A8700 game. Either way, I'd say that Kroz is sufficiently notable to qualify under Vault rules. But, to strike a further comparison, ZZT is a game similar to Kroz that has a level editor (and it was created by Apogee's traditional rival, Epic). While I'd likewise argue that ZZT itself is sufficiently notable, I'd say that pretty much all custom scenarios made with the ZZT editor are not.
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
xnamkcor wrote:
Radiant wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
Radiant wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
Air 1 and 2 showed their reason to be included by getting published.
Please show me a source for that. Published by whom, and where?
It got obsoleted.
You didn't answer my question. You've just implied that Air 2 has been published by some commercial entity equivalent to Apogee or Activision. I'm really curious as to when that happened, please show me a source of that.
http://tasvideos.org/ Refer to "Latest Publications"
That's nothing but sophistry, so I'm done talking to you now. You've made your point and almost nobody appears to agree with it; I see little value for you in repeating your point a second or a third time.
Joined: 2/21/2008
Posts: 255
https://www.google.com/search?q="publication"%20site%3Atasvideos.org And a complete list of the times in the site the word "Publication" is used.
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames." Frames 16:26
Guga
He/Him
Joined: 1/17/2012
Posts: 838
Location: Chile
xnamkcor wrote:
https://www.google.com/search?q="publication"%20site%3Atasvideos.org And a complete list of the times in the site the word "Publication" is used.
No fucking shit, thanks for the notice.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Radiant wrote:
Good point; although I would argue to allow both games.
Oh, for sure we'd actually publish both. I just wanted to ensure your generalization wasn't applied in too far flung a manner.
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.
Joined: 2/21/2008
Posts: 255
Guga wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
https://www.google.com/search?q="publication"%20site%3Atasvideos.org And a complete list of the times in the site the word "Publication" is used.
No fucking shit.
I assumed he knew we used the word "Publication". I was wrong. And he asked me to cite where it was published.
Nach wrote:
Radiant wrote:
Good point; although I would argue to allow both games.
Oh, for sure we'd actually publish both. I just wanted to ensure your generalization wasn't applied in too far flung a manner.
What? Are you crazy? we can't just accept any DOS game. There's got to be at least 1000 of those. Imagine how much work it would take to catalog those. No, we'll have 5 DOS games and we have different better runs obsolete other DOS games' runs.
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames." Frames 16:26
Guga
He/Him
Joined: 1/17/2012
Posts: 838
Location: Chile
xnamkcor wrote:
I assumed he knew we used the word "Publication". I was wrong. And he asked me to cite where it was published.
And why do you state the obvious?
Joined: 2/21/2008
Posts: 255
Guga wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
I assumed he knew we used the word "Publication". I was wrong. And he asked me to cite where it was published.
And why do you state the obvious?
Because, I guess to him the obvious is not so obvious, and he demanded citation. So I cited.
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames." Frames 16:26
Guga
He/Him
Joined: 1/17/2012
Posts: 838
Location: Chile
xnamkcor wrote:
Guga wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
I assumed he knew we used the word "Publication". I was wrong. And he asked me to cite where it was published.
And why do you state the obvious?
Because, I guess to him the obvious is not so obvious, and he demanded citation. So I cited.
You could have simply... linked to the SPECIFIC source, and not putting such obvious states as if you were trying to say "how idiot can you be?"
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Nach wrote:
Oh, for sure we'd actually publish both. I just wanted to ensure your generalization wasn't applied in too far flung a manner.
Darn you, now I have the Skunny soundtrack stuck in my mind :D
Joined: 2/21/2008
Posts: 255
Guga wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
Guga wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
I assumed he knew we used the word "Publication". I was wrong. And he asked me to cite where it was published.
And why do you state the obvious?
Because, I guess to him the obvious is not so obvious, and he demanded citation. So I cited.
You could have simply... linked to the SPECIFIC source, and not putting such obvious states as if you were trying to say "are you this idiot?"
I looked in the official Glossary for "Publication" but it wasn't there. http://tasvideos.org/SDARunsWithoutAPublishedTAS.html Specific use of the word "Published". Guess how I found it. http://tasvideos.org/MoviePublishingHistory.html Specific reference to "Publishing".
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames." Frames 16:26
Samsara
She/They
Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player (2241)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2822
Location: Northern California
xnamkcor wrote:
I looked in the official Glossary for "Publication" but it wasn't there. http://tasvideos.org/SDARunsWithoutAPublishedTAS.html Specific use of the word "Published". Guess how I found it. http://tasvideos.org/MoviePublishingHistory.html Specific reference to "Publishing".
Published as in licensed and released to the public as a real legitimate cartridge/CD game, not published as in the site terminology. I love that you're being a condescending douchebag over shit you completely misunderstood.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 Currently unable to dedicate a lot of time to the site, taking care of family. Now infrequently posting on Bluesky
warmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Joined: 9/15/2013
Posts: 154
Samsara wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
I looked in the official Glossary for "Publication" but it wasn't there. http://tasvideos.org/SDARunsWithoutAPublishedTAS.html Specific use of the word "Published". Guess how I found it. http://tasvideos.org/MoviePublishingHistory.html Specific reference to "Publishing".
Published as in licensed and released to the public as a real legitimate cartridge/CD game, not published as in the site terminology. I love that you're being a condescending douchebag over shit you completely misunderstood.
Hey, didn't you post this? Practice what you preach. http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=380161#380161 http://tasvideos.org/Nach/Arguing.html <-- How on earth do you manage to not include ad hominem in this Nach? You include other argument stereotypes but forget personal attacks...?
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Dyshonest wrote:
http://tasvideos.org/Nach/Arguing.html <-- How on earth do you manage to not include ad hominem in this Nach? You include other argument stereotypes but forget personal attacks...?
I don't view personal attacks as something which conforms to: highly polished debating techniques make it appear to the untrained eye as though one is winning an argument, while in fact they are simply reconstructing, redefining, or redirecting the argument in order to make themselves the victor. Personal attacks are obvious to everyone involved that the argument is no longer being argued.
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.
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Kuwaga wrote:
I think this mentality of "if I want something, I need to cry very loudly and shout at people higher up till they do something about it" is a serious problem with our modern society as a whole. If you want things to change, just do it. Offer something instead of demanding something. That's just my advice, you are free to completely disagree and call me an idiot, or ignore me, or whatever. There'll be no hard feeling from my side.
Dyshonest wrote:
This, in turn though, makes authoritative figures/higher-ups ultimately pointless if everything boils down to "do it yourself" instead of the people above you... uh, doing their jobs.
And that would be a problem to whom? To you? You can't do any part of the work yourself because it's unfortunately theirs, so you have to loudly remind them of it till they do something instead? In that case, you are of course free to try it and see how far it gets you. You can't exactly threaten them with a labor strike here. What exactly is their job anyway and what exactly is yours? We all might have different opinions on this. You think the job of the admins here is to please you, or every other little minority here? Well, I think they'd disagree. Who are you to tell them what their job is? If you completely refute this post and I won't argue against it, it means I'll have silently admitted defeat.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Kuwaga wrote:
If you completely refute this post and I won't argue against it, it means I'll have silently admitted defeat.
Or that something unfortunate happened to you and you're no longer coming back. Or perhaps the refutation is so mindbogglingly idiotic that you've lost all will to bother responding to it. So let's clarify, if you intelligently completely refute this post ... and I'm still around here ...
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.
Joined: 9/15/2013
Posts: 154
You think the job of the admins here is to please you, or every other little minority here? Well, I think they'd disagree. Who are you to tell them what their job is?
Last I recall the people running a site dedicated to entertaining people should probably be willing to do things to faciliate that. Or am I speaking unrealistic/impossible over here, expecting entertainers to entertain? I have spare time. If we actually had hacks submitted often, I could get around to making a list (someone else can do the formatting I am programming/website-making (HTML, CSS, PHP, etc) challenged) of them and short write-ups or something. I've been a follower of TASes for a great many years and I'm a (somewhat) active speedrunner for various games myself. So I think it'd end up well if I had material to use (aka submitted hacks).
Samsara
She/They
Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player (2241)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2822
Location: Northern California
Dyshonest wrote:
Hey, didn't you post this? Practice what you preach.
Hey, what about your entire posting history over the past two weeks, where you completely and continually misunderstand what memory corruption and ACE are (after being told by literally everyone who bothered listening that you're wrong) and insult a non-native English speaker on numerous occasions by saying his perfectly understandable sentences are jumbled messes (while making grammar mistakes of your own)? There's no point in actually arguing something with either you or that other guy. Your main tactic is to just completely ignore valid points in favor of what you perceive to be the truth, even after multiple people who know way more about the subject than you ever will tell you that things don't work the way you think they do. On top of that, there's the matter of completely abandoning your stance to point out something trivial and unrelated in hopes that you'll distract everyone from how wrong you are. Like, say, pointing out the ad hominem in my statement instead of acknowledging the fact that I clearly pointed out his misunderstanding beforehand.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 Currently unable to dedicate a lot of time to the site, taking care of family. Now infrequently posting on Bluesky
warmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Joined: 9/15/2013
Posts: 154
Samsara wrote:
Like, say, pointing out the ad hominem in my statement instead of acknowledging the fact that I clearly pointed out his misunderstanding beforehand.
You used ad hominem but wished to be taken seriously. Sorry. No can do.
Guga
He/Him
Joined: 1/17/2012
Posts: 838
Location: Chile
Dyshonest wrote:
Samsara wrote:
Like, say, pointing out the ad hominem in my statement instead of acknowledging the fact that I clearly pointed out his misunderstanding beforehand.
You used ad hominem but wished to be taken seriously. Sorry. No can do.
Right, using ad hominen INVALIDATES HIS ARGUMENT COMPLETELY TOTALLY. Honestly, you just come here to spit out all your stuff without hearing anyone besides yourself without contribuiting anything valuable or at least WORTHY-
Joined: 2/21/2008
Posts: 255
Samsara wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
I looked in the official Glossary for "Publication" but it wasn't there. http://tasvideos.org/SDARunsWithoutAPublishedTAS.html Specific use of the word "Published". Guess how I found it. http://tasvideos.org/MoviePublishingHistory.html Specific reference to "Publishing".
Published as in licensed and released to the public as a real legitimate cartridge/CD game, not published as in the site terminology. I love that you're being a condescending douchebag over shit you completely misunderstood.
I've been using "Published" to mean being a "Publicated" run for this entire thread. He's the one who decided to use a new meaning. I never meant for "Published" to mean published in the game industry. Though he may have inferred it. If there were a different word, I would have used it, but "Publish" is the term this entire site uses as nomenclature for an accepted run.
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames." Frames 16:26
Guga
He/Him
Joined: 1/17/2012
Posts: 838
Location: Chile
xnamkcor wrote:
I've been using "Published" to mean being a "Publicated" run for this entire thread. He's the one who decided to use a new meaning. I never meant for "Published" to mean published in the game industry. Though he may have inferred it. If there were a different word, I would have used it, but "Publish" is the term this entire site uses as nomenclature for an accepted run.
Well, now you know that "published" has more than one meaning...
Player (146)
Joined: 7/16/2009
Posts: 686
Holy fucking shit. In the entirety of my internet history I have never seen anybody as obtuse as you two. And that's including trolls who are doing it on purpose. Seriously, get your shit together, or just go away.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Locked