This will both be glorious when they enable support for more resolutions but also probably a detriment. It could mean my internet will no longer be suitable for watching 720p videos due to poor download speeds once more and more people upload 60fps videos and Youtube starts feeding me 60fps footage...
If it's designed properly, it should fall back, dropping frames if you don't have enough bandwidth. YouTube already drops frames now, so it shouldn't be too hard.
Of course, that might suck for TAS footage, since 60fps won't need the fancy filters we use, and so transparent things may go invisible or stuff like that. Maybe we should upload both.
I mean, especially since there's going to be a huge backlog of TASes that are only available at 30fps. Since the 60fps versions are already rendered, it won't be too hard, but it still will take a while. If we keep both, we won't have to delete any videos.
I'm also not sure this shouldn't be a separate thread. Maybe once YouTube actually enables 60fps, we can have a new thread.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
No... seems like that was too early to say. It's black only for the first frame and when it stops at the end.
From the blog:
"when we launch support for 48 and even 60 frames per second in the coming months."
I'm definitely looking forward to uploading @60FPS, but that effectively doubles the amount of time required for me to make an atlas video. Better get started on it now ;)
Also, there's a bunch more features being integrated like a "tip jar" and creator credits which I find to be quite useful.
TASes have always had unrestricted fps, just not on youtube (downloadable), so this doesn't really change much. Youtube still compresses videos too heavily.
No problems there. Could be related to HTML5 vs Flash, though. I don't use HTML5 because frankly HTML5 video in browsers just suck (flash is so much better, and yet flash is so much worse than desktop players).
No problems there. Could be related to HTML5 vs Flash, though. I don't use HTML5 because frankly HTML5 video in browsers just suck (flash is so much better, and yet flash is so much worse than desktop players).
On my end it's the flash player that doesn't work well, while the HTML5 player works great.
Joined: 10/12/2011
Posts: 6337
Location: The land down under.
Link to video
For some reason when you don't have the 60fps enabled there is a jitter flicker and not a solid colour (for this case it would've been black).
Apparently Firefox HTML5 actually does what I wanted which was 1 frame white and the rest black, so yay?
When you have 60fps on it's seizure fun.
---
Edit: To whoever this "Alex Folland" is who disabled their replies.
Alex wrote:
I appreciate the effort you spent on creating this test, but visually, this video sucks to watch. A blinking game sprite from Super Metroid or Road Runner's Death Valley Rally would be preferable.
A simple seizure test with flickering between black and white is quicker and easier and more notable than doing game footage, it can be done manually and checked frame by frame to make sure it flickers. Alternately I could've done the flickering test a bit differently with going through the colours Red, Green, Blue, Yellow, Orange, Purple, Pink, Black, White etc. etc. but simple 2 colours is once again quicker and easier and more notable.
Your comment has also been deleted due to the fact you came from TASVideos and you didn't own up here and that you don't have a reply system.
WebNations/Sabih wrote:
+fsvgm777 never censoring anything.
Disables Comments and Ratings for the YouTube account.Something better for yourself and also others.
This will both be glorious when they enable support for more resolutions but also probably a detriment. It could mean my internet will no longer be suitable for watching 720p videos due to poor download speeds once more and more people upload 60fps videos and Youtube starts feeding me 60fps footage...
I'm a bit late, but until "film" goes 60 FPS aka video cameras capture at higher FPS, you don't have much to worry about in terms of live video. Games on the other hand, I can see this as a problem.
Joined: 6/25/2007
Posts: 732
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Warp wrote:
How would I know if YouTube is playing at 60fps or 30fps?
You can right-click on the video and click "stats for nerds", which tells you the frame rate. I don't think this works for embedded videos, but it works on YouTube's site.
For some reason I can't switch to HD in either that Mario Circuit nor the flicker video. It just shows the spinning wheel forever.
(Btw, how about making something less annoying / potentially dangerous for some people than flickering the entire image?)
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4083
Location: The Netherlands
Warp wrote:
For some reason I can't switch to HD in either that Mario Circuit nor the flicker video. It just shows the spinning wheel forever.
Which browser are you using? As far as I know, only Chrome is officially supported. (Though I'm hearing it works in some other browsers as well, but not in others)
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Using Palemoon 25.0.2 x64, videos play at 60FPS just fine, HTML5. 720p loads normally as well.
Spike's video flickers when played on the embed Flash Player here, though.
Joined: 6/25/2007
Posts: 732
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Spikestuff wrote:
Edit: To whoever this "Alex Folland" is who disabled their replies.
Alex wrote:
I appreciate the effort you spent on creating this test, but visually, this video sucks to watch. A blinking game sprite from Super Metroid or Road Runner's Death Valley Rally would be preferable.
A simple seizure test with flickering between black and white is quicker and easier and more notable than doing game footage, it can be done manually and checked frame by frame to make sure it flickers. Alternately I could've done the flickering test a bit differently with going through the colours Red, Green, Blue, Yellow, Orange, Purple, Pink, Black, White etc. etc. but simple 2 colours is once again quicker and easier and more notable.
Your comment has also been deleted due to the fact you came from TASVideos and you didn't own up here and that you don't have a reply system.
Hello. I am the "Alex Folland" whose comment you saw on YouTube. I did not mean to act anonymously by commenting on YouTube and I have not "disabled replies". I have been replied to on many other YouTube comments. I've checked my account settings just in case and I saw no relevant option. My theory is that since I'm using a Google+ account and you may not be, YouTube doesn't let you reply in that case. Also, I still see my comment there. It appears not to have been deleted. Maybe Google evilly hides deletion from the original authors of comments to privately create a seemingly-happy world for everyone.
Regarding the video itself, I stand by my YouTube comment and I agree with Warp's parentheses statement. The test video is visually unsettling. Note that I'm only voicing my complaint with no expectation of immediate change; just sharing publicly so it's understood that there are people who feel this way. I mean I value your freedom to leave your video exactly how it is. Also, I do agree that it is a highly effective test of 60Hz playback, and I thank you for sharing it.
