I'm creating a proper submission for this run, with the proper run time. The run is not different from the first submission.
I'll eventually do a proper write up as well.

Samsara: good
that is great haha my lptop is full of gum
Samsara: This is an interesting submission to judge, and not just because I'm secretly the biggest Gummy Bears fan of all time. It's actually gotten a strangely good reception across both of the submissions, even this one which was meant to be the actual "serious" submission has a solid 76% at the time of writing. But part of me still wonders how much of that was due to the gimmick and how much was due to the game itself, because all of the thread feedback points toward the entertainment value being tied to the gimmick and not toward the actual game itself.
We have to classify this as an extreme sports game... Okay, maybe not extreme, but the fact that it is a game of sport means that we can't Vault the run (any currently Vaulted sports games were published before the Vault was implemented, and were auto-tiered there due to their low overall scores). 76% may seem like a decent percentage for a run to make it to Moons, but once again we have to consider that not all of these votes are actually for the game itself, they're for the texture hacking, and even with all of the votes counted it's still about 5-10% shy of what I would consider the lower baseline for a Moon.
This, combined with the game's trivial nature, leads me to rejection. The run itself was good, and the texture hacking was one of this year's AFD highlights in my opinion, but the game itself doesn't exactly lend itself well to publication.
Noxxa: Unrejecting for consideration of publication to the Vault following a rule change regarding sports games.
Samsara: Finally, I can absolve myself of sin.
Samsara: Under the new rules, I think we can safely accept this masterpiece to Vault and showcase it on the site for eternity like it deserves. The golf may be miniature, but the thrills are larger than life! The bears may be gummy, but... Uh... Well... I'll get back to you on that one.


Spikestuff
They/Them
Editor, Publisher, Expert player (2656)
Joined: 10/12/2011
Posts: 6449
Location: The land down under.
JMC47 wrote:
I dunno, the slow loading times are part of the package.
And why is this considered to be an issue? When something similar which is the PS1 BizHawk core Octoshock, which has long loading times (as it too is going for accuracy).
WebNations/Sabih wrote:
+fsvgm777 never censoring anything.
Disables Comments and Ratings for the YouTube account. Something better for yourself and also others.
Skilled player (1743)
Joined: 9/17/2009
Posts: 4986
Location: ̶C̶a̶n̶a̶d̶a̶ "Kanatah"
One day, whenever PS3/Xbox360 emulation matures (eventually), there might need a rule allowing multiple console variations, if only because stuff like RNG and timing changes quite a bit between console loads. But uh...banning all sports games from vault even if it's not tied to a (fixed) timer seems kind of extreme. I can't argue against the trivial point however, since I never played this.
Skilled player (1024)
Joined: 1/9/2011
Posts: 231
After reading all of the posts and reviewing the Vault requirements, I believe I understand why this submission was rejected. It seems that all non-serious game choices are automatically rejected unless there's serious entertainment value. There's nothing wrong with that. The problem that I have is that in the very first two lines of requirements for Vault submissions says that the purpose of this category is to focus on collecting tool-assisted speedrun records. I'll even quote the bullet point in the Overview section which is right below it "Its purpose is to fulfill the site's goal of being a TAS records site, and a central repository of tool-assisted literature and information." This statement alone should mean that we accept EVERY submission of an actual published game. This is assuming that it follows the rest of TASVideo's rules. Since there are some games that won't be allowed on this site, even in the Vault tier, then the goal of becoming a full TAS repository will never be accomplished. It seems like eventually there will need to be one of two changes. The first would be to simply change exactly what the Vault category is trying to accomplish (i.e. games with slight entertainment value that can potentially be optimized to be beaten faster). The second option, and the one that I feel would work best in the long run is to create a fourth tier of games (Basement Tier or something). This tier would be a repository for every game that doesn't make the cut for Vault with absolutely zero regard for entertainment value. This would also be a nightmare for the awesome publication team on this site, so I also propose that no encodes need to be made for these submissions (if the creator wants to add a temp encode to the submission text, then kudos to them). As long as they sync, then they're in. Creating a fourth tier would make this site's stated goal be much more realistic.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
WarHippy wrote:
The second option, and the one that I feel would work best in the long run is to create a fourth tier of games
This has been proposed for years. At one point it even went like 90% through in ideas and acceptance. But it wasn't implemented for various reasons.
Former player
Joined: 4/18/2015
Posts: 168
Location: Canada
Too be honest, I'm a little disappointed this was rejected. I found the abuse of the physics engine to get hole-in-ones was clever and decently entertaining. Some of the shots were actually pretty crazy too if you watch the run again. I don't know, maybe I'm just a sucker for physics based games. :P (I also really like mini-golf...) I'd like for this to be published but I understand the decision against it. EDIT: I saw Samsara's post on the video about possibly re-judging this! I hope this TAS can get accepted!
Active player (429)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
thommy3 wrote:
There are other published (mini)golf or pool runs on the site, so i wondered at first. Some are more interesting i agree, this one http://tasvideos.org/2730M.html probably isn't. I guess if the Gummy Bears had faster load times, the run would really benefit.
Since that mini-golf TAS was published and is in vault, I don't see why any mini-golf that plays all levels (which makes it a speedrun) that is optimized should be rejected. I don't see any difference in overall goal between this TAS and the published mini-golf TAS. I think that even despite the load screens, this TAS is more interesting.
Samsara
She/They
Senior Judge, Site Admin, Expert player (2241)
Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2823
Location: Northern California
If you take a look at the submission itself, Krazy Ace was actually initially accepted to Moons. The submission voting was actually quite positive as well, good enough audience reception for Moons in my opinion. I'm not entirely sure why it got pushed down to Vault, there's nothing that really explains why except for a couple comments at the end of the submission thread that just say it happened. As was stated earlier, it's highly likely that I'll be taking a second look at this under a new set of rules currently being discussed, so everyone can rest easy and feel accomplished over defending the artistic merit of a game where a soft, chewy candy comes alive and decides that the best use of its waking hours is to play a rousing round of miniature golf.
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.
Noxxa
They/Them
Moderator, Expert player (4128)
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4090
Location: The Netherlands
Samsara wrote:
If you take a look at the submission itself, Krazy Ace was actually initially accepted to Moons. The submission voting was actually quite positive as well, good enough audience reception for Moons in my opinion. I'm not entirely sure why it got pushed down to Vault, there's nothing that really explains why except for a couple comments at the end of the submission thread that just say it happened.
It was initially accepted to Moons, and later on was (mistakenly) demoted to Vault due to poor entertainment ratings.
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.
Experienced player (691)
Joined: 11/23/2013
Posts: 2239
Location: Guatemala
The Gummy Bears are FREE!
Here, my YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/dekutony
Skilled player (1743)
Joined: 9/17/2009
Posts: 4986
Location: ̶C̶a̶n̶a̶d̶a̶ "Kanatah"
Post subject: Movie published
TASVideoAgent
They/Them
Moderator
Joined: 8/3/2004
Posts: 15629
Location: 127.0.0.1
This movie has been published. The posts before this message apply to the submission, and posts after this message apply to the published movie. ---- [3140] Wii Gummy Bears MiniGolf by Fog in 12:27.13