This topic is for the purpose of discussing #1070: adelikat's NES Tecmo Super Bowl in 08:15.20

I'm sorry...I'm going to have to vote no. Yes it's a few minutes faster, but this is a football game. I think it's pretty obvious already that this movie is pure entertainment value. I just think this a lot of...messing up on purpose. I like the other movie a lot more because it's a real game of football with a lot of crazy stuff, not running backward instead of a touchdown... The part I did like was the field goal to end the game, that was pretty interesting.

I thought it was pretty good, although it started getting old by the 3rd quarter to me. The end was great, but I guess I had expected things like safetys and missed field goal / extra point attempts. I'm not really sure how, but I think a better run could be done. I'm going to vote meh.

I quickly noted game summaries for both movies: adelikat's pit ko return, fumble rec by sea pit fumble return to sea 1 pit 115-yard pass int, sea touchback sea pass to goal line pit int pit time-consuming run, fumble self-recovery, td, 7-0 sea ko return, fumble, pit @ own 1 pit long pass, fumble, sea td, 7-7 pit mid-field return, long field goal, 10-7 Arc's ind ko return, fumble self-recovery, td 7-0 ind int, fumble rec by ne, td 7-7 ind 110-yard ko return, td 14-7 ne rush, fumble self-recovery, td 14-14 ind fumble out back of endzone, safety, 14-16 ind punt return, fumble recovery by NE, td, 14-23 ind ko return own 1, qb rush for 99-yard td, 21-23 ind punt return, td, 28-23 ne 96-yard rush td, 28-30 ind ko return to ne 1 ne int 95-yard td return, 28-37 ind 'matrix' catch, 99-yard td, 35-38, onside kick recovery ind lateral is incomplete ind top left corner to bottom right corner td pass, 42-37 ne drive: 4 1st downs (movie stops early) ne stopped on one yard line to end game Explain more about the reasons that you think that yours is more entertaining.

but I think a better run could be done. I'm going to vote meh.

Me too

I'm not really sure how

Unforuntately, me too Arc: that must have took time to make a play by play for both movies. I am not sure how it proves entertainment value. problematic moments in Arc's run that I attempt to fix: 1) It bugged me about arcs run to see him running along side the cpu to force him to score. I avoided this by running the ball to the 1 myself, fumbling and having to cpu recover. [EDIT] 2) Things should be in logical order. Therefore people shouldn't go skipping numbers arbituarily [FIXED so that Truncated's primitive linear mind can handle it ;p] 3) Calling the cpu's plays! Why do this? it would be more impressive to call a different play and stop them anyway. 4) Unecessary plays by the cpu. In one drive it is clear you want the ball back so you sack them several times? This shows less control over the situation, not to mention making the movie much longer (the animation between plays costs a minimum of 6 seconds. If you wanted the ball back then force a fumble. If you want the cpu to score, then have them score on the first attempt. I take conrol of the situation more and minimize the amount of plays it take to accomplish goals. 5) on a extra point kick, arc pointlessly picks a man deep in the inzone. This costs a little time and looks sloppy. Either keep the default player or pick the olb and go for the block. 6) The coin toss is long and can be skipped. I skip this animation while simulateneously getting the right coin flip & the max kick off power from the cpu. 7)

I like the other movie a lot more because it's a real game of football with a lot of crazy stuff, not running backward instead of a touchdown...

This is a valid argument that part of me agrees with. The other part of me enjoys when I game gets altered to the point of being something else (my favorite TASes do this). In this case, the concept of a football game gets turned upside down. I run an entire quarter away in a single play! further more the ball went up and down the field that when I played it back, I lost track of which direction the runner should have been going in the first place. These kinds of thing made me enjoy the run. Making it more like a football game appeals to me less. Mainly becuase this is a cheap looking NES game. How entertaining is it to WATCH a real tecmo superbowl game? 8) at the end of the 2nd quarter, arc does a play from the 1 with about 20 sec left. He slowly runs all the way to the inzone. The timer said 0 for about 1 minute of that play, thus wasting a lot of time. That would be okay if it were something novel there, but instead it was you dodging a bunch of taklers, which is something that happens throughout the movie. Why add time just to put more of that in? I would have rather seen you get tackled or run out of bounds. In my movie I make sure to end plays as soon as the timer reaches 0. In some cases this took a lot of planning and timing (like getting the 110 yd interception. It took a lot of work to get the ball into the opponents hands at the precise time) 9) 5 minutes faster isn't something to ingore. If I were going for pure speed my run would be about another minute shorter! That would make it roughly have the length of Arc's run. While the run aims for entertainment, keep in mind that time is a form of entertainment too. Can the added "entertainment" of Arc's run justify doubling the length of the potential movie. Does that make it too long and thus lowering entertainment value? I am not saying that a run that aims for pure speed would be more entertainment. Rather I am saying that the added movie length needs to be considered when making decisions in the run. At first I wanted to do a 3-0 game but considered that a little dull, so I put in the minimum amount of scoreing: get ahead (7-0), cpu mounts a comeback (7-7), last second game winning field goal.

it started getting old by the 3rd quarter to me

I feel the same way about arc's run too. NOTE: I have two versions of the run. One where I make the field goal (by it bouncing off the upright) making it 10-7. Another where it unexpectedly misses. I liked the thought of it missing but it would result in overtime which means the game is not over, so I went with the 10-7 run. What do you guys think. Would people complain if the field goal missed? It would be just for fun, but one could argue that the movie isn't over. What do you guys think?

It bugged me about arcs run to see him running along side the cpu to force him to score. I avoided this by running the ball to the 1 myself, fumbling and having to cpu recover.

I manipulated luck. It was difficult to make my own team avoid tackling him. Running backwards takes less skill and and is less realistic.

Calling the cpu's plays! Why do this? it would be more impressive to call a different play and stop them anyway.

I like the swarming.

If you wanted the ball back then force a fumble. If you want the cpu to score, then have them score on the first attempt.

I wanted them to punt.

on a extra point kick, arc pointlessly picks a man deep in the inzone.

Kickoff manipulation.

The coin toss is long and can be skipped.

Speed wasn't my goal.

at the end of the 2nd quarter, arc does a play from the 1 with about 20 sec left. He slowly runs all the way to the inzone. The timer said 0 for about 1 minute of that play, thus wasting a lot of time. That would be okay if it were something novel there, but instead it was you dodging a bunch of taklers, which is something that happens throughout the movie.

It's difficult for the incredibly slow QB to dodge the whole team for the whole length of the field. His reaching the end zone is somewhat unexpected.

5 minutes faster isn't something to ingore.

But it was 5 more minutes of action, not wasted time.

What do you guys think?

I'd link to this movie in the description of the current one; i.e. "adelikat has created a [[shorter, alternative movie]]." Mine should be converted to .fcm if possible.

I am cancelling my submission due to lack of interest. I would like to make another version of this. I would have like this submission to result in some ideas & feedback as to what the next run should be like. I still find the current published run very problematic. I am afraid since we are talking about non-speed elements of entertainment that the subjectiveness will ensure that no decision is made on any future run of this game; favoring the existing run.

Quote: The coin toss is long and can be skipped. Speed wasn't my goal.

There is a difference in not aiming for speed & wasting time; unless you think a coin toss adds more entertainment?

Quote: at the end of the 2nd quarter, arc does a play from the 1 with about 20 sec left. He slowly runs all the way to the inzone. The timer said 0 for about 1 minute of that play, thus wasting a lot of time. That would be okay if it were something novel there, but instead it was you dodging a bunch of taklers, which is something that happens throughout the movie. It's difficult for the incredibly slow QB to dodge the whole team for the whole length of the field. His reaching the end zone is somewhat unexpected.

My point wasn't whether that was entertaining or not. My point was that better planning could have allowed you to do that while the clock was ticking, therfore significantly reducing the length of the movie. A big complaint of the movie is that there is too much running around dodging tackles. Why add more by increasing the length of the quarter?

Quote: 5 minutes faster isn't something to ingore. But it was 5 more minutes of action, not wasted time.

Most of that extra time is the scenes in between plays, the plays lining up of new plays, extra point kicks, and a coin toss. How is any of this "action"?

om, nom, nom... blech, bitter!