For my part, I have no idea. I'm watching this thread thinking, "why not just star movies where entertainment > 9.whatever?"
I thought that was the point. Or close enough, anyway.
I think that the more the starred movies become just about a voting system, the more they'll resemble that list.
When I came along, having seen the starred movies, I assumed that they'd been selected by an individual (or very small number of people) and to my mind, that gives it more import than a bunch of movies voted into place without discussion.
I personally think that having much discussion and a tiny commitee would definitely help keep it more unique.
I think the starred movies could maybe show the best examples of each type of movie - each movie included for a particular reason and showcasing particular aspects or styles of TASs.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
Btw, do we all agree that the stars should signify not-completely-obvious movie recommendations aimed at newcomers, and not anything different? Just to be sure we are all on the same page.
I thought obvious recommendations are also to be included. When I first came, I wouldn't have looked for Mario 64 had it not been starred. And then I saw the 1-star run which astounded me - I'd never thought such things were possible, let alone the more recent efforts!
Though game X may be a popular game and you think people will look for it, I think it should still be starred, depending on run quality. Seems better to include an absolute gem that most will have already seen than to have a minority miss out on a highlight.
And from what Bisqwit says, these are meant to both be recommendations for newcomers and also a checklist of 'have you seen this?' for older folk.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
That would be pointless for most people. Nobody cares about filenames except you.
In fact, I give you something that will make your job easier: Prefix every movie with "0000-moviename", where 0000 is the movie ID. Then you won't have to "guess" about anything.
I care too. I have exactly the same problem.
And if the filenames are changed, they can no longer be seeded. That's half the reason I keep them.
Bisqwit wrote:
stickyman05: Columns are difficult to layout in HTML, unless you resort to using tables. However, as for tables, the current Wiki markup doesn't quite support them to the extent you suggested, so unless one wants to hardcode that page as serverside code, it is a no-go. (The extra bullet is also a consequence of this design.) An option is to switch to another wikimarkup engine, which is what I studied in e.g. September. However, I fear I do not have time for that project; new developers are needed.
Does that also mean that putting an image on the right-hand side is a headache?
What if the picture were a background gif or png, with a transparent left side?
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
Whatever the method, I would personally enjoy seeing more discussion of the matter in the open.
Just having a vote doesn't really encourage any discussion and in the end it just comes down to whatever is most popular - more popular games will more likely be voted upwards and there's no need for great thought.
With discussion, everyone can understand the reason for a game's inclusion/exclusion, the whole process feels more inclusive and the results are likely to be more considered and thoughtful.
I would suggest having Bisqwit alone or some small panel able to vote. And the meta-voting or unknown-voter idea sounds exciting. Whatever the situation, discussion should be encouraged and publicly visible.
The 'hidden voting' - Bisqwit selecting, say, 7 people whose votes actually matter but not telling anyone who they are - would encourage everyone to discuss their thoughts, since they need to vote but also need to sway others' opinions - probability states that their vote doesn't actually count.
The meta-voting could easily end up as people just using their votes whenever they get them and never bothering to discuss anything.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
This actually makes sense only if your monitor has just the right gamma :)
If it doesn't, you only have the monitor to blame and image 3 is likely even worse.
Using the 'view-it-between-two rectangular-objects-method' I now see how much better #2 was than#3.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
I ran the images though Irfanview's "Convert to grayscale" option. The results are <cut>
Wow!
That's amazing! Thank you so much for posting this!
I guess that settles it.
P.S. Warp, you're totally right. I just spent a few minutes using two bundles of folded paper and moving them up and down so I could only see a thin horizontal strip between the 2.
Image 2 IS totally perfect and image 3's issues become far more apparent when seen this way. This is the most astonishing thing I've seen all month! Thank you both!
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
I like the 'exhibitions' and categories of stuff - looking forward to watching the skipped games.
I also like the purple.
I think the right-side can look a little bare on the movies page though. An image there would be nice - maybe a collage of various consoles and stuff - something non-game-specific?
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
I'm kind of torn how to actually go ahead with the colours :I
Whilst different colours do have different brightnesses, the 'after it was fixed' example looks far more uneven to me - as if you did too much. The bottom example seems almost right - any tweaking needed is minute.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
Well, the .avi worked for me.
I've stuck it into bitTorrent, so it'll be seeding for the next few days whenever my computer's on.
I dont know... It still dosent work. Maybe i dont have the right codec???
I've only uploaded 10MB, so unless there were also others seeding (and I don't see any peers) you haven't gotten the whole thing from me.
I use VLC to play it - a program recommended by Halamantariel. That program seems to play any .avi I throw at it.
If it still doesn't work, I might be able to stick it up somewhere for you to dl directly, to check you have the same file.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
Could someone please make a good AVI of my run? I dont know if its only me or if the actual AVI is corrupted but all i get is a little square.
I dont know if this happens often but... It kindda sucks :P
Well, the .avi worked for me.
I've stuck it into bitTorrent, so it'll be seeding for the next few days whenever my computer's on.
jaysmad wrote:
BTW my all gem run is comin up very soon... i hope
Brilliant!
I think this game makes for a good show, but skipping the red gems just makes it feel 'incomplete', not to mention all the acrobatic stunts we miss.
I enjoyed your going off-screen in one autoscroller and lingering in the fire in another.
Overall though, I felt like too much of the run was identical to how I'd play it (other than the parachuting trick).
I expect to be enamoured with your 100%-red-gems one though.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
It was really fun watching this - I, like others, never got past the first boss. This makes me want to go back and try again...
I applaud the decision to get the emeralds - whilst watching, I didn't actually realise what those were and was confused as to why you were retracing your steps.
If a slightly slower in-game time would make for a faster play-record time, I wouldn't be opposed to some slowing down - maybe showing us some of the secret rooms or something. That might have been marginally more entertaining than the few more seconds of the timere count-down. Although then I'd probably have wondered why you weren't just going straight to the end until I read the comments.
A hard choice, certainly.
It's kinda funny the first few times we see the score take so long to count down, anyway.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
I enjoyed watching this - for the first half at least - in a mindless way.
It annoyed me when you let the prizes disappear in the 2nd room of 'world 2' (and a few places thereafter) though - it made it seem less impressive.
The way you let the tank run around for a while in one of the later rooms was kinda interesting.
Glad you went for the pleasuredome and ending.
This brought back memories - my bro was awesome at this - he once rolled over the score (it went back to 0) after a few plays. He wasn't as good as this though!
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
In fact, it can be proven that at any time, the number of button presses (a key that is held in frame n while it was not in frame n-1) is always 1 more than the number of buttonreleases (a key that is no longer held in frame n while it was in frame n-1).
I challenge this. I believe that the number of presses is X more than the number of releases, where X is the number of buttons currently held down. And X does not necessarily equal 1.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
It actually kinda annoys me when folk call colour-matching games a 'Tetris-style' game, since Tetris only shares the similarity of game-pieces falling down a 'well'. It's more similar to 'columns' if you want a more popular comparison. And surely everyone knows what 'colour matching' means?
Conversely, I loved watching this video. It was fun trying to work out what the combos were gonna be before they were 'set off' and the action really was non-stop.
I imagine this was fun to make!
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
Currently, I can't give out 'technical' ratings for published movies - I can give ratings for entertainment, but whatever I select in the other drop-down box, it doesn't seem to register (and records as 'missing' when I look at stuff I've rated).
I thought this was worth making a thread for. Hope that's cool.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
I was slightly disappointed when the shyguys you were juggling in the auto-scrolling stage were smashed together - I was hoping you'd juggle a stupid number of them at once.
I liked the accumulation of red eggs, the big Bowser technique and the sheer use of the flabbergasting warp technique.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
Off topic: Here are the mosaics of the same pictures I posted earlier, using (almost) all pictures from the TASSnapshot package.
A quality bunch. I specially like the Bowser, Mario (brawl) and luigi pics - perhaps because their simplicity lends themselves to a cooler-looking mosaic?
I think that having so many identical tiles next to each other kinda detracts somewhat, though. I assume these are algorithmically generated, from something you coded?
It's mega-impressive but maybe if you could have it so the same tile never occurs within, say, 4 'squares' of itself, it'd result in more variance and a cooler effect?
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
I would have thought that folk without published movies should have less influence.
And that's how it works, too.
I meant 'less influence than they do'.
I thought it would be at most 1/2 of the influence of someone with a published movie. 10/11 seems relatively high.
Thanks for the links. The 'access' section was specially helpful.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.
I would have thought that folk without published movies should have less influence.
Not that I'm complaining.
Bisqwit wrote:
Publisher: influence=1.5, end
Halfpublisher: influence=1.1, end
If the user has movies published, then let minimum post count be <another>, and scale = 1.1
I'd like to ask though - what's a publisher and what's a half-publisher? When I read that section, I assumed they were folk who had authored a published movie or co-authored a published movie respectively. But since you make another clause for 'if the user has movies published' later on, I think I was mistaken.
I'm just some random guy. Don't let my words get you riled - I have my opinions but they're only mine.