Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
MESHUGGAH wrote:
edit: oh, and as I've already mentioned on a few places multiple times, none of these TASes are high quality (void glitch is possible on many places yet not used and totally suboptimal at e3m5 or e3m6 whatever. movement is totally sluggish (player waits for 20 tics and go forward if he magically gets into the teleport), do I need to fucking continue?
I don't see this as a problem. It just means that the runs can (and likely will) be obsoleted at some point by better runs. The first submission for any game is supposed to be good, it doesn't have to be perfect.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
TASVideoAgent wrote:
Use select-state key (Number key 5) to start from World 2
I believe it would be more fitting to reach world 2 by playing through world 1.
Two years ago, I have said that I would use the 4 stage version instead of an extended one, because the official site only has this version. Also, a source claims that Syobon Action only has 4 stages, implying that the extended version is a fan-game.
We should probably do some research into this. It strikes me that we should either accept the eight-level version of the game, and have one run completing all levels to obsolete the published four-level run; or we should reject the eight-level version for lack of notability.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
I just found this speedrun of Eternal Daughter; it's a lengthy Metroidvania game that normally takes hours, and with a handful of fast movement, machine gun fire, and wall clipping glitches, it is completed in about 20 minutes instead.
Perhaps this can serve as inspiration for a TAS :)
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
OmnipotentEntity wrote:
Actually, Star tier means "movies we think are amazing." Newcomer tier is "movies that we think newcomers should watch first."
That's funny, because just two posts before yours, Feos outlined the selection process for Newcomer tier. Turns out it is exactly "movies we think are amazing" :D
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Warp wrote:
Radiant wrote:
Why exactly do we have two "best runs on the site" tiers, again? I get the impression that Star tier has exactly the same purpose as Newcomer tier.
Probably a question of size. The star tier ought to be relatively small in content (because it's a selection of "watch these first" runs). The moon tier has no size limit.
Warp, I'm not talking about Star vs Moons. I'm talking about Star vs Newcomer. Star tier is the "watch these first" runs, as you say; but Newcomer tier is also a relatively small list of "watch these first" runs. In other words, exactly the same thing.
Moon tier is clearly different, of course.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Mothrayas wrote:
By the same logic, runs that do not belong in the vault (as per hard-set rules), can be said to belong in Moons or Stars too. In fact, elevating them to moons is the better solution because it at best violates a subjective issue, whereas putting un-belonging runs in the Vault is an objective rule violation. There are precedents for handling it that way as well.
I get the impression that you see Moon Tier as the "bottom bucket" where all runs go that don't fit in any of the other categories; whereas most people seem to see Vault Tier as this "bottom bucket".
So which is it? Is the Vault the category below Moon, which holds movies that aren't eligible for Moon? Or is the Moon tier the category below Vault, holding all runs that aren't eligible for the Vault?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Mothrayas wrote:
The fact that it is in that tier by mistake due to the fact that it breaks the rules of that tier?
Ah, I see you've pre-empted the entire discussion here by moving these runs to Moon tier, despite the fact that they also break the rules of that tier :P
I'm not sure how that helps. I think it makes much more sense to set up tiers so that "Vault is for pure speedruns, Moon is for entertaining runs", instead of (as it is now) "Vault is for pure speedruns except for boardgames, Moon is for entertaining runs and for non-entertaining boardgame runs".
SmashManiac wrote:
I'm with Warp on this, at least on the principle. I see no reason why some genres should be excluded from Vault, as the whole point of this tier (at least for me) is the best theoretical speed that a game can be beaten. adelikat's argument about the triviality of making board game runs may be true for some of them, but not only is it false in the general case, but I don't see why not have the trivial ones have their own records anyway.
...
That's why I would resolve the situation like this:
- Remove all genres exclusions from Vault.
- Allow all versions and categories for all official games in Vault.
- Let other communities bother with theoretical optimizations for the abstract version of games.
As for the creation of new tiers, it's in my opinion that it would only introduce artificial fragmentation and confusion. It's already possible to sort movies by user rating, so I don't see why additional tiers would be necessary. The improvement I would do however is make this sorting more obvious.
I completely agree with SmashManiac.
Also, as near as I can tell, the issue that there are lots of implementations of the same board game only seems to hold true for Chess, Checkers, Go, and Mah Jongg; perhaps two or three others. So I don't think that issue is as big as this thread suggests it is. Perhaps the Vault should explicitly exclude these particular common games, instead of excluding all board games ever?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Mothrayas wrote:
Me, in the same topic wrote:
Or, it is a mistake caused by automation. It's really not a strong argument for anything.
Remember a common TASVideos adage: "Past mistakes do not justify repeating the same mistakes again".
Whatever makes you think this is a past mistake?
Considering that (1) those board game runs clearly do not belong in moon or star tier, and (2) by site policy we never un-publish any run, it follows that yes, they do belong in the vault; and as currently under discussion in the workbench, improvements to such movies can also be accepted in the vault. Since the vault contains board games by precedent, it follows that the vault can accept board games.
So the vault contains board games, and should continue to contain board games. I don't see any problem with that.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Mothrayas wrote:
Or, it is a mistake caused by automation. It's really not a strong argument for anything.
Considering that (1) that run clearly does not belong in moon or star tier, and (2) by site policy we never un-publish any run, it follows that yes, this does belong in the vault. And since the vault contains board games by precedent, it follows that the vault can accept board games.
Anyway, regarding this run, since it is an improvement to an existing movie, it shouldn't be rejected. Since the existing movie is in the vault, AND has low audience response, AND this submission also has low audience response, it follows that this run also belongs in the vault.
So the vault contains board games, and should continue to contain board games. I don't see any problem with that.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
It has been brought to my attention that the Vault in fact already contains board game runs.
So that strikes me as a strong argument to allow board game runs to be published in the vault (assuming the run meets standard site criteria). After all, precedent shows that we've already done that for years, albeit sporadically.
[1884] NES Solitaire by FractalFusion in 00:42.80[2014] SNES Clue by Deign in 00:26.50[2289] GBA Hikaru no Go by pirohiko in 12:02.33
Note that all of these have poor enough viewer ratings that they clearly don't belong in any other tier.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Mothrayas wrote:
Keep in mind that this run is an improvement to a pre-split publication of this game, which was auto-split to the Vault.
Interesting.
So the fact that the vault does in fact already contain board game runs should be a strong argument to, you know, allow board game runs to the vault in the first place.
Given the poor viewer reactions to that earlier movie, it clearly does not belong in moons.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
So we had a four-month discussion on allowing board games in the vault tier, that doesn't have a clear conclusion to it. What is the judges' consensus on that topic?
Anyway, no vote. In my opinion this belongs in the vault, and if it's not allowed there, it should be rejected.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Warp wrote:
I'm honestly wondering if you are just trying to troll me.
That logo doesn't dictate the policies of the site. It could just as well say "Tool-assisted slowplay movies" and it wouldn't make any difference.
Not at all. If I understand your previous post correctly, you would like a showcase tier for runs that don't fit the definition of "speedrun" (i.e. to complete the game as fast as possible). I'm simply pointing out that we already have runs in moon tier (e.g. all playarounds) that don't complete the game as fast as possible.
Basically, if propose that we need a new tier to publish X (for some value of X), then it strikes me as a fair counterargument that we already publish X.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
feos wrote:
I decided to go through some potential demos, that one might or might not feel like seeing in Showcase tier, and see if I'd be able to invent causes to put them there. Because, it's the best test for any proposal idea, let's decide what fits and what doesn't by simply looking at examples!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
feos wrote:
Being technically interesting has no relation to Moons. A run could be absolutely straightforward, but well-received, and for that alone reside in Moons.
Indeed. My point is that "technically interesting" runs are also going to be well-received (so that they can go in Moons). If a run isn't well-received, then clearly most voters didn't find it interesting.
Warp wrote:
I thought that a TAS has to, at the very least, complete the game. If it doesn't complete the game, then it's hard to call it a speedrun at all. (Because that's the very definition of "speedrun": To complete the game as fast as possible.)
According to the site logo, TAS stands voor Tool-Assisted Superplay, not speedrun. Indeed, we have a numerous Moons runs that don't in fact complete the game as fast as possible.
Grincevent wrote:
Let's go with some examples.
We could have the "multiple games with one input file" in there, and they would also get published in moons.
We can have the *GDQ events (SMW turns into pong+snake or into SMB, Pokémon plays Twitch...).
We can have the infinite SMB2 run, even if it can't be published because it doesn't finish the game, the Pokémon pi run doesn't finish the game either.
I note that all the movies you mention are, in fact, in Moon tier (except, surprisingly, the infinity run). So that seems to confirm my statement that Moon tier already covers what this proposed tier is for.[/url]
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
dwangoAC wrote:
In brief, the proposal calls for creating a new and unique tier that would be used for technically interesting runs that do not fit in the existing categories.
I'm not really seeing the point of this. It seems to me that any technically interesting run already qualifies to be in Moon tier; if it didn't get into Moons, then most people wouldn't find it technically interesting for the same reason.
We don't need a whole new tier to deal with a relatively short contest.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Kurabupengin wrote:
So if you guys don't like the hack, what hacks do get your standards? Only Extra Mario Bros. and that retarded Kaizo hack?
That's a fair question. EMB is an interesting hack because it goes well beyond what SMB itself does (it's a metroidvania game with an extensive boss fight, which the original SMB is decidedly not), and "that retarded Kaizo hack" is one of the most famous SMW hacks ever.
The site romhacking.net already lists 209 SMB romhacks, most of which are nothing to write home about. Imho, a hack needs to stand out either in originality or in fame (or preferably both), and this rom does neither.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Note that the sign right at the beginning of the level says "go up", which also suggests that going over the mountain was in fact the intended path and everything else is a big red herring.
(yes, it's in a substitution cypher, but if you'd bought the game then you would have received the key; the game is full of this kind of signs, too)
Oh yeah, and the game's blurb refers to the penultimate level as "the impossible maze of the Caves of Oblivion". You should take that literally.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Warp wrote:
I don't see how. The core standards of the vault tier are: Play at the highest difficulty (unless you have a very good reason otherwise), complete the game as fast as possible. The "board game tier" would have those exact same requirements.
As for entertainment, it's a rather non-issue for vault, so why should it be an issue for this proposed new category?
Precisely.
z1mb0bw4y wrote:
The entire reason why board games aren't excepted to vault is because they're all too "same-y" and typically not interesting.
As Warp says, entertainment (how interesting a run is) is not an issue for the vault; speed is the issue for the vault.
The entire reason why the vault doesn't have board games is because the site as a whole had a "no board games" clause which actually predates the existence of vault. So we could either make a new tier that's "exactly the same as the vault, but for board games", or we could simply remove the "no board games" clause from the vault (keeping all its other requirements, of course).
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Tangent wrote:
I agree that there should only be one branch unless a good argument can be made otherwise, but you haven't said what that branch should be. "Hardest" is an inadequate definition. What number of players and which mode is correct in that example? Why?
The same as with every other game on the site:
(1) if there's a difficulty setting, set it to hardest.
(2) pick any other options based on "whatever is fastest".
(3) done, you now have your "any%" fastest branch.
(4) any other combination of options needs to either give a substantially different run, or be entertaining enough to qualify for moon tier.
For example, if an RPG allows you to pick out of six classes for four characters, that's already 1296 combinations, which is way more than most board games. And this is an issue that's already been solved: You pick whatever is fastest.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Player
(26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
For example, you might as well ask if Super Mario Bros 2 should have thirty different runs, i.e. Mario+Luigi, Mario+Toad, Mario+Luigi+Toad, Mario+Princess+Toad, and so forth for fifteen permutations plus warpless version of each.
In case you were wondering, the answer is "no, obviously not". So that also means that Uno does not require separate runs for 3, 4, 5, and 6-player mode.
