Posts for Samsara


Samsara
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Dimon12321 wrote:
It will obsolete NES version once it's published.
It will not. Separate ports are publishable and will exist alongside each other. Please do not speak for the Judge team unless your information is accurate.
Samsara
Posted: 6/28/2022 4:49:14 PM Emulators GeneralVita3K, a PS Vita emulator
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
TheAmazingAladdin wrote:
You can TAS Vita3K using libTAS!
Yeah, let's not do this. We don't need the massive text announcement, the stolen screenshot, and the complete lack of known and relevant information. It's heavily misleading.
Samsara
Posted: 6/27/2022 6:24:20 PM SiteStaff
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Hell yeah. Welcome back~
Samsara
Posted: 6/25/2022 9:04:36 PM GeneralTASVideos and cheats
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Sorry I'm late to this discussion, I've had kind of an insane week and it's stunted my ability to think about video games in slow motion. I can post more detailed thoughts tomorrow, when it isn't Literally My Birthday Today.
feos wrote:
In my opinion most issues can be resolved by a rule like this:
In-game codes that add gameplay are allowed for a separate branch in Standard, as long as such codes are used optimally.

So I suggest adding this rule:
External codes that modify the game are judged as unofficial games if modifications are severe enough. Otherwise, external codes are allowed for Moons only if they unlock gameplay or content that in-game codes can't access.
These look good to me. In general, I'm a very hard "NO" on allowing external cheats universally. The logistics of judging that would be impossible to figure out. Not for lack of trying: It's been a thought of mine for well over a decade, and I have yet to come up with a single passable solution. We have Playground now for that sort of thing. People can make their own rules, every run exists on entirely its own merits, and we don't need to figure out some kind of insane logic with cheat usage and obsoletion in order to keep things sane. The way the suggestion is worded right now fits in with the maximum I would personally allow. It limits things sanely and nicely. I'm way more lenient on in-game codes, but there's still a lot of things that need to be figured out there. The suggested rule is pretty much perfect, though I could see it being relaxed even further in the future.
Samsara
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Memory wrote:
Personally I'm starting to lean a bit towards the "we'll get around to the old runs when we get around to them" approach but I could be missing something.
This is my take on it, honestly. I have no qualms about runs like this being standard, but I recognize that setting that precedent here and now would mean a great amount of effort needed to re-judge things, and we can't reach that demand at the moment. Rule changes tend to be a lot of people bringing up their rejections and not a lot of people offering to help out with acceptances, after all. That being said, I don't think we should be delaying positive changes for very long. We should just be reasonable and forward with what we're able to do as a team, focusing on the present at the moment and popping back to the past when we have time to spare. As long as we keep a log of what needs to be looked at, and as long as the community understands that we're not omniscient superheroes that can and will automatically and instantly fix all our past mistakes, I think we can go ahead and make some changes now. My main issue is finding a way of making "fastest input time" an objective and standard category without opening the floodgates to things like taking a published run and slightly tweaking the ending input to be able to end it a few frames earlier. We sort of have some subjectivity in allowing "no major skips" runs as standard categories, though I feel fastest input time is a bit more of a minefield of subjectivity than that. It's possible we may have to delay actually figuring out concrete boundaries while also letting things through. We'll figure something out. Man, change is complicated. No wonder we refused to do it for almost 20 years.
Samsara
Posted: 6/13/2022 11:54:48 AM Gruefood#7536: MrTASer's NES Chase in 01:18.47
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
This isn't a fun thing for me to remember, but: #4799: arandomgameTASer, Samsara's NES Chase in 01:15.61 Level 1 is even between the two. Levels 2, 3, 4 and 5 are slower in this submission. I see no differences in emulation, apart from a single extra frame of lag on the linked submission, likely due to the QuickNes core being used. On top of that, there's User movie #24955764634818867, which is much faster than both submissions. Also, there's no 100% in this game.
Samsara
Posted: 6/12/2022 7:32:29 PM SiteUpdating Movie Tags
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Sounds good to me.
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Moons, absolutely, but honestly I'm starting to lean standard on this. We definitely need a discussion thread for allowing in-game cheats in standard as separate categories. Given class changes are effectively a free action on the site (some changes to publications require an updated re-encode, class changes don't), there shouldn't be anything holding us back from accepting to Moons now and changing to standard later once we get that discussion going.
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
CoolHandMike wrote:
Wish Spikestuff would do some fighting game playarounds...
And I wish all games, genres, and TASes would be encouraged similarly and equally.
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Perfect service, perfect game.
Samsara
Posted: 6/1/2022 1:23:55 AM Post subject: new hire! new hire! new hire!!! SiteStaff
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Holy h*ck in a h*ndbasket, y'all, we got ourselves a new Judge! Please welcome Info Teddy to the team!
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
It's been... Just a bit of time, shall we say, since this was submitted. A slight bit of time, perhaps. Couple days, maybe? I dunno, I lost all grasp on time millennia ago. Since submission, a lot has changed regarding the site. Notably... The site itself, but also the evolution of how content is treated and accepted. I'd like a fresh set of perspectives on this run, some new feedback (and even the repetition old feedback from people who already posted) to determine how to handle this run. Was it enjoyable? Does it differ enough from the published Genocide run? Is it something worth showcasing? That last one's a trick question. The answer is yes. But still, there's been enough time since submission and enough changes to the site that it's worth essentially starting over on feedback. please do not take another 7 months ._.
Samsara
Posted: 5/22/2022 1:18:34 AM MS-DOS GamesNetHack
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
LET'S HECKIN' GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
I love easy conclusions! I was leaning towards glitchfest as well, so we'll go with that.
Samsara
Posted: 5/18/2022 12:57:20 AM SiteGame page maintenance
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Memory wrote:
So there has been a major change to game entries where instead of having a system tied to the game entry, it is tied to an individual game version. Therefore game entries can have multiple systems listed and have proper cross-system obsoletion. There is also now an admin only operation to rewire existing game pages together. In my opinion, it makes sense to have game entries shared whenever gameplay is extremely similar, and cross obsoletion can occur. Pokemon versions (Red/Green/Blue/Yellow for example) and various modern operating systems are cases of this. What is not a case is say a GameBoy Advance game and a GameCube game based on the same license with the same title. These are likely to be two completely different games. My goal long-term is to have people navigate the site largely through game pages, so I'm itching to get started. But if there's any adjustments that make sense, post them. EDIT: Another potential example would be Lion King SNES vs Genesis. While traditionally cross system obsoletion has not occurred for those games, I feel they are similar enough that people searching for the game are likely to want to see either if not both.
As far as I'm concerned, if the games are meant to be the same (i.e, Pokemon RGBY/other sets of generations) or extremely similar (i.e, Lion King SNES/Genesis, Myst, the big collection of Donkey Kong ports), they should share game pages.
Samsara
Posted: 5/17/2022 8:51:33 PM GeneralShould we ban VBA-rr for GB/C submissions?
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
It's official now. The parser won't be deprecated or anything, but VBA-rr is no longer allowed for GB/C publications.
Samsara
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
#5854: ThunderAxe31's GBC Toki Tori in 42:20.24 Leaving this here as a reminder to myself, in accordance with Post #514335... And also as a reminder to myself to check what's been posted here. Heck, dang, jeez, I've been slacking on this stuff.
Samsara
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
feos wrote:
Are there any opinions on branching this?
Looking back on previous cases where 100% runs were preferred over any% runs, I can safely say that I completely disagree with the practice of doing so. At no point should we have ever said "Oh, you beat a game as fast as possible? Sorry, not good enough for us. Do some unnecessary content and make it take longer." Superseding of content and/or similarity shouldn't matter when comparing quite literally the two most objective categories in speedrunning, barring some situation like Mega Man X2, where the two categories were actually considered one in the same for several years. I'd like to keep this a separate branch, and I'd also like to correct past obsoletions/rejections where this occurred.
Samsara
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
MESHUGGAH wrote:
I saw a few interesting notes about this on various not allowed to link sites,
So you'll follow those rules, but you disregard the rules against hate speech by keeping that ableist slur in your forum signature? This isn't the first time you've been warned about using that word, either. Remove it. EDIT: I apologize for hijacking the submission for this, but I'm not going to let language like that stand, and prior warnings were ignored.
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Please use this when editing your submission. All non-minor edits are tracked in our Discord server, and it can result in pretty annoying spam when several of them happen in a short span of time.
Samsara
Posted: 5/8/2022 6:50:26 AM Post subject: Reviewers - A new way to contribute! TASVideos NewsTASVideos news feed
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Have you ever thought "I want to be a Judge, but I don't think I have the qualifications or the time commitment to do it"? The new Reviewer role might be perfect for you! Reviewers make up a trusted panel of experienced community members, working alongside Judges to curate what content makes it onto TASvideos. They are not able to directly process submissions like Judges. Instead, their role is to streamline the overall judging process by providing first pass reviews of workbench submissions. Examples of what Reviewers can do include verifying that input files sync and checking for any obvious mistakes in routing and optimization. They are also given a much bigger voice in discussions over difficult judgements and possible changes to our submission rules. For more information on the role, there's an in-depth writeup on the Judging wiki page. If you'd like to be a Reviewer, please contact Samsara, and then expect to wait for several hours because she's really bad at both sleeping and checking site DMs.
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Info Teddy wrote:
I would also like to note that the submitted movie file ends on Frisk slashing Toriel, and stops at her saying "You..." whereas the temporary encode advances past that dialogue and gets to the "UNDERTALE [HARD MODE] Coming... Maybe, Eh. don't count on it." screen. The movie file should probably be updated to get to that screen.
This makes sense to me as well. I'll hold on replacing the file and making my judgement until a new fixed file is provided.
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
I apologize for the delay in processing this submission. I've noticed a lot of inconsistent optimization compared to [2844] Genesis Flashback: The Quest for Identity by Alyosha in 22:29.99, particularly in menuing and comparable movement. Some comparable sections are noticeably slower than the published run, others are a fair bit quicker. Is there any reason for this? Frame rules, movement optimization between screens, RNG manipulation, emulation accuracy improvements, anything like that? The menuing at the very least seems like an oversight, something that would have been caught by referencing the published run, though I lack the familiarity with the game to tell if the overall movement is also an oversight or intentional. There's definitely some very solid improvements in here with new glitches and strategies, but I worry that a good amount of time is being lost in these comparable sections. EDIT: Some of these are pretty significant losses, too. You're only 2 seconds ahead of the published run at the start of the second area. Keeping pace with the published run in comparable sections (i.e, not the strictly improved rooms) would have put you at least 5-6 seconds ahead. EDIT2: I've gone deeper into comparing the two runs and I don't think the optimization is up to snuff. Outside of rooms with new glitches/routing, time is constantly being lost.
Samsara
Posted: 5/1/2022 9:12:46 AM SiteTerm to replace "Rejected"
Experienced Forum User,Senior Judge,Published Author,Skilled player   (1680.4)

Joined: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2419
Location: Northern California
Arc wrote:
Split it into two separate classifications. Rejected for movies that will never be published (there is no more accurate term in English than 'rejected'). Deferred is the proper term for something that could be given consideration in the future.
I've brought this idea up in the past and still agree with it. I've opened up an issue for it on Github and, honestly, I'd consider it high priority given the current state of the workbench. EDIT: Less priority now, but I still think it's a good idea!