Also, I really really hope that the site doesn't store passwords in plaintext, but stores a salted fixed-length hash instead.
Given that the site doesn't use encryption for logging in (ie. https), does it really matter? The login/password is already going in plaintext over the internets.
While it's naturally not wrong to give a technical rating based solely on how you felt when watching the run, it's preferable if you have at the very least read the author's description on how the run was done (and if there are previous versions of the run for the same game, all the previous descriptions as well, because authors tend to leave out things that have been explained in the previous versions.) This can give a much better idea of how much effort the author put into the run and what kind of techniques and tools he used. (I'd say that a well-written submission comment by the author goes a long way to a higher technical rating, especially when the run deserves it.)
Of course it doesn't hurt if you know TASing techniques and the games themselves more in depth, but I'd say it would be a bit unreasonable to demand that kind of knowledge before recommending people could give a technical rating.
Remember that the votes aren't for "should we accept this run", but rather "did you find this run entertaining enough for Moon or Star tier".
And once again we see why there should be an option for "this should not be published".
I honestly cannot understand why there can't be such an option. Just add it already, sheesh. Stop being so stubborn.
How about instead of wild mass guessing, the original poster could explain in more detail what is it that he wants? The original question was quite vague.
I suppose it's useless to live in denial any longer: The wings are there to stay. I suppose the sooner I accept the fact, the sooner I can get over it.
I just hope they don't mess it up any more than they already did with that last, horrid episode.
While on average nudity is more acceptable in Europe (although it obviously varies wildly from country to country), it's not like nobody would bat an eye if there's overt nudity in a videogame aimed at children. It might not get the moral guardians to the barricades as much as in America, but I think there would nevertheless be some discussion.
As for "bad language", I suppose there's much less censorship of that here as well. The extent of bad language censorship in the US often looks quite ridiculous watched from here.
If to get the WR in a real time run you must get a good RNG on the first stage, then runners will reset until they get that good RNG, uninitialized RAM or no uninitialized RAM.
So (in this particular case) they are not really using resetting to glitch savedata or otherwise glitch the game. They are simply restarting the game until they get a favorable RNG. Resetting is simply the easiest way to start over. (Ostensibly the favorable RNG doesn't come from the fact that they pushed the reset button, but simply because of different timing and actions they do on each run.)
That's not the kind of "reset abuse" I was referring to.
I don't understand the desire to limit tases from doing things that could just as well be done by real time runners. I feel like that defeats the entire purpose of a tas.
It's not like I'm thrilled to see resetting used in real-time runs either...
It's ok to demonstrate some interesting glitch, such as triggering the different kinds of inventory bugs that can be achieved even on the real console via resetting in the pokemon games, but I don't think it should be constitute the "official" speedrunning record (if there's such a thing.) At most a sub-category (but not the "main" one.) But again, just my personal opinion.
Why not?
The point is that the RAM state should be inconsequential and the same for all runs. Not meddling with the RAM prior to running the game should be regarded the same as not using a savestate to start the game, and using a cartridge with no savedata on it.
Of course I understand that I'm fighting windmills here, but that's my opinion, for what it's worth.
Because this has every thing to do with speedrunning, and nothing with "designing your own ROM".
I fail to see how setting RAM values even before the game has started constitutes speedrunning.
The difference between setting RAM values because they theoretically might be like that by chance, and setting them explicitly via external means while the game is running, is artificial at best. One is not any more "speedrunning" than the other, not even if we were to loosen up the definition and allow achieving some goal (other than getting to the end of the game) as fast as possible.
I would go so far as to say that "the console RAM must be set to all zeros (or whatever) before starting the run" is on par with "the run must start from powerup". (And, if it were up to me, also "resetting is not allowed.")
At least I want to see the game played with superhuman accuracy. Why would I want to see a different program being run?
And none of the three has anything to do with what is being asked here.
That's not what this sounds like: "We could have an entire program sitting in unitialized memory, and through memory corruption techniques maybe we could get the game to start executing at this point and completely take over the game"
I repeat: If you want to run your own code in the console, just make your own ROM. It has absolutely nothing to do with speedrunning.
But then, i also think there was no need to call him out for it the way you did, warp.
To clarify: When antd commented on Bisqwit's original post, he defended it by saying that they are famous in some circles and why. My intention was to point out that his post didn't come off as annoying because of mentioning some unknown people, but because of the religious undertones, which can feel opportunistic and irk people (which is why I mentioned that it would have been the same if someone had similarly used the opportunity to promote some other world view.) Surely he can understand how his post can give this impression.
My post (and especially the followups) sounded harsher that was my intention. My mental diplomacy filter was not turned on in such a familiar environment as this.
OmnipotentEntity wrote:
I was on the same plane as Eric Hovind.
Now there's a famous person among certain groups of people... :P
I honestly cannot see the point in all this.
If you want to run your own code in the console, then make your own ROM. If you want to modify the game's own code, then make a modified version. If you want to modify how the console works, then take the source code of the emulator and change it.
You are free to do so, but none of this has anything at all to do with speedrunning. Speedrunning is playing the game.
The issue concerning my response to you was that you were hammering him for talking about famous Christian figures in his neck of the woods (Finland).
I wasn't the first one to object to his post. I was explaining why his post is quite off-topic and uncalled for.
It's quite clear that "famous" in this context means well known in popular culture, eg. because of appearing in movies, TV, magazines or other similar popular media, and known all across the spectrum. Those people he mentioned are not "famous" here in Finland, nor probably anywhere else either, save for a very narrow niche subculture. It's quite clear that his religious beliefs prompted him to write about them, rather than they being truly popular because of appearing in mass media.
I'm pretty sure he understand this, but nevertheless chose to try to rationalize it, rather than directly admitting that yes, it was his beliefs that prompted him to make the post, stretching the meaning intended by "famous people" in the original post. Hence the comment on honesty and integrity.
And for the record, he's a close friend of mine, and he has berated me in the past for some behavior of mine (and justly so), and that's completely fine by me. I'm pretty sure we are long past the phase of getting angry for expressing our opinions and views openly.
So what if he embedded some links within his post?
You are giving way too much weight to some ancillary side comment I made in parentheses, and missing my point completely.
Remember, everything written in parentheses can (not) be ignored.
In more complex scenarios we may be able to do amazing things to a SNES game. We could have an entire program sitting in unitialized memory, and through memory corruption techniques maybe we could get the game to start executing at this point and completely take over the game (hypothetical, and unlikely, but certainly interesting).
I see little relevant difference between this and using just a custom ROM. It seems kind of pointless, especially in the context of this website, which is about completing games as fast as possible by playing them with superhuman accuracy.
I really think that the more we deviate towards "let's run our own code in the console", the more we lose sight of the actual purpose of TASing: Namely, speedrunning. In other words, play the game, complete it as fast as possible.
If you can affect the game via gameplay, that's par for the course. When you set values prior to even starting the game in order to get some effect, that's more dubious IMO. That's not playing the game anymore, nor is it speedrunning.
Let's retain some purity to the concept of tool-assisted speedrunning.
But I see. Some topics are prejudiced against and that is totally fine.
I think you know perfectly well what I am talking about, and are only rationalizing in order to justify your post. Not to be a huge dick, but I would expect a bit of honesty and integrity from a bible-believing Christian.
As for the Uri Geller example, it would have been made a difference if the poster had used it as an opportunity to promote some kind of psychic belief system (or to bash it, for that matter), rather than just mentioning the name of a person who is genuinely famous (for good or bad) because of having been a prominent public figure internationally, appearing on many TV shows, popular magazines and so on.
It's the same difference as if someone said simply "I have met John Travolta", or additionally using that as an opportunity to promote scientology.
That kind of attitude generally irks people.
I think the problem is that you used this opportunity to preach your religion (with lots of links and all), which is kind of uncalled for.
It would have been quite the same as if someone had taken the opportunity to promote, let's say, homeopathy by telling how he met a "famous" homeopath (who is known only in some homeopathy circles), or doing the same to promote scientology, ufology, or anything like that.
This is neither what is generally meant by "famous people", nor is it in any way on-topic to preach some world view or ideology.
instead of Color A Dinosaur, Mario Paint, every single coloring book game ever, etc.
That doesn't make any sense. It would be like saying "this is a ripoff of board games", or "this is a ripoff of first-person shooters", or "this is a ripoff of puzzle games."
You can't "rip off" an entire genre. That doesn't make any sense.
You can, however, rip off a specific TV show.
