Because AVI time depends on the publisher logo and the time he decides to spend on the ending screen.
And btw, "avi time" is a real misnomer, and has been for a rather long time. (And yes, I know the statistics page still uses that term. Maybe it should be changed.)
AVI is but just one multimedia container format. In the beginning all encodes were published using it, but that hasn't been the case for quite many years. (Also youtube makes the definition even fuzzier because we are not talking about a physical file anymore, but a stream watched using a flash application.)
However, it's hard to come up with a better alternative that's unambiguous and doesn't cause confusion.
You should vote yes. We are asking for your opinions on entertainment value, not if it breaks the rules. To be blunt, no one is asking you if it breaks the rules, that's what the judges are for.
It doesn't really matter what the actual question presented in the poll is. Voting "yes" still feels strongly like voting pro publication. If there's a problem with the run, voting "yes" feels like saying "there's a problem with the run preventing publication, but I still think it can be published (after all, I am voting 'yes'...)", which feels contradictory.
Currently the only available option is to abstain from voting. I don't really see a good reason why there could not be a voting option to indicate an objection to publication, and I don't really understand the seemingly strong opposition to the idea. What exactly is the problem?
However, if you have a reason it breaks the rules, or some other objection, the judge would prefer you mention it. Judges are supposed to read all comments. In theory, commenting is sufficient to bring it to their attention, and it will be weighted accordingly.
I know, but I don't see anything wrong in being able to also express that info in the poll itself. That way a judge can at a quick glance see that someone has an objection, and look forward to it in the comments. What is so wrong about this that it seems completely out of question?
AnS wrote:
Which one exactly? Because I see a lot of possible additional options that solve one minor problem at a time.
"Not ok for publication". (Not necessarily using those exact words, but as an idea.)
What I'm saying is that the votes don't (or shouldn't) matter.
So what should I vote if I find the run entertaining but I have an objection to it being published (eg. it blatantly breaks some of the rules)? Should I simply abstain from voting?
IMO if there's a poll system, it should cover all the possibilities, not leave the third option out completely.
Besides, if there were a "this should not be published" voting option, then it would more quickly inform a judge that "hey, someone thinks there's a problem with this submission" at a glance. (More information should be given in the comments, of course, but this notifies the judge that someone does have an objection.) There's nothing wrong about that.
* Entertaining.
* Not very entertaining, but ok for publication.
* Not ok for publication (explain in the comments why.)
The wording could use some work, but as an idea...
Just a question to the NO-ers you mean NO for entertainment but still suitable for the vault? Or just NO overall?
This is just a curious killed the cat question.
(since it does say "Did you find this movie entertaining?")
I think you raise an interesting question. As it is now, there's no way for people to vote between "ok for publication in vault" and "not ok for publication". Naturally they can express their reasoning in the comments (as they should), but what exactly should they vote?
If one's honest, one can find a run entertaining even if it's blatantly against publication rules. Should one vote "yes" and then comment that they think it should not be published? That feels a bit contradictory, even if it's technically speaking accurate.
The most important reason to measure the length of a run by how many frames the keypress input file has is a practical one: It makes automation of the website easy. The website can automatically show the length of the run without knowing anything about the game and without the need to determine what constitutes the "ending" of a particular game. It also makes comparing lengths infinitely easier.
From this, however, the focus of some runners has shifted from finishing the game as quickly as possible to making the keypress input file have as few frames as possible. In the vast majority of cases the two are the same thing, but in a few cases they are not.
I certainly do not disagree that making a game finish with a keypress input file that's significantly shorter (in frames) than the actual resulting length of the game (iow. the ending is just left to finish on its own for a significantly long period of time) is interesting. However, I feel that this loses the main focus of speedrunning: To finish the game as fast as possible, not to make an input file that's as short as possible.
The keypress file is a mean to an end, not the end itself. The keypress file itself should be inconsequential.
However, since it's very rare for a game to be finishable with a significantly shorter input file than the game's length, this isn't such a big deal to make a fuss about, I'd say. Live and let live. Rules should be flexible.
Potatoes are also listed as poisonous to horses. For the life of me I can't remember if there's any scene in the entire series involving potatoes in some form... Maybe not.
Getting the item lets you end input around frame 1000, and the game ends at 1500. No further input after frame 1000 would end this any sooner. As such, your criterium is fullfilled.
Not getting the item would allow you to start the boss fight earlier, except you'd need more input, so you can only end input at frame 1200 (which is later). However, as you've been inputting the whole boss fight instead of just the start, the game ends at frame 1300, which is faster.
Both options fullfill the criterium, but which one do you believe should be used?
Fair enough. As said, I'd say that the run that completes the game fastest is the one that should take precedence. The main question is: When it is acceptable to end the input of said run? And the answer is: At the moment where no further input would make the game end faster.
Anyway, this seems to be a rather exceptional case. I have never opposed the idea of having special exceptions to the rules for individual corner cases. On the contrary, I have always supported it, in cases where the exception is justified. Rules should be flexible to accommodate special situations they might not cover well. (Also, such exceptions in no way imply creating precedents.)
Thus the principle I like the most is "end the input where no further input can make the game end faster".
I don't think that's unambiguous enough. In Rosenkreuzstilette, there are two possible routes. One of the routes involves obtaining a particular item, spending time in the process; this lets you get a final boss fight that's faster than skipping the item, and that lets you end input at the start of the boss fight. The other route, skipping the item, means that the final boss fight is shorter, but ends earlier relative to the run as a whole (because skipping the item saves time, letting you get to the fight earlier); you have to input all the way through it.
So with your definition, it'd be faster to obtain the item; at the point when you end input, there's no way to beat the game faster from there. It is possible to beat the game faster, but only by changing route earlier.
I don't understand. If obtaining the item makes the run longer, how exactly do you get to it being actually shorter? I'm not really seeing how you are understanding "end the input where no further input can make the game end faster."
The question about where it's considered valid to end the input has been open for almost the beginning, and there's no unique agreement on it.
Personally, I think that the goal of a TAS is to (usually) end the game as fast as possible, not to minimize the length of the keypress input file. That latter goal is completely inconsequential and irrelevant. What matters is finishing the game, not how many keypresses were needed to do that.
Of course I also agree that keypress files should not contain any needless data after the end, because that would be useless redundancy.
Thus the principle I like the most is "end the input where no further input can make the game end faster".
The composer/orchestra has copyright on a specific performance even if the score itself is out of copyright, though. So some care is needed.
I love how using public domain music from a composer that died in the 18th century seems to be more problematic than using copyrighted game music that was composed like 10 to 20 years ago (with most of the composers very much alive.)
If you like violent anime, then you might want to check Elfen Lied. Although it might be a bit too brutal for some people. It has more than just gore, though.
I like Suzumiya Haruhi because of the quality of the drawing and animation (and the plot isn't boring either.)
As for other anime... too many to choose from. I suppose Hikaru no Go, Naruto and Bleach could be mentioned (although they might be a bit too obvious.)
those bulky panels, retro controls and the unobtrusive style of presentation makes people more happy and satisfied. I bet if he were to use a simple PC + unshaven face, a lot of Youtubers would call him cheater and wouldn't really learn anything from the video.
Oooh... now that's clever. And I'm not being sarcastic here.
Have you ever watched this video series?
I started watching the first episode and after a minute or so I was like "bleh, this is dumb and boring."
After 30 minutes I was still watching...
I must admit I was a bit prejudiced when I started to watch the movie, but it turned out to be entertaining. Not great, mind you, but entertaining. (It didn't leave a bad taste in my mouth like eg. the last episode of the third season did.)
OTOH I have to agree with almost everything that was said in that "Everything Wrong With Equestria Girls in 7 Minutes or Less" video above. Not that most of it bothered me during the movie, but in hindsight, he's right.
(Btw, I kind of hate that the parallel dimension having humanoids is supposed to be a surprise in the movie, yet it was spoiled eons before the movie was ever released. Everybody and their grandmother knows the movie is about humanoids, even though in the movie's own setting it's supposed to come as a surprise.)
