Posts for Warp


Post subject: What makes a game "TASable"?
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
In the recent Math Blaster submission somebody presented the suggestion that rather than define which genres of games are acceptable and which aren't, instead it could be better to define the characteristics that a game needs to have, in order to be acceptable for TASing (and publication here). This reminded me of how I once purchased a visual novel on Steam, thinking that it would be an actual video game ("adventure game" as they are called in Japan), and getting disappointed because it was indeed a pure visual novel with no gameplay elements of any kind. I wrote a negative review of the game, main argument being that it actually wasn't a game at all, even though it was being sold as one. I ruminated on what exactly makes a video game an actual video game, as contrasted to just a pure visual novel (that consists of nothing more than pictures and paragraphs of text, with no interactivity). I came up with these minimum requirements for an actual video game: Firstly, interaction: The program must be interactive in some manner. And this interaction should go a bit further than to simply wait for the user to click to advance to the next paragraph of text. This is tightly tied to the second feature: Choice. The player needs to be given some kind of choices, no matter how primitive, rather than the events on the screen happening in the same manner completely regardless of what the player does. This could be, for example, choice of direction of movement, or choice of dialogue. Even if these choices have no grand-scale consequences to speak of, the mechanic should still be there. Thirdly, a goal: A game should have some kind of goal that the player strives toward. It's not a question of how complicated or large that goal is (it could be extremely primitive and simplistic), but there should nevertheless be something that the player is trying to achieve, which is the point of the game. (This doesn't mean that the game must have an ending. A game could very well be endless, such as trying to play for as long as possible, with progressively increasing difficulty. The goal in this case could be, for example, trying to achieve the highest possible score.) Fourthly, challenge: Achieving said goal should not be completely and absolutely trivial. This ties to everything above: Achieving the final goal ought to involve player choices, and those choices should be even slightly challenging. It should be something more complex than simply "click to advance". (This doesn't mean that the game has to necessarily be difficult and require great skill or knowledge. Even a very easy game can still be fully considered a game.) Of course these characteristics are just something that define a video game, not something that defines a "TASable" video game, but perhaps something like this could be concocted for a definition?
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Usually definite integral problems are given like: integral from -∞ to ∞ of e-x^2 dx = ? I was wondering if such problems are ever presented in such a way that what's asked is not the value of the integral, but the value of one (or both) of the limits. For example: For which value of A does the integral from 0 to A of e-x^2 dx = 0.5? I suppose it becomes even more difficult if both limits are variables, and you are asked for a function of one in terms of the other. In other words, for which values of A and B does the integral from A to B of e-x^2 dx = 0.5?
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
The youtuber blackpenredpen made a video about the integral from 0 to 1 of the function ln(x)ln(1-x)dx. Calculating the exact value seemed to be quite laborious. I find the function itself quite interesting. It's almost like a semi-circle, but not quite.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Mathologer made a wonderful YouTube video about the (in)famous sum 1+2+3+4+... and its connection to the value -1/12. Is that sum equal to that value? The answer is complicated. I suppose that one way to answer it is "yes and no". In normal arithmetic it's not equal to that, because the same rules that apply to convergent infinite sums cannot be used with divergent infinite sums. However extended summation methods can be defined. Most prominently in this case, the analytic continuations of the eta and zeta functions (which are well-defined and unique) give a sensible expansion to the summation. I think he does a great job at explaining all this in terms that can be easily understood even by laypeople. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuIIjLr6vUA
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Famously, lim(x → ∞) (1+1/x)x = e. But what is lim(x → 0) (1+1/x)x?
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
That wasn't a crappy video. It was bodacious!
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Tub wrote:
That test is technically true, but in practice it rejects too few candidates to be useful.
So what you are saying is, formally speaking, that the decimal representation of most numbers of the form (2p-1)2p-1, where p is a prime, ends in either 6 or 28? Maybe I'll try to figure out why.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Every even perfect number ends in 6 or 28, base ten. Since there's a one-to-one correlation between even perfect numbers and Mersenne primes, wouldn't this mean that the above fact can be used to narrow the search for new Mersenne primes? In other words, take a candidate Mersenne number 2p-1, calculate its correspondent perfect number, and if it doesn't end in 6 or 28, we know it can't be a Mersenne prime.
Post subject: Re: #5759: qflame's SNES Math Blaster Episode 1: In Search of Spot in 07:53.15
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
TASVideoAgent wrote:
ThunderAxe31: In view of the arguments provided by feos in the forum thread of this submission, I start over the judging process.
Thank you. Even if this ends up being rejected a second time, I still greatly appreciate that people's opinions are heard and seriously taken into consideration.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
feos wrote:
In complicated situations when I struggle to remain sane and when I look and feel like the one who failed something (and when other probably think I gave them up), I always become saner and calmer if I apologize to people that are probably angry at me, even if I'm doing everything right, even if I consider them to be wrong.
It may indeed be a good idea to be the bigger person, swallow your pride, make amends, and apologize if somebody is angry at you, even if you haven't really done anything wrong or unjust. This often de-escalates the situation and is the best for everybody. However, in some cases there is the danger of this backfiring. I know I'm being a bit cynical here, but one should be a bit careful about these things. If you too eagerly apologize to anybody who gets angry at you, with some of these people you might be sending a message that you are just a pushover who is easy to be taken advantage of. Doing this to the right (well, wrong) kind of person might make them take advantage of you in the future as well, because you are giving them the message that you are willing to submit to the abuse (emotional or otherwise) even if you are not at fault. But as said, this is probably not very often the case. But it might happen. I suppose the principle "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" applies: Better to apologize at first, but if similar events start happening again and again, perhaps reconsider.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Habreno wrote:
And in all reality, this site is pretty poor when it comes to a firm stance on anything controversial. So I have no faith in anything happening, and I have no clue what will or will not be accepted much anymore because I lack any faith in the site to be consistent on anything close.
I think you are being quite unfair towards the site and its staff. I have been to other (very large and popular) forums where the staff is an absolutely totalitarian hive mind, and where the forum rules are effectively considered holy gospel written in stone, which cannot be questioned and especially cannot be changed, no matter what the situation, even if it results in completely ridiculous rulings that make no sense. Trying to point out a problem in the rules, or how they are being enacted by the staff, is like talking to a wall, or a cult of a brainwashed hive mind, with staff members never questioning the rules or each other, or presenting any differing viewpoints, and where the staff has absolute power and users have zero power, and their opinions don't matter at all. During all the time I was in that forum I don't remember any member of the staff reversing, or even questioning, the decision of another, nor any sort of public discussion about such decisions, or the very rules of the forum. Needless to say, if you got on the bad side of the hive mind, you had absolutely no recourse against it. Here, however, the opinions and suggestions of visitors are heard and considered, and it sometimes causes serious discussion on how the site should operate. When you say "this site is pretty poor when it comes to a firm stance on anything controversial", and "I lack any faith in the site to be consistent on anything", I don't really understand what you mean. It sounds like you want the site staff to be that kind I describe above, ie. a totalitarian dictatorial hive mind which rules with an iron fist and always thinks it's right, never changes its mind regardless of the situation, never changes the forum rules, and the users have no say on anything. I would never want this site to become like that. (If that's not what you tried to say, I apologize. It just sounds to me like that.)
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Nach wrote:
Requesting rule changes just because you like a run is a bad way to judge.
On the other hand, if a particular run shows a potential defect in the rules, it's good to discuss it, and perhaps consider if the rule could benefit from some fine-tuning. I'm glad that this is being seriously discussed. (By the way, if my tone has sounded a bit aggressive in some of my posts, it wasn't my intention. Sometimes I fail to express my opinions in a manner that doesn't come out as feeling a bit pushy and aggressive-sounding. It's not my intention.)
Bobo the King wrote:
I'll own up to it. Sorry, Warp. I was a dick and you were right to call me out for it.
No problems. Forgive and forget.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Can this time be matched in real-time play trivially?
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
I always thought of Vault to fulfill the principle "every game deserves a TAS", regardless of any subjective "entertainment" value. The only minimum requirement would be that it's an actual video game that's "TASable" in a reasonable way (which essentially means that it has a well-defined ending; otherwise it would be impossible to time it and decide which TAS is fastest.) I believe that tiers were originally created, and the requirement of any sort of entertainment value discarded in the case of Vault, largely for this reason. While I understand the principle that a game has to be a "serious game", in that it has to be, by some standard, an actual playable video game and not just eg. an application, or some kind of other software that's not a game, I think that in this case this concept is being overly applied to an "educational game". I honestly can't understand why having to solve math problems in order to advance in the game makes it "not serious" (especially since "serious game" seems to be poorly defined).
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
ThunderAxe31 wrote:
If a game has the mandatory requirement to do a lot of Math, we consider it a non-serious game
That makes absolutely no sense. I can't even begin to imagine how you come to that conclusion. And then Mothrayas castigates me for repeatedly asking why if the math was replaced with puzzles, it would (seemingly) become acceptable, for some reason. I'm asking it because it needs to be asked, because the same point keeps being repeated, and it makes absolutely no sense. What is it in math problems in particular that makes them so different from puzzle problems, that any game where you need to solve math problems to progress is automatically disqualified, while games where you need to solve puzzle problems to progress is ok? I honestly cannot understand why you are all so adamant to have this game not be eligible, no matter what, as if it were some kind of principle.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Bobo the King wrote:
And, to be quite honest, I think it counts for a bit extra that it's Warp I find myself agreeing with. No offense intended, Warp.
I wish people stopped doing this. You might not intend offense, but that doesn't mean it isn't.
Radiant wrote:
As I understand it, this is not a blanket ban against educational games in general, but a ban against educational software that is shoddily put together and/or lacking in actual gameplay (i.e. "not serious games"). And it's an unfortunate fact of life that the vast majority of educational software is shoddily put together and/or lacking in gameplay.
I would like to once again contest the idea that this is such a game. Sure, it might not be the best and most challenging game in existence, but I don't think that has ever been a requirement. As I said before, it has game mechanics that are very typical of 8-bit games, it has a health bar, you can take damage, it has a score, it has level progression, it has an ending. If you watch the encode, it looks to me like a completely normal game. So what if there are some numbers appearing here and there? I seriously do not think this is the kind of game that's referred to with the term "educational game" in the rules.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Nach wrote:
We have no goal to throw away rules just to make everything become acceptable.
I'm not asking for everything to become acceptable.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Nach wrote:
The rule as it stands exists to disallow non-serious games. To change the rule would mean to allow non-serious games.
Just watch the run, please? You'll see what I'm talking about when I say this is an actual video game and I don't see any reason why it should not be eligible. There's level progression, there's a space shooter stage, there's a platformer stage, there's an energy bar, and you can take damage from enemies, there's a score, there's an ending. This looks more like a "serious game" (whatever that means) than some of the published TASes.
By saying you want to accept this game anyway, are you implying you agree this game is non-serious?
What I'm saying is that if this is rejected solely because a rule says so, then perhaps that rule could benefit from some changes.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Nach wrote:
A game with educational elements can be accepted if the educational elements are not the primary focus of the game. A judge has deemed that they are, and it looks like the senior judge concurs.
Ok, that's clear. My proposal was, however, to change that rule so as to make it possible to accept games like this one in Vault. You stated earlier, rather adamantly, that the rule will not be changed, period, even though you haven't even seen the game or the run (thus, I think, you don't have the full perspective of why I consider this particular game to be perfectly fine for Vault. To me this particular game is a good example of why that rule seems to be too restrictive.) I don't really understand why you are being so strict here.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
2017 Raytheon MATHCOUNTS National Competition It's actually fun to pause the video when the questions are shown, and solve them in your head.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
I think that if I'm not happy with an answer (which, as you point out, seems to have been "questions about hypothetical situations make no sense"), I think I'm allowed to ask another person the same question to know what he thinks about it, aren't I? After all this discussion, it has actually become a bit unclear to me what exactly is the reason for rejecting this game, given that Nach above says it's not purely because this game contains educational elements to it:
Nach wrote:
The actual rule doesn't necessarily disqualify this game, even though there is strong indication that it does.
This just confuses me. Is this game disqualified because of the current Vault rules or not? You seem to be saying in your posts that this game could ostensibly be accepted, even according to the current rules, but it nevertheless isn't. So why exactly isn't it accepted? With all the discussion going on, I have missed the concrete reason for this. (The only thing I can see is, essentially, "it's an educational game, educational games are not eligible for Vault." If this is not the reason, the what is?)
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Mothrayas wrote:
That is not what I answered, because that is not an answer to the question you actually asked. What you asked was "if this game used puzzles rather than math, would it be accepted?", and that is the question I answered. You then repeated the same question with zero acknowledgement of the answer.
In your answer to that original question about the game containing puzzles instead of math problems, you referred to your previous post, in which you write:
Mothrayas wrote:
But the choice as to whether a game is educational or not is more than just a label on the box. It's a key facet behind game design decisions, behind visual appearance and prominence decisions, behind what the game designer wants to show to the user in order to make them absorb their educational contents as best as possible to the best of the designer's ability. There's a whole science behind this sort of design. And yes, if a game does exhibit that type of game design foremost, that makes it an educational game not fit for the Vault.
You are arguing that this is a primarily educational game, and such games are not fit for Vault. Exactly what I claimed you answered. Did I miss something?
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Spikestuff wrote:
Warp wrote:
Could it be possible to create a stereoscopic VR180 video using the same principle?
Should be since YouTube supports that... on mobile. I'll just say the full 360 is better than 180 just mainly due to being able to view all angles on Desktop. Someone who owns a VR set and tell me if the 180 feature is possible on Desktop. (curious now)
I asked for a VR180 video precisely because I own a VR headset (PSVR to be more exact), and VR180 videos look really cool with one. It is my understanding that YouTube supports stereoscopic videos on all VR headsets (including the mobile phone ones). VR360 videos also exist, of course, but they require significantly more resolution and bandwidth, and quite often you are looking at them sitting down anyways, so you don't often look behind you. (Note that a VR180, or VR360, is significantly different from a normal 360 video in that it's actually stereoscopic, and thus looks three-dimensional when looked at with a VR headset. YouTube supports stereoscopic rendering of these videos. Of course they require for the content to have been created with two "cameras", shifted from each other.)
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Nach wrote:
You should pretty much almost always accept that the rules will not be changing.
This hasn't been so in the past, and I would hate it to become the norm. When that one mini-golf game (I think it was) was rejected because it was a "sports game", and Vault rules were against it, I contested that rule, it was discussed, and it was changed so that some sports games are now acceptable. I expressed back then how appreciative I am that here the people in charge listen to user feedback and make rules changes when it's reasonable, rather than obstinately consider them written-in-stone, absolute, and never-changing. If it's found out that some particular rule has a negative side-effect, which wasn't apparent when that rule was written, it's good to fix it. Rules can be flawed, and may need fine-tuning when problematic situations reveal these flaws. It makes no sense to strictly adhere to a rule like it were holy gospel that's perfect and unchangeable. Now, if there were good arguments why the rule is fine as it is, and/or why this game is not an example of why the rule requires fixing, then that would be fine. However, mostly the answers have been "this was rejected because the rules say it has to be rejected". The majority of the arguments have been about whether this is an "educational game" or not, not whether it's a good rule to have as it is now (and enforced so strictly). I'm not saying to remove the rule. I'm just suggesting to loosen it a bit, just like with the sports games rule.
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Mothrayas wrote:
Please stop repeating questions while ignoring my answers.
Not being satisfied with an answer is not the same thing as ignoring it. If the answer is "this is an educational game, and educational games are not accepted", that's an "answer", but it's not one I'm happy with. As said, I'm suggesting to change that rule because it needlessly disqualifies perfectly good games like this one. (The rule doesn't need to be outright removed, just fine-tuned to not be so broad.) I feel like we are talking past each other. It seems that you are answering the question "why was this rejected?" (answer: "because it's an educational game, and educational games are not accepted under the Vault rules"). But i'm not asking that. My suggestion is to change the rule so that games like this one aren't needlessly rejected.