Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
System Error wrote:
No, what I was saying is that every game would be judged on a different criteria.
I was only trying to think of a way to please everyone. Looks like that's not gonna happen, though. Meh.
Yes, because abandoning a universal standard just so that we can publish more submissions is a great idea. Heaven forbid we simply expect every run to be both fast and entertaining: no, instead, let's allow some runs to be really boring and other runs to be flawed in the speed department! Great idea.
You should probably not try to please everyone. In this instance, you're pandering to people who are willing to accept a repetitive movie for the sake of seeing one of their favorite games published. This site isn't about what game has a run, but the quality of runs for any one game being above the standard. That being said, I don't see why you're trying to support publication at one point and then abandoning that position when you realize it isn't so popular anymore.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
System Error wrote:
Sometimes we need to bend the rules a little to get by, and other times we need to change them altogether. Change is good.
What are you talking about? What "need" is there to change fundamental tenets of the site just to publish this one run? There is no imperative reason that SSB should be judged on a different criteria on any other game on the site (especially a fighter) just so that we can "get a ball rolling."
antd has shown that the game can be interesting, yet people are dead set on getting a submission that beats the game quickly while sacrificing 95% of the things that made SSB a great game in the first place. Why?
Furthermore, don't use such lofty axioms. I know you need to breathe in oxygen order to survive, but I "change is good," so try huffing!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
System Error wrote:
the same can be said about many other TASes, can it not? There are a number of TASes which abuse fast but repetitive strategies that are already on the site.
Besides, this game is long overdue for a published TAS. It is time to put our opinions of repetitiveness aside and finally do what should have been done a long time ago.
System Error wrote:
Super Smash Bros., on the other hand, does not have a character like Shang Tsung, and therefore has to work with characters who are more one-dimensional.
One, that aims for the fastest time possible, without any care for entertainment whatsoever (i.e. using repetitive strategies if necessary)
I am sure that this compromise of having both types of movies on the site will satisfy the needs of all but the most stubborn of members.
Before I say anything, you should really read this before you vote again, since you're violating a lot of those.
You are making a lot of terrible arguments here. The worst ones are in bold. We don't have an obligation to publish any run, regardless of its popularity. We shouldn't ever put aside our entertainment values for the sake of publishing a movie. We should never ever submit a run that completely ignores viewer entertainment for the sake of speed. The fact that you're willing to concede all of these makes me wonder if you really get the whole point of this site.
Furthermore, I would just like to point out that in the past, SSB has had playarounds, pure speed, speed:point ratio, and speed:entertainment ratio runs submitted. All have been found lacking for the simple fact that while SSB is a great game to play, you can not complete it quickly without it being very repetitive and annoying/interestingly enough without drawing it out too far. I don't get why people can't simply accept that there will always be a huge obstacle for this game as a speedrun because, as stated, the game is so one-dimensional compared to other fighting games that you can not do anything quirky and interesting with the mechanics as is.
I can appreciate people enjoying this movie. However, for the sake of judgment later on, it would be of great service that people explained what it was that that liked/disliked so that there was a more rational debate. It does no one any good to just say 'this was good so Yes' or 'this wasnt that great but Yes anyways.'
bkDJ wrote:
I was excited at first. and then after about 5 yoshis died, I felt pretty meh throughout the rest of it. I will abstain from voting.
This makes no sense. What's the point in even watching a submission/posting your opinion in the thread without also affirming a valuation by vote? I know that the votes really don't mean anything in the long run, but you're doing everyone a disservice by not voting. It would seem like I'm just trying to gather up No votes here, which is partially the case, but it also stands to logic that if a run makes you feel meh, you should vote Meh so that your opinion can be factored in numerically. It at least detracts from the confidence of the Yes to No ratio.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
I ended up going to Comicon for 2 of the 4 days that it ran. There is nothing more fun than disrupting cosplayers' days by drawing attention away from them.
That, and I got to see Eric Estrada and Will Riker in the same 30 minutes.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
While I don't agree that the reference was either vague nor cryptic, your point is valid. I guess I'm just continually expecting some sort of tolerable level of competence from the forum goers. My mistake.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
mmbossman wrote:
Next time, assume that people won't automatically know what you're thinking about when you say that "Someone once did something at some point in time"
Next time I make a reference, be it vague or not, I will expect that people won't comment on it unless they are confident that they have caught the reference properly. Otherwise, why would someone run the risk of looking like a fool by making a false assumption in the first place?
Honestly, do you respond to every cryptic statement with some sort of universal brush-off?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
adelikat wrote:
1) Rating based on the entire body of TAS movies (or TAS movies the person has encountered), including TASvideos publications, rejections, other sites, etc.
There is no good argument as to why rejected submissions would factor in to the site's average ratings. Otherwise, those who flood the submission queue with uselessly unoptimized/boring runs would artificially drive up the ratings for published movies. Ratings should only be based on the actively published body of videos on the site. Otherwise, what is the point in rating? It's meant to show personal comparative values for available movies, not "well, everything on this site is fucking sweet compared to some of the shit I have seen elsewhere!"
adelikat wrote:
2) A more absolute rating system where 10 is what you imagine the ideal TAS would be like
Why wouldn't 10 be the ideal? Would you propose that 11 be the ideal instead?
Either way, I was initially referencing the second quote on this subsection of moozooh's page. It saddens me that so few of you know enough about the tasvideos forum lore and history.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
mmbossman wrote:
Zurreco wrote:
12. Doesn't use illogical ratings systems that are both convoluted and self-reprimanding.
That's the site, not a person.
I'm fine with how the site's rating system works (although I find it aggravating that the averages for either statistic are probably not 5, which is where they are expected to be). You're just missing the reference to a rating system that someone attempted to apply at one point in response to the site rating system.
Seriously, though, way to jump the gun.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Even with the randomness, my room mate and I have a very hard time losing to most people. We even play 2v2 handicap matches against level 9 CPU and still win a great portion of the matches.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Well, the I and Me problem arises from the fact that one is the subject of the sentence while the other isn't. "Me" can't act, since it isn't a subject (or is it object?), but "I" can act.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Meh. Just as soon as I had written over my healing chips and other underpowered things, I focused on money for Buster upgrades. After that, there isn't a good reason to get in to any fights until you can get very damaging chip sets.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
I get a few Shockwaves at first to replace healing chips, and then I will only worry about earning high attack situational chips. That is to say, long range explosives, straight line attacks with piercing, or nice sword setups. I'm pretty sure that the lotto can be used to get any decent chip; maybe not a nice LongSwd with heavy damage, but anything is better than tiny Cannon chips.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
I moved a few hundred frames past Numberman in MMBN1, but I'm still plagued with doubts as to whether or not I should skip the Cannon C I pick up right before the battle. I could trade it in to get good swords once the lotto opens up, but I don't know if ~3 seconds of sidetracking is worth one extra chip, or if I'm even going to be able to rely on luck so much.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
How would you differentiate between the Smith family's dog, the dogs belonging to Smith family A and Smith family B, the Smiths family's dog, and the dogs of Smiths A and Smiths B?
Usually, the answers are Smith's, Smiths', Smiths's, and Smiths'.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
The term "on crack" in the US is very literal, much like LDC noted. It's a reference to how things act and/or perceive when they are high on cocaine. Notably, when things are spastic, convoluted, or superhuman. I've never heard it used in any other way.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Former player
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Got around to watching this. Very impressive through and through. The last Arma fight was magnificent. My only concern is whether killing Ovnunu closer to the center with air shots would be faster than killing on the side with ground shots, since the flying back to the ooze takes forever once it dies.
Either way, giving this a Yes Vote.
