Posts for dunnius


1 2 3 4 5
13 14
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
hahaha "rafting" through Kefka's Tower. I also like how a character sprite got turned into MissingNo. Those battle strategies really "blew" me away! Good work!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Samsara wrote:
I'm not sure how anyone would feel slighted under the new system apart from not getting a Star, and even then I don't think anyone on the site is egotistical enough to demand a Star for their run.
Oh come on, Hydlide totally deserves a star. :P A few days ago, I was discussing on IRC with adelikat about the merits of the tier multipliers in player score calculations. That got me thinking about the feos/Warp plan, which would mess up the multipliers since it removes a tier level. So today I thought about it more and came up with an idea that will work with the plan, and I think is also an improvement. I propose that this be added to the feos/Warp plan: Change the calculation for the player score calculation to the following: O*max((r+15)/20*r^max(2.6-0.2*average_ratings/ratings,1)/sqrt[P],5) The change is that M is changed to (r+15)/20. This changes the multiplier to be based on its rating rather than a tier so that the bonus or penalty multiplier is based on the TAS' merits rather than a placement by a judge, etc. The formula is a simplified version of 1+(r-5)/20 which means that 5, the middle, is neutral. Below 5 gets a penalty, and above a bonus, that gets larger as it goes further away from the middle. The maximum are 0.75 to 1.25 times the original value. One advantage of this system is that it is fair to TASes that are star quality, but not chosen to be a star, since runs of the same rating give the same points. This eliminates tiers in that the star is now a tag for showcasing.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Ah, I always thought that not something I could do. I was thinking that Hydlide needs to be rewritten, so I will work on a text for that. I will also see if any of my other TASes need touching up, and I can also see if there other obscure games that I am familiar with that need touching up.
Samsara wrote:
I don't think the Vault itself presents the runs negatively. I think it's a step back from that: The site presents the Vault negatively.
I agree with that.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
feos already answered how the submission poll question should be in that system:
feos wrote:
This way we could return the old question: "Should this run be published?". It would just mean different things depending on the branch: - If it's a speed record, people vote for its optimality - If it's a side goal, people vote for both entertainment value and optimality. Because if (and only if) a speed record is not optimal, it will be rejected. Otherwise go to Coins. If a side goal is optimal but boring, it will be rejected. If a side goal is enjoyable but suboptimal, it will be rejected. Otherwise go to Moons. Pretty simple, huh?
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
MUGG wrote:
I don't like this kind of "input end" where the character stands around for another minute before the game ends. I prefer fastest real time
I agree. It was this reason that I voted no on E.T. I didn't like the standing around at the end. It detracts from the entertainment.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Voted "Do something else" in support of the feos/Warp plan. I guess it is "remove the vault tier", but it is really better organizing and categorizing of the main TAS goals. I was skimming through the original vault idea thread: http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13395 and saw many points that are very relevant to this discussion. It's funny how some of the points made then have now been brought up in this thread. Of course it is easier to see it now that it has been in place for a while.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
feos wrote:
Warp wrote:
(Btw, I still think that the "star tier" should be special. It shouldn't be considered just a "better-than-Moon tier". Basically any TAS ought to be eligible for a star if it showcases something representative we want to show. Having extremely high ratings can (and will usually) overlap with the Star tier, but it's not a requirement. Not all highest-rated run will necessarily get a star, and not all star runs will necessarily be on the very top of the rating list.)
With tiers tied to goals it's what will happen. Fastest possible any% and 100% runs that are already starred will showcase that. BTW, then the system is no longer
-------
 Stars
-------
 Moons
-------
Dungeon
-------
but instead it's
        (Stars)
     ideal anything
     /         \
(Coins)      (Moons)
 speed     entertaining
records     side goals
I like this idea. It combines vault and moons into a single tier, but separates the general goals better as tags. We still have stars as a showcase of excellent runs (for newcomers) just like it has always been. This makes sense especially after reading http://tasvideos.org/JudgeGuidelines.html#TiersAndGoals because it is an extension of what already exists. I like your idea of the checkered flag for the speed records category since it matches what it stands for. I suppose we could consider changing the name and icon for moons to reflect entertainment better. (Though I still laugh at the concept of mooning runs :P) I like the stars name, especially because Super Mario 64 "0 stars" gets a star.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
'Coin' is a great name! If we don't use blank to replace 'vault', I would say use 'coin'.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Samsara wrote:
Ferret Warlord wrote:
I made this run nine years ago, before the tiers came out. When tiers were implemented, it was automatically assigned Vault, according to its user ratings. Just this last week, someone improved one level in it by six seconds, and left almost all the rest untouched. Look what tier it's in.
The same thing happened with Moon Crystal: JXQ's great run was automatically Vaulted when the system was implemented. I save less than 4 seconds mostly through reducing lag and it gets Moons. So maybe the 4 minute improvement really was too much! It gets even better when looking through obsoletion chains. Look through Wrath of the Black Manta: Moon run obsoletes Vault run which obsoleted... a Moon run... which obsoleted a Moon run. Same goes for the GBC Spongebob game: Moon obsoletes Vault obsoletes Moon obsoletes Moon. Even glitched A Link to the Past's history has some Moon/Vault/Moon switching. Hydlide's entertainment rating: 5.9 (Vault) A Boy and his Blob's entertainment rating: 5.7 (Moon) Q*Bert's entertainment rating: 5.5 (Moon) I agree, that isn't exactly far off. It's not THAT much higher than some recent Moon runs. Let's go a bit further: This Metal Slug run was Vaulted with a 7.3 entertainment rating. Doc Louis' Punch-Out has a 6.3 entertainment rating. Traysia is sitting comfortably at 6.5 for entertainment, same with Tiny Toons. Ghosts n' Goblins has 6.2 entertainment. 6.1 for Advance Wars, another 6.2 for Pepsiman, and another 6.1 for Rollergames. It goes both ways: Glitchless Dragon Warrior 3 has a 4.8 entertainment rating. A 5.3 for Chocobo Racing and Track and Field. A staggeringly low 4.5 for Metal Mech. And let's not forget the classic Riddick Bowe Boxing, with its astonishing entertainment rating of 4!
dunnius wrote:
From the movie description: "Metal Mech: Man & Machine is a poorly-designed platformer." Yet it got a moon with a low entertainment rating. Somehow this sounds like Hydlide a bit, how people feel about it[the game], but it[Hydlide] is vaulted with a higher rating
I would still like an explanation for these (except Riddick Bowe Boxing which is "unvaultable") because it gives the appearance of arbitrary tier placement.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Tangent wrote:
dunnius wrote:
In some respect, if there is a TAS of a game that is considered "bad", then it will tend to be put in Vault regardless of how well the TAS was done
What does that even mean? If it was done poorly, then there would be clear improvements and it'd generally be rejected. If you mean perceived effort, there are so many problems with that and the only benefit seems to be self-esteem hugs.
It's because voting on entertainment is subjective and biased, which can't be helped. The bias is see is people voting on the game rather than the TAS. This goes for vault as well as stars. Of course the tier placement can bias the voting as well.
r57shell wrote:
1) No vault: as I said, just clean, without tiers.
Now that I think about it, we can use the old system's methodology. Change the name 'vault' to something along the lines of 'normal' and change the icon to nothing. That way it can still be a tag for filtering, but will appear as if there is no tag. I would also say that moons could go back to to being more like a 'notable TASes' tag, with a somewhat higher rating requirement.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
The good: It provides a way to filter TASes by quality (although filtering by movie rating range would work too*). The vault did enable more games to be accepted, though that should have been allowed all along. Vault does get credit for fixing that, and that is a big improvement to this site. The bad: The default movie lists hide vault entries, causing them to be overlooked (and less likely to be rated*), even if they actually are high quality. In some respect, if there is a TAS of a game that is considered "bad", then it will tend to be put in Vault regardless of how well the TAS was done because it would be perceived as "boring". I would prefer to have the full list by default, and then let people filter the list however they want. The ugly: The vault category name/icon does make those TASes feel second rate. Also, there is also a "penalty" applied to the score calculation to the player score for vaulted TASes. I do not agree with any of the multipliers for tiers; I don't think they are necessary. Because of how the rating system has always worked (which I like), there already is a penalty for runs with a lower rating; that is two 4.5 rated TASes do not equate to one 9.0 TAS. But with the current system, the 2 TASes would be in separate tiers, and so the separation is enhanced with multipliers, which is rather unfair to TASes that happen to be put in vault, especially if they are borderline cases. *Provided that the movie rating system is working well. Right now, that system is broken along with the submission voting, and I think that is the primary factor why there are complaints. It may be that the tiers are generally working, but it needs the voting to be working to help the judges decide. Submission voting: The question is "Did you find this movie ENTERTAINING?" (emphasis added) But some people have been voting as if it was "Should this movie be published?", especially when the TAS is an improvement. This makes it difficult for a judge to determine the entertainment response. I would propose that there be 2 poll questions, the ones mentioned above. That way the "yes for improvement" votes can be moved to the published poll, and then the entertainment can be voted on properly. It might be worth having 5 choices for the entertainment poll, sort of like a 1-5 rating, but with wording like: yes, probably, maybe, not really, no. I think these changes will help the judges determine the entertainment better. Movie voting: I honestly have no clue how I am supposed to rate movies, so I refrain from doing so. I don't see a 100 point system as useful, even 10 point is somewhat difficult. But having a description for what that rating means would be very useful, and it would help people give useful ratings, especially help avoiding voting 7 because that is the default. Also, having it be less daunting would help encourage people to vote. As for the technical rating, I can't even imagine what the numbers mean, and the votes from people make no sense either. That definitely needs text to help understand it. Perhaps another category could be useful to either add to diversify, or replace another if it were to make more sense. I can't think of any right now, but it should be considered. I agree with AKheon that an optional review would be useful with the voting. It is sort of like the comments in the submission thread that go along with the voting. Conclusion: I am not so sure what to do about tiers right now because I think we should focus on fixing the voting system, which I think is the main cause of the symptom, tier complaints. If the vote results were more useful, it would help make better sense of the tiers. But in the meantime, I think we should change the name and icon of vault so it is less negative. The original system sort of had tiers (nothing, moon, star) though they were really category marker tags. In fact, I think it is better to think of tiers as just category marker tags for sorting, like they were before the change. We should drop the score multipliers for tiers as well since that penalizes lower rated movies(or perceived lower) more than is deserved. Adding reviews(comments) for movies would be interesting. I suppose it could be done now by creating a thread for each movie and having people post there.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
One of the arguments against having 4 tiers was that it creates more borderline cases, which is more work for judges. That is true, and now that I think about it with what others are saying, I don't think that we need tiers; let the ratings speak for themselves (though the rating system needs rework). "Recommended for newcomers" tag is still useful, and perhaps stars (as a tag) to emphasize the great runs. But there should not be any bonus to player score applied to those categories. I don't think the bonus/penalty concept is a good idea, especially with the way the main point calculation works.
dunnius wrote:
I do not understand the reasoning in that thread for Riddick Bowe Boxing. I guess it is an "not quite so complete" playround run that was supposed to be entertaining, that had been rejected before but was reconsidered when the vault tier was added. If it was rejected before, I can't see how it could be entertaining enough to be a moon, and the rating supports that it should be vault or rejected(replaced by a more complete-ish run, or something like that). From the movie description: "Metal Mech: Man & Machine is a poorly-designed platformer." Yet it got a moon with a low entertainment rating. Somehow this sounds like Hydlide a bit, how people feel about it, but it is vaulted with a higher rating.
I would like an explanation for these examples...
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
To abandon tiers, I would view it more like Speed Demos Archive, where it is a collection of well created TASes. I do not understand the reasoning in that thread for Riddick Bowe Boxing. I guess it is an "not quite so complete" playround run that was supposed to be entertaining, that had been rejected before but was reconsidered when the vault tier was added. If it was rejected before, I can't see how it could be entertaining enough to be a moon, and the rating supports that it should be vault or rejected(replaced by a more complete-ish run, or something like that). From the movie description: "Metal Mech: Man & Machine is a poorly-designed platformer." Yet it got a moon with a low entertainment rating. Somehow this sounds like Hydlide a bit, how people feel about it, but it is vaulted with a higher rating.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
From what I saw on IRC, the judges do not work together in judging. How the hell is Riddick Bowe Boxing a moon tier? Perhaps we should abandon tiers since I don't see it working well. I guess my signature is relevant. I still think that the submission voting and the published movie voting need to be redone. I still don't know how I am supposed to rate published movies with that wide point range scale, and I have no clue how I am supposed to know how to rate the technical.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
You caught me playing around with the ratings. I was curious how much 1 vote can affect things at this time. I'm done testing, so my vote is not there now. I guess I should have only improved one section of Hydlide by 6 seconds. I guess I improved it too much. Edit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHcC-s6JN_Q is a good video which has a section about Hydlide's history starting at around 5:05 in the video. Learning about Dragon Slayer was interesting as well.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
thatguy wrote:
Sorry dunnius, I did not mean to insult your efforts and I appreciate the technical excellence of this movie. My entertainment standards are higher than most, probably because I have never made a TAS before and therefore do not truly appreciate how hard TASing is.
It's fine. I am only trying to counter arguments that I view as less subjective than they should be. Today in IRC: <scrimpy> and, let's face it, Hydlide is not a very good game Then why was it so popular in Japan? It can't be a bad game for that to be true. Actually, it happens to be a great game for its time, 1984. The reason it is hated in the US is its release timing, 1989, which caused to be judged harshly. I somehow doubt PonyCanyon knew how old it was, but they misinterpreted the popularity of the game. They might have been straining to find a fifth game, the other 4 being Ultima series. Perhaps we actually have Nintendo to blame for the draconian rules back in the day. For me, Hydlide is not the worst game, it is the worst port of a game.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
Spikestuff wrote:
Example: [2556] PSX Tekken 3 by NhatNM & Spikestuff in 02:15.15 From Submission: "This time, domination of posts about how good this movie is, was quite clear. 9-ish over 3-ish. Votes are about the same (68% support). Accepting to Moons."
68% support is not nearly as dominating as 89%, however, but even so it is difficult to predict the movie voting.
thatguy wrote:
I haven't seen the previous movie, and, hearing that this one is a vast improvement entertainment-wise, I don't really want to, because this one was pretty middling. Basically, the problem is Hydlide itself. You can't polish a turd. In particular, Hydlide's bizarre game mechanics (before Zelda and Dragon Quest standardised the action-adventure and RPG genres) mean that a TAS doesn't look very optimised, at least to the uninformed, even when it is. Looking optimised, and doing crazy things that would be impossible in real time, is what makes a TAS entertaining. Here a guy wanders round a bit, sometimes at below top speed, and occasionally runs round in circles to grind or even manipulate the next map. It gives the feel that the game is being played by a monkey randomly mashing buttons, rather than a superhumanly skilled player.
The previous movie is indeed terrible in entertainment because of the out of date strategy. I detect some bias in that you hate the game, which I understand, but the comments are ignorant. If you take any game (including sports) into its basic structure without understanding the basics of the game, it will sound silly. The statement, "Hold right for great justice" is one of those because it ignores the reason for holding right, the primary direction of motion. Super Mario Bros. is simply hold right and jump on occasion to get to the goal on each level, but of course it is a great game. A TAS that would feel like "being played by a monkey randomly mashing buttons" is King's Bounty. It starts up, randomly presses a bunch of button very randomly and even wastes frames doing so. But of course it was done for luck manipulation to beat the game instantly. I'm sure there are other TASes that have parts of it that are like that as well. If you are unfamiliar with the game that is being TASed (or the methods used in it), reading the submission comments is important to at least appreciate what(and why) is happening.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
I have no idea what the rerecord count would be since I never tracked it for any of the run. The bot had many overnight sessions, many would also run through the next day, and some went through the following night. This is all in turbo speed, so all I know about that is that it is very huge. As for manual input, I never tracked it because I was entering the input in the lua script and playing back from a savestate. I later did use some movie file to record when I hit tough areas, but those were temporary and I didn't keep them after putting the input in the lua script. All I can estimate is that it was a very dense re-record. One thing about the previous TAS that I didn't like was the lengthy standing around sessions. So I figured that distributing the stopping would look better. The path from the sword cave to the roper maze didn't have that much grass on the way (and I couldn't wander around), so there was more stopping on the grass than I liked, but it wasn't too bad, and the bot made sure that the stopping was distributed evenly. But I like the contrast of full speed on any terrain that is not grass. Fortunately, I only have a few sections of noticeable stop and go, and thankfully stopping was not necessary after the eels because of level 6 and higher.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
This is why people, including myself, have supported a 4 tier system. There are runs, this one included that are borderline enough not to fit neatly into vault or moons. The problem that I have with vaulting something is that it ends up hidden, and so it is less likely to get voted on. Also, vaulting a movie that is rated as a 6 is rather harsh; it hides too many decent runs. I suppose there is also an aspect of "The TASer wasted time making this" element to the vault category. I understand why Vault exists, to have a place for runs that would be gruefood under the old system, or for really old runs that squeaked by in voting. I wonder if the voting question should be changed to "Should this movie be published" and the movie voting system added in as a separate "question" to help gauge the entertainment level. This would help get more movie voting, and it would also separate the automatic "improvement so yes" from the entertainment voting. This would also give a better indication for the tier placement if published. I also wonder if the tier placement affects how people vote on the movie. It applies here certainly. A nearly 4 minute time improvement is definitely more entertaining, and I'm sure is a major factor in the yes votes. But I would like to know what people think of how I handled the input in this run (and not what they think of the game or its music). It does seem to be positive, but how positive I can't tell.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
FractalFusion: That video is awesome. Having the HUD info off to the side is nice. PJ: Thanks!
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
The game does get progressively harder in the following cycles. It eventually has more and more of the blue enemies that were a pain in the ass, and I think more pterodactyls (I believe that is the official enemy name) if I recall correctly. It has been a very long time since I played this. But I guess it wouldn't matter for a TAS since it would kill them in an instant regardless. I don't know what to vote on this. I'm not sure that going more cycles would be any more entertaining.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
If I recall correctly, there is a counter that decrements on each step. There are some areas that don't decrement the counter. I think that was used in Eblan cave in the TAS. How the value that gets set for the counter is calculated, I do not know.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
The feedback will always be bad given that this is Hydlide, a game that everyone is told to hate, causing a bias in voting. Even the currently published movie description does not have a null point of view with: "It was suggested that this movie be published with a "Music from Hell" warning label." In fact, that description seems to indicate that this run would be superior in entertainment due to less waiting for health recovery, which is what most of the text talks about, for a good reason. So the question is which run is more entertaining to watch. Currently published movie description: "Hydlide is an old and somewhat notorious game, mostly because it has very strange gameplay mechanics. For the first part of the game, walking consumes health, and the character must stop every now and then to regain it. This one of the few games (the only one?) where the level grinding sequences are actually entertaining, while the boss fights aren't. Hitting a boss decreases your own health as well as the boss's, after which there is much waiting for more health until you can hit him again. It was suggested that this movie be published with a "Music from Hell" warning label."
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
It is not a cheat code; it is built into the game. It is used to cut out a significant amount of waiting and remove leveling. The currently published run is way out of date, but its new route would basically be the same as this route; the main difference is a detour for leveling, as well as getting the shield, and changes when fairy 3 is saved. The battles with the dragon and Varalys would be much longer and therefore boring because I would have to stop in the middle of it to recover health, which is standing around because that recovers health faster. Funny that those who are voting no have yet to give a good reason why. This game gets too much unwarranted hate.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Active player (423)
Joined: 9/7/2007
Posts: 329
I'm voting yes, but I must ask if there are places where it is faster to take damage. If there are, then this run should be obsoleted by one that does. If there are none, then the "no damage" should be removed, making this the main branch. I absolutely loved the pause glitch on the waterfalls. It reminds me of the pause glitch in NES Metal Gear, which is also an "Ultra Games". I appreciate this TAS more because I watched MURPHAGATOR speedrun this game.
1 2 3 4 5
13 14