Let's not forget that obsoleting the run on J version with the run done on U doesn't:
1) erase the J version from existence — if one like it more, no-one is prohibiting them from playing it;
2) erase the previous run from existence — it's still available as a .fcm download.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Jungle/Desert Strike could make for an interesting speedrun, not sure if the SNES versions are better...
Way too long for my taste, and I've played through all 3 parts (Jungle and Urban on SNES, though). I sure remember SNES versions have strafe function, not sure if it's present in the Genesis versions.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
If input is still possible (as it is at the end of the movie) then a player could pause, or even remove the lance.
It doesn't really matter much. Though the movie termination point is subject to debate, pressing pause so that the game won't end is kinda… well, retarded, I guess.
[EDIT]
Damn, JXQ beat me to it. Teaches me how to refresh the window before typing an answer…
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Very interesting, and I see you've used a couple new attacking and positioning strategies compared to sarou's run. I think it might now be possible to bring the unassisted run time sub-3:20 even without LQD and Graham1 in 3 teleports.
comicalflop wrote:
It really makes it seem that Julius's abilities make the game too easy
The game is already too easy even when playing with Soma. Julius (and Maxim from HoD) doesn't change that really much…
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Seeing as this is exactly same run as the previous submission but only this time this is around 60 frames faster, I think its safe that I (who watched and voted in the previous submission) dont need to view this. Voting yes.
Now if someone finds this a clear violation of the voting rules, then ban AngerFist from voting. Take him to jail… throw away the keys… He isn't afraid of ******* ******* ** ** *** ***.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Alright, just watched it. The solutions were smart and everything was rather interesting, but in the second half it became tedious. I still enjoyed it, though, but it's a very borderline yes.
On the downsides: lack of music, great length, long fadeouts and morph sequences. I also predict people's major discontent with screen jerking, even though it was ok with (and even good for) me.
Random notes about the run:
• the ways you dealt with dinosaurs were hilarious;
• the ship in the ending scene reminded me of your Starflight run. I can't believe how everything is interconnected!
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
The only thing it would do is it would make it better clear which members actually have a clue, and which don't, about the movie they are rating.
Giving them a option to "hide" their ratings will obviously be subject for abuse by those who know they rate movies just by their own flavour (probably without even watching in some cases) to boost up movies they like or pull down movies they don't, no matter what the true facts are about the movie (this applies at least to technical ratings, which should be exclusively judged by the facts they show).
But people will still rate movies by their own impression, rather than facts. Moreover, facts often don't stop people from rating a certain movie lower or higher in tech score than it probably deserves. Like, for example, even knowing that a certain run can be improved doesn't stop people from throwing 10s at it, while there are runs that are very close to be unimprovable rated lower than 8.
But the truth is, until a person tries it and gets some result (a clue you mentioned) themself, they wouldn't know how improvable it is actually, so only about 3-5% of the ratings are trustworthy in this respect.
Furthermore, as ratings stay subjective, they might be influenced by comparisons with other movies, certain mood (fascination especially), misinterpretation of author's actions or intentions, or anything else that might lead to the mark being "clueless". Facts have little significance here in the list of everything that the rating score consists of.
I have even decided to formulate a definite scale to rate the movies with, both to stay consistent myself and explain my marks for others' movies, let any of them be publicized in some way, without arguing or other hassle. It illustrates what factors I usually consider when rating each movie, and I believe this scale to be rather good and consistent, but so far I am the only one of about two hundred rating users I know of who actually has written such a thing down, so that people could at least know that I'm being consistent in my rating activity.
Moreover, since I formulated that scale, I usually was among the first ones to rate almost all the recent movies, and there was a peculiar thing I discussed with Xkeeper in IRC. I noticed that the more recently published movies' overall rating scores almost always coincide with my own, or at least stay very close to them in both categories. I was puzzled, since I rated those movies among the first three users, and thus couldn't see what the others have rated it with, so I couldn't fall under the peer pressure.
So I wondered if it was me whose tastes became more like the others', or the others' more like mine. Xkeeper expressed a thought that it likely wasn't me who fell under under the pressure, but those who rated afterwards; that is, I helped generate this "clue" with my early rating mark that might have led to slight peer pressure in the end.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
The game didn't quite do it for me. It was hard to play and easy to watch, but I couldn't say it was entertaining. I'm not sure what to vote, yes or meh. :\
Also, the AVI is never edited by publishers, it shows all the same things the movie file supplied does.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
If we are such an open community, why is it so often that someone who votes no on a very popular movie gets labeled as "hater" and frowned upon? You shouldn't forget that such a situation, when a player finds his run in other user's table with exceptionally low rating, won't be very rare. The attitude towards that user might change for the worse as a result. I know not everyone is sensitive like that, and not everyone rates the movies much lower than the average, but I still wouldn't want such things to happen, as it might hurt the integrity of the community.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
