Posts for moozooh

1 2
17 18 19
229 230
Posted: 5/1/2013 9:20 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Why are you arguing? You don't even seem to know what sophistry and common sense are, but still feel the need to defend your opinion even though I neither attack it nor really care about it. To get these things out of the way, common sense is a system of beliefs and judgments that can, on a very basic level, attribute sensations to certain phenomena. On a higher level, it is essentially a preconception that things you deem familiar should work as you expect them to. No logic is truly involved at any step, and sometimes no reasoning is required at all; eg. most animals are afraid of heights even though they can't understand nor justify the danger—this is what common sense is. So yes, it is essentially a feeling that is easy to relate to. And there's nothing wrong with that, because logic itself only provides a limited set of instruments to learn truth, but doesn't guarantee that results will be true. And if I were to ask you to point me to sophisms in my previous post, you'd have a hard time not falling flat on your face. You're welcome to try though. Please use logic while you're at it. :) Really, all I'm asking is to stop dismissing other people's opinions using extreme amounts of grandiloquence to justify your own. Perhaps in your dreams you are a freedom fighter who opens the world of mythical TASland to everyone under the sun. I wouldn't know. It does look that way though.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 5/1/2013 8:09 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
feos wrote:
It's not some obsession that makes me post in this thread.
feos wrote:
I imagine his ruleset is applied to all the community and... I'm scared.
All the needless pathos makes me feel that exactly the opposite is true. Are you quoting a movie character or something? Is this how you avoid basing something off of feelings? feos, you seem to have this delusion that this site, and TASing in general, has adopted an "anything goes" policy at some point, which Warp (in this case) is trying to oppose. But neither has been the case. We've had a lot of rules against cheating that can be seen by someone as "limiting the creativity" and "infringing upon opinions". Warp is merely stating his, and fully maintains a solid composure in doing so. Kindly don't infringe upon it.
feos wrote:
This means, if someone WANTS to make a full use of some programming hole in the point where hardware connects the software, no one must be able to stop him. Because if such a border existed, it: 1) would make no constructive and logical sense, 2) it would distract very skilled specialists from contributing.
No-one is stopping anyone. Specialists can do whatever they want. Whether the result remains a speedrun (or a superplay), eligible for the site that hosts speedruns and superplays, is the question. Again, last I checked we had rules in place that made sense to (most of) us, but could be argued that they didn't. In fact, the rules—any rules, anywhere—are merely an attempt to legalize what is ultimately based on feelings. Is killing people wrong? People seem to say so, but is afterlife perhaps a better place to be? I don't know, and can't provide infallible logic or evidence for either choice, but there is a rule that we shouldn't kill people, and I obey for the lack of a better option.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 4/30/2013 12:02 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Any video editor that doesn't force a particular combination of encoding options "gets" good quality. You just have to choose wisely.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 4/30/2013 10:58 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
For what it's worth, I agree with Warp on virtually every point he made here. Potentially there are limitless ways to abuse a game's code or the hardware of its platform, but ultimately none of them are as interesting to me as abusing its gameplay. While these other kinds of abuse should be represented in some way, I feel that they should always be secondary. Of course, people would always want a clear line defining what constitutes the "true" spirit of whatever activity they enjoy, and be frustrated about not seeing that line, but apparently, while it cannot be seen or sometimes even properly expressed, it can still be felt, and thus debated and upheld.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/28/2013 4:57 PM
Post subject: Re: Notable improvements not so notable
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Nach wrote:
These movies are notable improvements over their predecessors. These include massive improvements, brand new routes, new glitches, significantly improved entertainment throughout or something else fresh and surprising. The intent of this distinction is to inform viewers of a significant change and not just minor optimizations. A significant distinction is not always obvious from looking at the movie times. When seeing this label on a movie, viewers who saw the prior movie know there is fresh play available. This will attract those who don't watch improvements that are merely frame optimizations. Edit: In case it wasn't obvious, I indicated the portions that best apply to the movie in question. You might want to see the last posts in its discussion thread as well. They remarked on how notable the improvement to the run is other than just saving a frame.
Nach, I'm pretty sure I asked you to explain how the SMB movie is notable improvement. What I expected you to do was telling me how the new/different things in it corresponded to the description. Instead, you just stated it was a notable improvement and quoted the description. Lazy, unsatisfactory rhetorics like this disappoint me. For the record, I specifically watched the comparison video linked in the submission post. The difference between two versions is very subtle, and basically the only people who have spoken for improvements in entertainment are SMB TASers/fan(boy)s who watch every improvement anyway. For the rest, it's "he made a bit different stylistic decisions", which happens in virtually every improvement out there. But something would be wrong if SMB didn't get special treatment for the most mundane stuff, I guess. Again, who is the intended audience for this flag? Is it general audience who doesn't even see nuances so miniscule? Is it experienced community members who know what to expect of the TAS and need to be pointed towards something surprising specifically? Is it the author, whom we tell in this way that we distinctly recognize his contribution? I've yet to see an answer.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/28/2013 3:40 PM
Post subject: Re: Notable improvements not so notable
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Nach wrote:
With this example, you've shown to utterly miss the point of the flag. [...] If you'd compare that movie with the previous, much more was changed than just a single frame. You would have no idea of knowing it by seeing the time alone.
You seem to be knowledgeable about the "point of the flag", so I'd like you to please explain that and the "much more" in the SMB run that constitutes notability according to the description. Maybe it makes sense, maybe it doesn't. Right now I wouldn't know because the description is too broad and vague.
Nach wrote:
The description is correct and not vague.
...Right. Nah, I should just stop taking you seriously. :)
Ilari wrote:
IIRC, "notable improvement" was the other half of "notable publication", after the "first platform" was split away.
"Notable publication" was the single most arbitrary flag issued on the site. If there can be some meaningful logic behind improvement notability—indeed, if only because some people (myself included) often skip minor improvements to avoid wasting time—what decides the notability of publications in general is basically politics and personal preferences. Good thing it's gone.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/28/2013 3:10 PM
(Edited: 1/28/2013 5:25 PM)
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
It's fairly recent, 2012 I believe? The revision you're talking about was way earlier. If this label is to be used, the current list should be nuked, then some (rough) guidelines established, then a (rough) list assembled collectively by editors, like what was done during the category revision. Right now it seems like only one or two persons are doing it, and they don't have a clue what they're doing. With according results.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/28/2013 2:34 PM
Post subject: Notable improvements not so notable
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I've noticed this label a while ago, but recently decided to see what it was all about. And apparently there's no consistency to it at all. I don't know who manages the label, but so far it's been done... poorly, to say the least. The description says: "These include massive improvements, brand new routes, new glitches, significantly improved entertainment throughout or something else fresh and surprising. [...] The intent of this distinction is to inform viewers of a significant change and not just minor optimizations. [...] When seeing this label on a movie, viewers who saw the prior movie know there is fresh play available." The terms used in the description are incredibly vague and broad enough to be applied to most improvements on the site. — How minor must something be to be considered minor? — Is a single change in gameplay significant? How do you tell what is and what isn't significant? — Do small isolated portions of altered gameplay interspersed between long stretches of identical one constitute freshness? — How many improvements out there don't use something out of "a brand new route, new glitches, significantly improved entertainment throughout or something else fresh and surprising"? — Is the label supposed to help people notice the significance that could otherwise be missed, or just state the obvious? Apparently the label manager(s) can't decide! For some reason the list of currently published notable improvements contains only 36 movies (21 more in the obsolete list), and the choice is... confusing. They're mostly games from popular franchises: Mario, Mega Man, Sonic, Zelda, and, surprisingly, a whole bunch of RPGs. Let's look at the most ridiculous entries: — [1946] SNES EarthBound "check glitch" by pirohiko, MUGG in 09:01.77, [1752] GB Final Fantasy Adventure "warp glitch" by Touch-me in 17:41.33, [2080] N64 The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time by SwordlessLink in 22:50.27 and others like this: thanks for telling us these were significant, because we absolutely couldn't tell otherwise. It's not like the previous time was suddenly cut in three or anything. — [1312] Genesis Shining Force by DarkKobold in 1:59:59.05. About a dozen changed battles surely motivate the viewer to watch the rest of the two hours the previous movie already featured. Obviously only the direst fans would do that anyway. Misappropriation at its finest. — [1715] NES Super Mario Bros. "warps" by HappyLee in 04:57.31. I bet any person can instantly tell where the new frame was gained, right? Including one-frame improvements throws any legitimacy of the description out the window instantly. — [794] N64 Super Mario 64 "16 stars" by Rikku in 15:24.08. "This 10-second improvement is half made of no saving and a different overworld route, and half of just framewise optimizations". So basically the exact stuff that puts off people who don't watch every improvement unless it's significant, right? Likewise with [748] N64 Super Mario 64 "16 stars" by Rikku in 15:33.77. The label manager just loves Mario. — [1678] GBC Pokémon: Yellow Version "save glitch" by p4wn3r in 01:36.95. At this point I stop any attempts to comprehend any logic behind "notability". — [304] SNES Super Mario World "all 96 exits" by VIPer7 in 1:23:38.37. This isn't even an improvement... Tl;dr: the label manager(s) is/are clearly confused, and it makes the label itself confusing and pointless. Solution: fix it or get rid of it.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/27/2013 2:25 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I much prefer it when characters aren't overpowered, and especially not endowed with endgame-worthy abilities from the get-go. I did enjoy that run, though.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/27/2013 12:45 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
henke37 wrote:
Is it too much to ask for a run of this game that doesn't horribly break the save system?
I have to second the sentiment. At some point entertaining stuff gradually becomes replaced by menu navigation, out-of-bounds travel, NPC interaction, cutscenes and whatnot. This TAS is way past that point.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/25/2013 12:59 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
This route is crazy! I couldn't follow it at all. Voting yes, but I think reinstating the in-bounds category is very much warranted at this point.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/18/2013 3:27 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Eh, you're short, yellow, with a spiky head and no mouth. What's good about your looks? Is your success denoted by your rotation?
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/4/2013 6:42 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Last I checked the discussion about licensing once raised with FractalFusion's submission of another player (properly attributed, though) and then went to die on page 6 of this thread. DarkKobold's argument still sounds convincing.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 1/4/2013 12:49 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Enjoyable. I'm not a huge fan of F-Zero, but the submission text helped appreciate the tricks in this run. Will other cups be done this way?
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/28/2012 4:43 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Compression of input sequences was only a problem when we needed to edit them. We never edit savestates, so there's no problem in storing them as tightly packed as feasible.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/16/2012 10:27 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
You two are made for each other.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/14/2012 11:29 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
nfq wrote:
There is a real church though, that is crazier than that parody site, called Westboro Baptist Church.
By the way, https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/legally-recognize-westboro-baptist-church-hate-group/DYf3pH2d :D
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/14/2012 12:47 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
And? This run does complete the game, and indeed does so faster than the previous.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/14/2012 12:09 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Whoa, what a nice TAS. Maybe a bit tasteful.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/12/2012 2:32 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
This is getting more tangential, but I, for one, really don't appreciate the need to bash popular games for their large(r) amount of TAS categories when your beef is with the low amount of categories for less popular games. So, instead of pushing for better awareness of these less popular games and generally being helpful and a good sport, people rather tend to become scornful and envious, their message becoming akin to, "I have suffered for my preference, why mustn't you?" And people who have beef with popular games just because they're popular, I don't understand them whatsoever. God forbid having fun.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/11/2012 12:01 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Aiming at an angle doesn't make you move faster per se, it just pushes Samus forward by a single pixel every time her arm cannon changes position. By doing it at 30 Hz you're effectively adding 1 px/frame to your movement speed, even though the game still considers Samus to be running at her usual speed. It could also be (and actually is) used in realtime runs as well, just not exactly as effective. I have no idea what stood behind that design decision, but it seems very likely that stopping on a dime is another of its side-effects.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/10/2012 11:42 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Warp wrote:
One form of conspiracy theory is the kind that tries to find signs of life and alien technology in the photos taken by the Mars rovers. They claim that NASA is censoring and altering photos to remove any such signs, but sometimes they miss something. This kind of conspiracy theory is as hilarious as it is puzzling. So let me get this straight: NASA sends probes to Mars in order to study it, one of the main goals being to discover if life had been possible, if not even actually existed, in the past... and then they censor and cover up all signs of this very goal? Why? What for?
Well, that's rather simple, too. NASA gets their results as intended in either case. They don't have to publicize everything they receive as-is. All results are subject to approval before they are publicized—there's no going around that, and especially not when you're dealing with one of the most important government agencies. Let's imagine some possible scenarios that start with "NASA sends a rover to Mars to see if there's any signs of alien life". The rover captures some photos. 1. There are no signs of life on the planet. In fact, literally nothing is out of the ordinary. NASA scientists sigh and publicize the photos. This is most likely what has happened. 2. There are signs of primitive life on the photos: chunks of frozen water, bacteria, whatever. NASA scientists rejoice and publicize the photos. 3. There are traces of intelligent life: constructions, images of supposedly living beings, unknown devices, certifiably unnatural landscape arrangements. NASA scientists gasp and alert the president because that's what they're supposed to do in such a situation before letting the cat out. Now imagine you are the president. You have solid evidence that humans are not alone in the Universe, and in fact they're very likely being watched. Since it can't be the case that aliens have actually lived and developed their civilization on Mars in recent times—the planet is a barren wasteland after all—it means the aliens have the technology to travel here from light-years away, meaning they can somehow avoid the fundamental physical limitations we have no idea how to overcome. It means they also possess all the military technology we do—and then some. You know people are generally smart enough to understand that. You don't know the aliens' motives. You don't know if it's possible to communicate. You know you can't afford taking the wrong step. Things become tricky, and the last thing you want is for your people to become afraid and unmanageable. So would you instantly disclose this information, knowing that we're essentially at the aliens' mercy, and neither you nor ordinary people can't really do anything to ensure everyone's safety? Would you rather prefer a state of helpless panic to a state of blissful ignorance that gives you enough time to consider your options and perhaps gather more information first? Of course not. It is a well-established government practice to make sure people remain calm if something weird is going on, and to maintain the facade until it's proven as such. Oftentimes it is the wisest thing to do. One easy way to achieve that is to present an edited photo, as it raises less suspicions than presenting nothing. One thing common among the three scenarios is that all of them publicize something and none publicize something alarming. This latter aspect is completely out of the question. The reason these conspiracy theories exist is that people who come up with them understand that no matter what the result would be, at best people would be told nothing. That becomes a breeding ground for all the what-ifs.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/4/2012 10:02 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
I get a repeatable desync right around getting The Creature's soul. Any ideas as to what could cause that? Advanced bus timing is on; soft rasterizer is on with all options except the lien hack.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/4/2012 8:53 AM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Warp wrote:
You see, one of the most common claims that they make is that they are exposing the most well-guarded secrets of the shady organizations running the world's governments and economy, and that said organizations go to extremes to get rid of people who are a threat to them and expose their plans (via "accidents", outright assassinations and so on.) The amusing thing about all this is that the conspiracy theorists themselves don't see the contradiction and irony here.
But see, maybe it's in those organizations' best interest to keep these people alive and well so that skeptics like you would have no reason to believe them! In any case, these days, when the Internet and global communication in general made it very easy to share information, there's little point in actually silencing anyone. It's much easier and safer to drown them in a sea of noise. Just think about it: if even a single one of these hundreds of theories is true—and there is a chance this is exactly the case—you wouldn't know which one, and end up dismissing all of them.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Posted: 12/3/2012 12:19 PM
Quote
moozooh
Experienced Forum User, Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Curiously enough, the runs that blew my mind back in the day (read: 2005–2006) were all WIPs of some 100% runs. I didn't actually enjoy TASes as much back then as I did later, but these hit the spot in many more ways than one. The first to mention is, of course, Michael Flatley's Super Metroid 100% WIP, i.e. the run that sparked the generation of Super Metroid runs/WIPs that introduced numerous TAS-only tricks that distinctly separate well-made realtime speedruns from poor TASes. A little beside the point, but whenever I want my TASVideos nostalgia fix I reread that WIP thread. The first 20-something pages of it are overflowing with anticipation and joy of new discoveries in what was already considered to be one of the best-researched games at the time. I think that was also the thread where Microstorage was introduced. The other two 100% WIPs are spezzafer's Yoshi's Island and pirate_sephiroth's Aria of Sorrow all-souls. The latter, completed by Kriole, has stood to be one of the most mind-blowing runs I've ever seen to date. The former is yet to be done.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
1 2
17 18 19
229 230