i was curious as to what movie was published the day i first visited here but the "recent additions" only goes back to 19/4/2004 or 4/19/2004 for my fellow americans
my first visit was roughly 3 weeks before then
is there a way to view a chronological sorting of publications back to #1?
by the way, it was a smart idea to put the site address in tas back then
i downloaded something like 4-5 of them over direct connect (was all the rage back then) and one of them had the site address
glad it did otherwise i would probably never have gotten to see more until a while later
hope someone can help
peaces of reeses
i am curious as to why the first one was done instead of the second
i never played either but i naturally assume the second would be a better game
or was this just to show off a glitchfest?
i feel that given the frequency of submitted improvements to mario 64 and how much time it would take to clean up the angles why not pass on this one in favor of the next?
man everything here is so predictable
so just as entertaining as the published version with a noticeable drop in time
what more is there to say
It's obviously not neccesary to fall into the lava to get into the right position for that sideflip dive, and it's possible to grab Bowser equally close to the bomb with other methods for diving into the tail as well.
exactly
if doing that had saved time then go right ahead but on your list of saved frames it says nothing about gaining frames during the second bowser battle
i independently came to the same conclusion as several others
i have never cared at all about the camera angles previous to this mario 64 tas and when a couple people each time whined about the camera angles i thought they were being ridiculous
but this one is where even i have to draw the line: these camera angles were bad the majority of the time and a few times even made me literally cringe
also falling into the fire against bowser #2 might be something that other people do not care about but it looked ugly to me
i feel that given the frequency of submitted improvements to mario 64 and how much time it would take to clean up the angles why not pass on this one in favor of the next? the published tas i thought was overall more entertaining
also props to the encoder/uploader; that was good quality and file hosting services are more and more becoming more convenient, reliable, and faster in general than bt
So, voting "no" because a movie's boring to you at that point isn't wrong, because it does answer the question of "did you enjoy this movie"...
I have always hated how people opportunistically interpret that question more literally or less literally depending on which better suits their opinion.
I understand the spirit of the question to mean "is this movie good enough for it to be published, or should it be rejected?" In other words, even though you might not have enjoyed a movie too much, it may still be publish-worthy, and people who vote should judge whether it should be published, not so much *literally* "did you like it a lot?"
The significance of the question "is this movie good enough to be published" gets a special meaning when someone submits a movie which ought to obsolete an existing publication. In this case the question is "is this movie good enough to be published, and is it *better* than the existing publication?". And again, even if you didn't like the movie a lot, you could still judge whether it's better than the existing movie and whether the new one should obsolete it or not.
But of course people will stick to the literal meaning of that question when it fits better their mood and opinion.
Can't that question be finally changed to "should this movie be published"? It would better avoid this problem.
one of the funniest and most intelligent posts ive ever seen here
i award you six out of seven cookies with chocolate chips and one additional topping at no extra charge
there, the proverbial random no vote required before every high attention tas gets accepted
seemed like it was going to take forever but now it can finally be accepted
this whole thing about the ice cavern and botw is beginning to seem very arbitrary
with a lot of luck and persistence, you could complete the game without the lens, but how is it that someone playing normally could complete the game without the iron boots? i will have to check that out
otherwise it seems like a "dungeons that i felt like doing" tas
(edit: ok, right, the final scale, of course; i am embarrassed; i wonder how the water temple is done without the iron boots though, this will be interesting to see)
also i think the couple of people who havent played this game and are giving the author a hard time need to chill
he deserves props regardless
holy expletive
no expletive way
numerous other expletives
im sure this will be up there with glover, turok, mario, and zelda mm among the greats
you, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar
we are being spoiled by these 64 tas
Personally, the two things that could make this slightly better would be speeding through the credits and hitting everything, and the fighting and utterly humiliating the Ness cpu.
I agree with this. It would be pretty cool seeing an 100% hit rate of the credits and beating the crap out of Ness.
thirding
also not a big fan of yoshi but as you said he is funny so a yes vote all in all (didnt vote on the other one by the way)
How is it irrelevant? I read your post as "The Diddy Kong Racing run shouldn't have been accepted, and was only published because a judge liked it so much that he went against the crowd and accepted it anyway. This run should be no different".
If I misinterpreted, I apologize, but could you clarify what you meant?
that was pretty close except i did not mean a crowd of people railed against it; i meant that it was another example of a "contentious" submission because the people who knew the game well called it unoptimized (which it was) and that the creator of the run did not know the game's mechanics well and there was arguing for several pages etc. etc.
if i went into any more details or examples i would probably irritate/offend some people so i stop here
anyway i am curious as to what loophole is going to be applied here or if the classic "wait until everyone forgets about it and then reject it for some random reason" will be employed
the other 1% is the "because i said so" of course which is how runs like the DKR one get published
Voting results from Diddy Kong Racing:
No 6 (11%)
Yes 43 (81%)
Meh 4 (7%)
Current voting results from this submission:
No 10 (20%)
Yes 28 (58%)
Meh 10 (20%)
If you're going to criticize prior judging actions, at least get your facts straight.
what you said is correct but irrelevant to what i said
i will ignore this though as thanks for your turok tas and adelikat's glover tas
in all this bickering has anyone said a loophole yet that will allow a judge to make a decision without pissing off a bunch of people?
that is how 99% of the contentious submissions are eventually judged as experience teaches us
the other 1% is the "because i said so" of course which is how runs like the DKR one get published
so anyway, still awaiting and anticipating the loophole