This is an improvement to the published run made originally by gia that wasn't submitted. More information about it can be seen in his youtube video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yXTpnUCh5Q
As far as I know, no .vbm of that movie was posted, shortly after that run was made I managed to recreate the presses file but kept it to myself as I was hoping that run would be submitted. Some months have passed and it seems the author doesn't have the intention to submit it here, so I'm submitting my own version (*puts on bullet proof vest*) because it looks like people want to have this published in TASVideos.org and asked me to submit this.
Objectives
Aims for fastest completion of the game
Extreme glitch abuse (not afraid to destroy the game)
Luck manipulation
Corrupts save data
What happens here
In order to understand, it's recommended to have familiarity with programming and some knowledge of GBC assembly and other aspects of the platform.
Relevant memory addresses
Trainer ID: 0xD358-0xD359
Map function (little endian): 0xD36D-0xD36E
Current map: 0xD35D
Party Pokémon general data: 1st one is at 0xD16A, has a size of 44 bytes
Party Pokémon OT name data: 1st one is at 0xD272, has a size of 11 bytes
Party Pokémon nickname data: 1st one is at 0xD2A4, has a size of 11 bytes
Pokédex data: everything from 0xD356 to 0xD31B, inclusive (38 bytes).
Inventory: 0xD31C (amount) and an array starting at 0xD31D with 20 elements of 2 bytes (item type and quantity) in the end of your normal inventory there's an 0xFF that indicates the CANCEL option, so this takes up at most 42 bytes.
The process to finish the game:
When the title screen opens, frames are waited to manipulate the trainer ID to be 0x64D0, there are other values that work but this is the fastest.
After the usual intro, picking the names ASH and BLUE because they are faster, we spawn in the room and hard reset mid-save to corrupt the data.
After the reset, the entire area destined to contain the data for pokémon in the party is full of 0xFF and is thus, corrupted. This includes the byte that counts the number of pokémon you have, so the game thinks you have 255 pokemon and will let you scroll the cursor and perform switches far after the usual limit of 6 pokemon.
Notice that for a max of 6 pokémon, the region that contains the party data will work fine, the general data for a pokémon will never overlap with its nickname or OT name. For more than that, this no longer holds because the difference in size will cause overlaps at some positions. When a switch occurs, the game will first switch the general data and then the other two, because of the coincidence of these two regions, interesting RAM manipulation can take place.
Switch 2nd pokemon (1st, 2nd, ..., 9th also work, the only difference is that the 1st is slower by 2 frames) with the 10th. This will set the entire pokedex region to FF, completing it and sets the inventory counter to 255 items. Because of the irregular 152 pokedex, a glitched description will appear at the end that doesn't need a click to cancel and input can be terminated sooner.
Switch 12th with 13th. 0x64 goes to address 0xD384 and 0xD0 goes to 0xD385.
Switch 11th with 13th. 0x64 goes to address 0xD32C and 0xD0 goes to 0xD32D, after this the 11 byte data is changed and the overlap causes it to be the region where 0x64 is, so after this last switch it goes to 0xD342.
It's impossible to get 0xD0 the right position with only pokémon switches, so we open the inventory and do an item switch to bring 0xD0 from 0xD32D to 0xD331.
Switch 11th with 12th. 0xD0 goes to 0xD35D (current map), 0x64 goes to 0xD36E, there's also a 0x01 that goes to 0xD36D, it's a byte that come before the trainer ID that, for our purposes, always contains 1.
After that, you can close the menu and the game will be completed, this is because Pokémon Yellow comes in an MBC5 GBC cartridge, this cartridge contains a lot of ROM that the GBC cannot handle all at once, so it's separated in chunks called banks. MBC5 has a main bank, which is always loaded into the gameboy and occupies positions 0x0000-0x3FFF and 63 other banks that the game can choose one of them to put in the active memory, at addresses 0x4000-0x7FFF. Having D0 as current map will force the game to load the bank which contains the function for the Hall of Fame walking cutscene, there are other values that work, but some of them mysteriously make ASH wait 16 frames to start walking, whereas D0 and some others don't. Additionally, having 0x0164 at the map function addresses will make the game execute a call to a function at this address and start executing stuff at 0x6401 (the data is little endian). Since this is an address from the bank area, what will be executed depends on the bank loaded, but with the previous setting, the machine will eventually start executing the hall of fame cutscene and grant you the completion of the game.
Through disassembly, I've verified that this function at some point switches to bank 60 and calls 0x4F26, which rolls the credits immediately without talking to OAK and that the map F8 can load this bank. However, with the above method we can only call addresses that terminate with 0x01, and going to 0x4F01 will get you a ret instruction on the way, and the procedure will return before reaching the credits. This can be circumvented with more manipulation of the RAM, but unfortunately, ended up slower than this attempt because of extra switches.
I also could notice that forcing the machine to jump to address 0x41c6 at bank 28 will start the pokedex rating sequence, however no map at 0xD35D can load this bank, the values for the bank which map loads are 256 bytes whose location starts at address 0x43e4 in bank 63.
Nach: Tremendous improvement, now you literally skipped the entire game. Accepting.
Have you improved my run? The fact I didn't submit is one hundred percent because I DID NOT WANT IT SUBMITTED here. You had it easy to replicate my run it was no accomplishment, I gave everyone the recipe to do it on my comments and what input I used was clearly visible to whoever watched the video. If you have indeed improved my run completely disregard this post please, I am extremely sorry, I just saw the time listed by the agent and it matches mine and I'm now raging.
Now regardless of what whatever player, user, mod, judge or admin says in the end and whatever you guys end up doing with this submission I want to emphasize my first paragraph. This is really outrageous to me. I do not want you to be granted the authorship of my improvement, I do not want to be marked as coauthor, sole author, or whatever and I do not want tasvideos to publish it.
The same goes to whoever decides to post this submission or my video posted on youtube on their own channel. Have some morals or whatever the word is.
I compared the two runs visually, and they do appear to be the same run. I think we need a 3rd party (not gia or p4wn3r, obviously) to compare the inputs of the runs. If they're identical, then the runs should probably be unpublished and the user banned for submitting somebody else's work.
I compared the two runs visually, and they do appear to be the same run. I think we need a 3rd party (not gia or p4wn3r, obviously) to compare the inputs of the runs. If they're identical, then the runs should probably be unpublished and the user banned for submitting somebody else's work.
gia's input was never released; p4wn3r recreated it. This is p4wn3r's movie, regardless of the fact that gia came up with the strategy.
There are many reasons why having the record on TASVideos is important, one of which is that we can't properly improve a run without knowing what to improve. I've known about p4wn3r's previous run far before I realized that gia had beaten it. I had personally asked gia to submit over and over again, to which I got the following response: "dont care sorry."
p4wn3r clearly cares about the community by risking a flame war while submitting this. He's set the stage for an improvement in the future, whereas if he didn't, someone would strive for a 1:26:xx run and think that was an improvement. He credited you in the submission, offered a co-authorship, and now you continue to claim that you have been wronged.
You cannot claim a strategy as property. By rejecting this run, the judge would have set a precedent that if someone came up with a groundbreaking strategy and refused to submit, we could not publish a run using such a strategy. That the final time came to be exactly the same makes no difference. It's very possible that there are no further improvements to this run; are you suggesting that we should have an inaccurate record until the end of time because you refused to submit a run using this strategy? Consider for a second how selfish that is.
p4wn3r did not submit your run; he submitted his own based on your strategy. He had no way of copying your input because you never provided it. In fact, he's the first person to prove that such a strategy actually works on an emulator. For all we know, you could have faked the original video. He set the record, and you can only blame yourself for not doing so earlier.
I am not guilty whatsoever for uploading / publishing p4wn3r's run. I'm sure p4wn3r would still be willing to add you as a co-author if you requested it. If you'd rather not have any association with this run, well, you can have that too. You shouldn't be able to lobby to remove it. Nach did the right thing in accepting this run.
I don't need p4wn3r banned, that was just a stupid idea of his, I hope. Right now Brandon deserves it more. Sadly I just read Nach was the one who accepted it, so I assume he won't ban or demote himself, which is what I would require of tasvideos to save face assuming the judge went willingly with this. Did you know about this Nach and accepted regardless? If you have you have shown complete lack of respect towards me and my work, and I do not believe the way you think is the way someone with judge privileges should think.
I don't require a flame war. I would like the official position of the organization, I assume that has to come from the admins. Nach being one I can only hope for the worst. Would liek to make sure if I am quitting tasing (as I am not sure if you had knowledge of this move, your reply will show, and certainly I can't just quit the community as you will copy my work) or this was just a misunderstanding.
Brandon, Nach, you seem to want tasvideos to grow bigger, that's cool, and squish anyone that opposes your view at that?, that's totally not cool. I am not talking laws or crap, as I won't spend money over this anyway. I am talking about the integrity you as a judge should have, and the kind of image I assume tasvideos wants to show to their own community, you are screaming "we will ask for it first but if you don't oblige we will take it anyway". If that's true I will lobby for anyone self respecting to quit your community as it doesn't deserve to grow.
While in the past I have not seemed concerned about authorship of a run (The short discussion over who WAS NOT going to be the author of King's Bounty's with Aqfaq comes to mind), that's because I in fact did nothing, and Aqfaq felt he did nothing as well, so "we didn't deserve authorship". That doesn't mean that from now on I give the freedom to submit things I did without my permission. It doesn't matter if I care or not care about anything anyway, you should care about your what's fair and what is not. Here I did everything, so it is practically insulting what you are doing. If you want the run so bad best it before, one frame is all you need, damn it.
Any taser that manages to go through my comments can make this input. I can accept they can be boring, or even confusing, they were comments meant for p4wn3r for example who could recreate my movie in a very short time, and commented to me on youtube about it and told me the final length of it in frames to which I agreed and wondered if he was going to get at least one frame better soon, I didn't release a vbm in fact because I didn't want it submitted here by someone else, which happened anyway. If I gave you the vbm through chat, not as a submission, you would anyway claim that I forged it I'll have to bet. lol
EDIT: Brandon, p4wn3r never offered me coauthorship I would have declined his suggestion that he could coauthor my run, I only knew about this because there was a post on SDA about this "new record". Back before I put this run on youtube I was the one who offered p4wn3r coauthorship, he declined, then I posted on youtube. p4wn3r doesn't have the right to offer me coauthorship for my run, what a joke you are.
You seem interested on having the records on tavideos. You are a site coder it seems, code something to link to external sites, in this case my youtube video, for records that aren't submissions to your site. Trivial work, problem solved. No need to do this.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
I'm out of the loop, but did you ever publicly or privately release the input file for your movie, gia?
EDIT: I just reread through the post above and it looks like gia's .vbm was never released, and that the input was recreated through original work. In which case, I see no problem with it. Input files are not something that you can copyright or protect legally, and as long as the submission .vbm was not simply edited to include p4wn3r's name as author, and he recreated it through his own work, he did nothing wrong. Just as Nach didn't do anything wrong by accepting the submission, and Brandon did nothing wrong by publishing it.
Have you improved my run? The fact I didn't submit is one hundred percent because I DID NOT WANT IT SUBMITTED here. You had it easy to replicate my run it was no accomplishment, I gave everyone the recipe to do it on my comments and what input I used was clearly visible to whoever watched the video. If you have indeed improved my run completely disregard this post please, I am extremely sorry, I just saw the time listed by the agent and it matches mine and I'm now raging.
Now regardless of what whatever player, user, mod, judge or admin says in the end and whatever you guys end up doing with this submission I want to emphasize my first paragraph. This is really outrageous to me. I do not want you to be granted the authorship of my improvement, I do not want to be marked as coauthor, sole author, or whatever and I do not want tasvideos to publish it.
The same goes to whoever decides to post this submission or my video posted on youtube on their own channel. Have some morals or whatever the word is.
So, let me get this straight. p4wn3r replicated your strategy via youtube. This isn't copying input, it is copying a strategy. You can't copyright a video game strategy. People use strategies from youtube videos all the time. For example, I'm sure that Grunz's OoT and Majora's Mask use strategies/tricks he didn't come up with. My FF8 run uses tricks I learned from youtube. Now, pokemon is short, and there isn't much beyond the first trick, which is glitching the game. However, as far as I'm concerned, this isn't rocket science. He figured out what you did, and copied it. He did NOT submit your input file, it was his own.
gia wrote:
I DID NOT WANT IT SUBMITTED here.
Second, you want your contributions to be respected on this site, at the same time you snub it? That is some gall you have there. You had a record, that you claim no one else can submit, but you won't submit, therefore attempting to place an embargo on the best known record appearing on this site. I'm more likely to ban you now.
You may have published the 'recipe' but p4wn3r made the cake. We take cakes here, not recipes. p4wn3r gave you ample time to submit your cake, but you made it 100% clear you weren't going to submit, given any length of time. Deal with it.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
At least p4wn3r still wrote your name in his submission text... so maybe the judge just assumed that you were both ok with this or maybe they thought you guys were both the same person or yep, just lack of interest to simply ask who is the real mastermind behind the submission, so at least the community opinion might change on the vote result.
I don't need p4wn3r banned, that was just a stupid idea of his, I hope. Right now Brandon deserves it more.
Because I published a run approved by an admin to be published? You can disagree with what the site did, but this was an official decision of the site. To blame me is ridiculous. More on this in the next quote:
Did you know about this Nach and accepted regardless? If you have you have shown complete lack of respect towards me and my work, and I do not believe the way you think is the way someone with judge privileges should think.
There was absolutely nothing to question about accepting this run but the fact that it was based on your strategy. He had to have known about this and accept it on these grounds. I'm kind of upset he didn't make this explicit in the submission text, but I guess he didn't want to incite a flame war like this one (That's what you call a rant like the one you're bringing up, regardless of what you might label it).
Brandon, p4wn3r never offered me coauthorship I would have declined his suggestion that he could coauthor my run
Not offered to you; offered to the community. He mentioned several times on IRC how he'd be willing to list you if people thought it would be right. I, quite frankly, think he was too kind in doing this. You clearly have no interest in contributing your findings to this community, and I don't think that kind of mindset should be honored by said community.
p4wn3r doesn't have the right to offer me coauthorship for my run, what a joke you are.
It's not your run. I'm glad you think I'm funny.
You seem interested on having the records on tavideos. You are a site coder it seems, code something to link to external sites, in this case my youtube video, for records that aren't submissions to your site. Trivial work, problem solved. No need to do this.
So, you want me to take a run you refuse to submit to the site...and then put it on the site? How does that make sense? Ignoring the fact, that I'm not going to do a coding request for you on demand when you're being so rude, it ignores the fact that we won't uphold records that have no proof of existence. p4wn3r is the first person to provide a .vbm to the site of this strategy, and the fact that you came up with the strategy makes no difference.
DarkKobold wrote:
You may have published the 'recipe' but p4wn3r made the cake. We take cakes here, not recipes. p4wn3r gave you ample time to submit your cake, but you made it 100% clear you weren't going to submit, given any length of time. Deal with it.
None of you have cared to look for my run and read the comments, or you would realize p4wn3r did not make this on his own, he didn't even have to reverse engineer the video as I wrote on my comments everything he needed to understand and replicate the run.
Brandon, what would have been rude of me is posting a link to my tas-on-youtube on your forums and then say ha ha I'm not submitting to you. I believe I chose the correct way since the contender for the record, p4wn3r, watched my channel at the time and I put detailed comments on what I did and how it worked.
Again you show no respect for me and the work I have put on your community throughout these years even if small. Your organization is big in fame. So you can bully the small fish all you like, and play with your words all you like to make it look like you are correct. Like I said I do not care about what the law grants me, as I'm not looking to sue, I am not even a USA citizen, I am not well versed in law and wouldn't spend thousands of dollars on it even if the law granted me any right whatsoever, the law is to be abused by crooks in power anyway. But I know all of you know you are stealing from my work and decide to go along with it.
This thread belongs in the submission, it is direct questioning on the legitimacy of it and its publishing, you seem to have cut it out to minimize damage to non forum users that access the thread form the front page, nice.
DarkKobold wrote:
therefore attempting to place an embargo on the best known record appearing on this site
As I said that's a limitation on your site, nothing prevents you from linking to external records. You choose not to.
TASVideos is about tasing but tasing is not TASVideos, I can make a tas run and publish it on youtube if I decide to, that's my decision, and I did, I did not put up a strategy video, I released it as a tas. I will not give you my reasons for not submitting my run to this site, as you shouldn't require it to be fair to me, sure I did not submit my run here but you never know what happens in the future, this or another runs could. The first tas ever was not submitted to your site either, if I recall correctly the history of tasing. Not submitting to your site does not make my tas illegitimate, it's like saying a record isn't legitimate because Guiness didn't approve it, or a speedrun record because SDA doesn't have it. All of you are smart enough to know this, as such you reveal to me your intentions.
All I await is Nach's and adelikat's replies, I do not need to dilute the topic at hand arguing with you.
Nach, adelikat, please read my posts carefully and check the youtube video and its comments in full, please don't give a rushed response that doesn't take into consideration everything I presented.
TASVideos is about tasing but tasing is not TASVideos, I can make a tas run and publish it on youtube if I decide to, that's my decision.
Yes, and you can't bar someone from creating a run using your strategy and submitting it here.
Not submitting to your site does not make my tas illegitimate, it's like saying a record isn't legitimate because Guiness didn't approve it, or a speedrun record because SDA doesn't have it.
So, based on this and your previous post, is it reasonable to assume that you want records to be recorded here regardless of whether the run is submitted or not? I mean, I suppose that's one way to look at it, but then we'd really be stealing your run (If you call posting someone's work and crediting them stealing). If I misunderstood you, and you merely want your TAS to be recognized, then you should have submitted it here. If you don't care about the records we acknowledge, then you shouldn't care that we're recognizing p4wn3r's. Make up your mind.
None of you have cared to look for my run and read the comments, or you would realize p4wn3r did not make this on his own, he didn't even have to reverse engineer the video as I wrote on my comments everything he needed to understand and replicate the run.
Once again, this is a technique. p4wn3r still created the input file.
gia wrote:
Again you show no respect for me and the work I have put on your community even if small. Your organization is big in fame. So you can bully the small fish all you like, and play with your words all you like to make it look like you are correct. Like I said I do not care about what the law grants me, as I'm not looking to sue, I am not even a USA citizen, I am not well versed in law and wouldn't spend thousands of dollars on it even if the law granted me any right whatsoever, the law is to be abused by crooks in power anyway. But I know all of you know you are stealing from my work and decide to go along with it.
Once again, you created a technique. p4wn3r still created the input file. Your work was creating the technique. p4wn3r's work was to create the input file.
gia wrote:
This thread belongs in the submission, it is direct questioning on the legitimacy of it and its publishing, you seem to have cut it out to minimize damage to non forum users that access the thread form the front page, nice.
I split this topic, as I knew it would turn into a flame war. Continue thinking of it as a conspiracy.
gia wrote:
DarkKobold wrote:
therefore attempting to place an embargo on the best known record appearing on this site
As I said that's a limitation on your site, nothing prevents you from linking to external records. You choose not to.
Its part of the RULES of the site. We have to have the input file to verify the TAS, so we know it is legitimate. See the Mario 64 debacle, when someone dropped frames from a youtube file. We aren't going to change how this site operates because you are being a piss ant.
gia wrote:
TASVideos is about tasing but tasing is not TASVideos, I can make a tas run and publish it on youtube if I decide to, that's my decision, and I did, I did not put up a strategy video, I released it as a tas. I will not give you my reasons for not submitting my run to this site, as you shouldn't require it to be fair to me, sure I did not submit my run here but you never know what happens in the future, this or another runs could.
Yes, you have the right not to submit. However, don't throw a hissy fit when someone uses your TECHNIQUE to create THEIR OWN input file, and submit that.
The first tas ever was not submitted to your site either, if I recall correctly the history of tasing. Not submitting to your site does not make my tas illegitimate, it's like saying a record isn't legitimate because Guiness didn't approve it, or a speedrun record because SDA doesn't have it. All of you are smart enough to know this, as such you reveal to me your intentions.
Uh, SDA doesn't hold records that aren't submitted to it, same with Guiness. p4wn3r did submit HIS FILE here, so yes, that is the record here.
gia wrote:
All I await is Nach's and adelikat's replies, I do not need to dilute the topic at hand arguing with you.
Nach, adelikat, please read my posts carefully and check the youtube video and its comments in full, please don't give a rushed response that doesn't take into consideration everything I presented.
I'm senior Judge and a half-admin. I'm pretty damn qualified to answer these accusations.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Hello gia, thank you for your continued interest in TASVideos.
First off, as to my decision on acceptance, I did know you created the original video, as p4wn3r clearly states in his submission notes. I also specifically told others in IRC that the movie should be clearly labeled somehow to attribute credit to you.
As to your claim of recipes and so on. We actually have a term for owning an idea, which can be demonstrated and you explain how the idea works in full with a recipe, it's called a "patent". If you had actually patented your technique, then yes, it would be illegal for p4wn3r to submit his work here by law, without your permission. You would have been able to charge royalties, block publication, and sue us.
Now of course filing for a patent on how to play a video game quickly is ridiculous, regardless of whether you would have actually received one or not. Here on TASVideos, we offer the next best thing. If you submit a video, we actively protect your rights and ensure that no one submits the exact same thing claiming it as their own. All derivative works are clearly labeled as such, and your contribution is forever immortalized in the movie history. You have forgone that right when you did not submit your video here.
As to a moral obligation you think TASVideos has to you, I really don't see it. We are an archive of entertaining videos, with clearly documented techniques and input. Information that does not hurt someone has every right to be free. Can you explain how you have been hurt by this publication, so we can rectify it or improve the site for the future?
As for linking to the external records thing you mention, we actually do do that. As all sites on the web, we support hyper linking to other pages, and p4wn3r linked to your movie on YouTube in his submission. As for making the video you created as documented by YouTube to be the primary video on the site, we are unable to do so according to our rules.
Our site is about clear open and completely fair competition for all. If no exact set of inputs are given for a publication, then competition becomes unfair. We have no way of verifying the authenticity of your video. How do we know if you used a video editor and cut out several minutes of video or not? How do we know if you used the exact same emulators available to everyone else? Perhaps you had a custom version of VBA made specifically for this game, or you had used a modified ROM image, or modified RAM as VBA was running.
In closing, I approve of p4wn3r reverse engineering your video and submitting it. I am also saddened that you feel that we've somehow attacked you or hurt you by doing so, it surely is not our intention.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Darkobold, thanks for your input. I'd still like to have the full admins response please.
Toothache, I know, I'm sorry I won't satisfy your curiosity.
EDIT: oops reading
Nach, but you make the rules, and you are using them to... cant think of the word, "to make you be right". As a person, not as a site with self rules, you are polite and nice to others, and you are certainly not being nice here. Someone who contributes on your site from time to time made a run, you didn't have it, and you decide it is ok to publish it on yours, under your rules, by accepting from someone else? Is that being a correct person? Seriously? Do you expect my run will be buried in time and the one you publish will remain as the only true run in the future?
The claim that I could have forged my run is ridiculous, how did I forged it so well it outputs the same as p4wn3rs run submitted much later?
If I was the owner of this site I would actually be fair to my community, and that is not the comunity of tasvideos, but the comunity of tasers of the world. The same goes to SDA of course. If I actively (actively looking for), or passively (someone points me out) found a run that beat the one I have I would modify my history files to make sure credit is given where credit is due. If I see a japanese player putting a tas on nicovideo I would make a history page which included the comments and a link to the video, maybe a copy of the video which would be only published to the public if the original was taken down for whatever reason (if that was legal, otherwise links would have to do). That is being correct. I do my part of keeping history recorded and do not steal people's work just because I can.
I don't know of something similar on SDA, and neither something here so can't compare. I know SDA allows you to remove your record from the site though and claims no ownership over such run they only host it. I am going to assume you don't because if you did and I removed my current record you'd just publish the same under another runner's name. You need the tasers to produce your content to grow, it is not the other way, you can't take away their rights because your organization is bigger. You have to play nice if not because your org. because of your conscience, you'll be losing them otherwise. Now I only await adelikats response to seal this issue.
gia, you keep calling it your movie. It wasn't your movie. It was p4wn3rs. It just repeated what you did.
The claim that I could have forged my run is ridiculous, how did I forged it so well it outputs the same as p4wn3rs run submitted much later?
Well, how the hell would we have known that until AFTER p4wn3r submitted his. Your logic is astoundingly poor.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11473
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
May I know what exactly gia wants?
It isn't very clear through all this text.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Someone who contributes on your site from time to time made a run, you didn't have it, and you decide it is ok to publish it on yours, under your rules, by accepting from someone else?
You're implying the run submitted by p4wn3r is yours. It's not. Stop pretending otherwise.
The claim that I could have forged my run is ridiculous, how did I forged it so well it outputs the same as p4wn3rs run submitted much later?
And we had no way of proving this until p4wn3r created his input file. He did a service for this site and submitted a verification of your strategy, which you refused to do. You don't have to submit to this site, but then don't get mad when p4wn3r creates a run using your strategy and submits it.
...I would modify my history files to make sure credit is given where credit is due...I would make a history page which included the comments and a link to the video
Joined: 8/15/2005
Posts: 1941
Location: Mullsjö, Sweden
What if someone found out how to do beat the game the same exact way as you did it, without watching your run? Would that person be stealing the run as well? Of course not. The only difference now is that you were nice enough to provide the strategy for anyone to use in a run, which p4wn3r did.
Or let's take Andrew G's SMB 4:59 real time run. Would I steal it if I made a 4:59 run myself? No, as I made the run myself, even though his run might have taught me a trick or two.
If you didn't want this discussion to happen, then you should just have submitted your run. But it is your own fault that you didn't really. P4wn3r gave you the credit for finding the improvement to the run however. None of the judges did anything wrong with this and neither did p4wn3r.
Joined: 6/25/2007
Posts: 732
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Gia, the fact is that you didn't release a TAS. You released a half-framerate video that looked like Pokémon being beaten. There was no input file or 60-fps video with input display.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
gia: A lot of your response has already been covered well by others, I won't repeat it.
However, I want to make a point of this:
gia wrote:
If I was the owner of this site I would actually be fair to my community, and that is not the comunity of tasvideos, but the comunity of tasers of the world.
To be fair to the community is exactly what we strive to do. We make sure everything listed here is completely provable, based on verified technology, and try not to step on anyone's toes if we can help it. As for the larger community, you argue on this point further with:
gia wrote:
You need the tasers to produce your content to grow, it is not the other way, you can't take away their rights because your organization is bigger. You have to play nice if not because your org. because of your conscience, you'll be losing them otherwise.
And here is the crucial point, we are not TASers of the world as a whole, but we represent a large chunk of them, and to an extent have our own community. But our community does more than just TAS games or document it, we actively create the technology to allow for TASing, and from this all other TASing communities are derived.
If not for what we do, TASing on most platforms would not be possible. Without us, there aren't communities outside of us. This brings us to a catch-22. We need people to submit TASs to keep the site popular. We need the site popular to attract programmers to make and improve TAS capable emulators. We need those emulators to be used to create runs which are then submitted to the site.
If you want to prevent what we do, in the end you prevent TASing as a whole. I speak about all these points mentioned here in this thread, in greater elaboration.
If you have specific suggestions how to improve the rules of the site, we're all willing to listen, and if the ideas are good, implement them. However I will not accept any changes which go against the essence of our site, which in the long run will destroy TASing.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
What if someone found out how to do beat the game the same exact way as you did it, without watching your run? Would that person be stealing the run as well? Of course not. The only difference now is that you were nice enough to provide the strategy for anyone to use in a run, which p4wn3r did.
Moot because that did not happen. No he wouldn't be stealing, I would have expected tasvideos to still honor me because I got it first. Of course that view has changed.
Dude, I don't understand why you like to make TASes of that game, keep them on your channel hidden from a potential audience that enjoys them so that you complain about people using your work, especially when you're a well known member here. I have expressed my will for you to submit it here shortly after you warned me that you'd done it. In seven months, you've been requested to submit it (even in this forum's topics), to which you vehemently refused.
I explicitly wrote that you had done it before and have never tried to take it as my original idea, stop trying to get across the line of "I don't want to submit this" and "I don't want anyone to". My biggest concern about doing that was exactly you creating this thread, but I did it because people wanted that run here.
You seem to consider that it's perfectly fine to reply "I don't care" when a lot of people come to you saying "Why won't you send this to TASvideos? We want it published." So, when I read that you were offended by me making that submission, I also reply "I don't care".
p4wn3r, well, that adds to the disappointment, thanks for letting me know what you think though. You are meant to honor the will of others people when it doesn't truly affect you, and my will didn't.
