I'm sort of concerned with the uniformity of the moon tier obsolescence criteria, mainly with how speed/entertainment tradeoffs are concerned. There have been runs like the subframe reset Chrono Trigger that were much less entertaining because of what made them faster and there's no reason to think it won't happen just because a goal is "good." Speedruns by their nature improve by skipping potentially-entertaining content.
IMO, new goals should be approved if a moon-tier submission can be done, but once approved, should not prevent vault-quality runs from obsoleting them unless the goal is revised to bar something that made the run less entertaining (and the bar should have something to do with the goal).
Also, I could be convinced that the moon tier is infact 2 tiers of sorts, where the moons are significant in some way, and the 3rd tier is more of an average/borderline level publication
Can I assume that "moon" is just a temporary name until a better name is devised? Because the moon has been traditionally used (and is still used) for publications that are somehow notable (regardless of what kind of runs they are.)
Would this, in any way, allow for multiple versions of the same game?
It makes no sense to me how a game on one platform can obsolete a run of the same game on another platform (e.g. Battletoads & Double Dragon NES obsoleting the SNES run). Why can't there be runs for all platforms a game appears on?
Can I assume that "moon" is just a temporary name until a better name is devised? Because the moon has been traditionally used (and is still used) for publications that are somehow notable (regardless of what kind of runs they are.)
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3598)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4738
Location: Tennessee
Zeikcied wrote:
Would this, in any way, allow for multiple versions of the same game?
It makes no sense to me how a game on one platform can obsolete a run of the same game on another platform (e.g. Battletoads & Double Dragon NES obsoleting the SNES run). Why can't there be runs for all platforms a game appears on?
The tiered idea specifically doesn't necessarily allow this, but the general game based reorganization does. It would be my intent that game versions across platforms would be more allowed.
Would Vault movies have the same player rank formula as the normal movies would, would they not be included at all or would this mean a complete overhaul of the ranking system?
This, I believe, is where the problem would arise because while it is just a meaningless number player rank is something that could be a badge of pride. I am not sure how people would feel if I went from having 10 publications and 1024 player points giving me the 34th most player points out of everyone on the site to 14 published movies and 1248 points (assuming I get the same score of 5 as the universally panned Garfield submission) which would move me up to 27th place thanks to 4 crappy movies.
Granted those 7 people may also have rejected for bad game choice movies but if I pump out another 10 or so terribly boring movies and get moved up in rank for these crappy movies I don't know if I would feel right. Does having ten extra movies that were actually considered less entertaining than Garfield actually warrant me having a higher ranking than Nahoc, NitroGenesis, or SwordlessLink who are in that list that I would pass.
I would feel less proud of my player rank if it started to be more about finding the shortest games out there that are currently unpublished and pumping out the fastest solution rather than having to put in extra work to study the game to find out if it will be entertaining enough or what extra tricks I could integrate to improve entertainment.
*Edit*
Additionally I think this would ruin April 1st for the site. If the normal April Fool's Day runs were submitted after this rule change then the majority of the runs that are normally jokes would actually be accepted.
Granted preserving the fun of April 1 is certainly not a good enough reason to not change a rule, especially about this past years slightly controversial April 1 festivity, but it is just something to think about.
Actually, the Vault also sounds strange. A bit derogatory, that is.
I think there should not be any emotionally colored difference between the two main tiers.
Since we all know what these tiers are about (in their essence), why not just call them literally instead of using allusions?
1st tier - Speedruns
2nd tier - Superplay
3rd category - Stars
Would Vault movies have the same player rank formula as the normal movies would, would they not be included at all or would this mean a complete overhaul of the ranking system?
I think the current plan is to multiply the points by per-tier factor (which would be greater than 0 but less than 1 for vault movies).
... Similarly, stars would have factor greater than 1.
Also lower-tier movies would likely have lower ratings, and points are proportional to 2.5th power of rating, so you wouldn't get a lot of points from low-rated movie.
Take two movies, with ratings 4.0 (low end today's standards) and 9.0 (very good). The latter would give ~7.6x (32 vs 243) the points with the same player count.
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3598)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4738
Location: Tennessee
rog wrote:
I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with giving more points for runs of popular games.
You get more points for a higher tier. And this is completely reasonable from a site perspective. What does TASVideos want most? The highest tiered publications. It is only natural to provide a greater incentive for what we want most.
Also, I completely agree with goffydylan's sentiments on the rankings.
I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with giving more points for runs of popular games.
If I do a run of all 15 Sesame Street games that were created for systems that can be published on this site and then do the 3 Fisher-Price games that were created for the NES and I get a 3.0 on all of them I will get 280 points which is almost equivalent to a single 9.6 run which is the highest rated run on the site.
Those 18 games would take me around a day and could be done in almost real-time so probably less than 1,000 re-records between them all. The 9.6 run had 275,000 rerecords and probably took months to complete. Does that seem like a fair reward?
And the 3.0 score was chosen as it was the lowest score on the site and only exists because it was an abuse of power by a mod who immediately accepted his run after submitting despite not receiving any votes or comments prior. I don't imagine it will be getting much worse than a 3 on any run.
How are you going to handle this from a gruefood perspective? Especially as points will be assigned, quite a few runs that have been rejected become eligible for the speedrun (vault) tier (throwing in my support for AnS' naming system). I assume you don't want people grave-digging the gruefood forums looking for movies that are now acceptable, copying them (perhaps literally in the case of some movies, as doing it yourself would result in the exact same input) and submitting them.
Sorry if I missed this, I read through the thread quickly and couldn't find it. And I'd like to say I support the general idea. I've always liked the idea of having TASVideos be more completionist in its speedrun department.
How are you going to handle this from a gruefood perspective? Especially as points will be assigned, quite a few runs that have been rejected become eligible for the speedrun (vault) tier (throwing in my support for AnS' naming system). I assume you don't want people grave-digging the gruefood forums looking for movies that are now acceptable, copying them (perhaps literally in the case of some movies, as doing it yourself would result in the exact same input) and submitting them.
Sorry if I missed this, I read through the thread quickly and couldn't find it. And I'd like to say I support the general idea. I've always liked the idea of having TASVideos be more completionist in its speedrun department.
Rejected runs that would be Vault-worthy will be rejudged.
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3598)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4738
Location: Tennessee
Scepheo wrote:
How are you going to handle this from a gruefood perspective?
With a massive effort to unreject submissions that are now plausibly eligible for moon and vault publications.
Note that it isn't only vault, there are some movies like CCCless mario (though it may be too out of date now), that would be more moon eligible than before.
Also, I don't know exactly how to handle it, but I think a number of current publications should be considered for vault, not moon.
I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with giving more points for runs of popular games.
If I do a run of all 15 Sesame Street games that were created for systems that can be published on this site and then do the 3 Fisher-Price games that were created for the NES and I get a 3.0 on all of them I will get 280 points which is almost equivalent to a single 9.6 run which is the highest rated run on the site.
Those 18 games would take me around a day and could be done in almost real-time so probably less than 1,000 re-records between them all. The 9.6 run had 275,000 rerecords and probably took months to complete. Does that seem like a fair reward?
And the 3.0 score was chosen as it was the lowest score on the site and only exists because it was an abuse of power by a mod who immediately accepted his run after submitting despite not receiving any votes or comments prior. I don't imagine it will be getting much worse than a 3 on any run.
So lets give more points for highly rated tases, and/or less for very low rated ones.
It is only natural to provide a greater incentive for what we want most.
Is that mario, zelda, and metroid tases?
If nothing else, i can agree to starred runs getting more points, but i really have to disagree with giving less for vault runs than moons.
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3598)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4738
Location: Tennessee
rog wrote:
Is that mario, zelda, and metroid tases?
Quite frankly, yes. We want movies that get 100+ votes on the submissions, lots of views, in addition are very complex to TAS and provide extra-ordinary gameplay. Pretty consistently the games that do this are mario, zelda, and metroid. Let's not forget mega-man too!
People talk about these in a derogatory sense because of popularity. But part of TASVideos is to expose people to the art of TASing. And more importantly, don't forget that these are indeed very hard to TAS and have some impressive gameplay. Super Metroid, Super Mario World, Mario 64, Megaman 2: Would you argue these are just average TASes that are overrated for their game popularity?
And more importantly, don't forget that these are indeed very hard to TAS and have some impressive gameplay. Super Metroid, Super Mario World, Mario 64, Megaman 2: Would you argue these are just average TASes that are overrated for their game popularity?
No, but then they already get more points than most any other tas. I'm not sure they really need a bonus on top of that.
I agree with this idea in principal. I can see a place for three or maybe four tiers. However, I think we should also consider a place to accept some of the borderline "moon"-tier publications that wouldn't fall under the any% or 100% categories, like walkathons, minimum button presses, or the endless Super Metroid categories.
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3598)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4738
Location: Tennessee
snorlax wrote:
I agree with this idea in principal. I can see a place for three or maybe four tiers. However, I think we should also consider a place to accept some of the borderline "moon"-tier publications that wouldn't fall under the any% or 100% categories, like walkathons, minimum button presses, or the endless Super Metroid categories.
Well, come up with a name for this category and some criteria we could use!
I will seriously consider good well thought out tier suggestions
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3598)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4738
Location: Tennessee
No because it wouldn't be a vault submission, it would be _a_ submission. Your vote would be "I did not find this movie entertaining, no". And without sufficient audience response, but still a speedrun record, it would be a vault publication.
No because it wouldn't be a vault submission, it would be _a_ submission. Your vote would be "I did not find this movie entertaining, no". And without sufficient audience response, but still a speedrun record, it would be a vault publication.
Can publications obsolete a higher tier one? Or would it be separate?
After reading the comments I must be the only one who doesn't understand these tiers.
Anyone could show a list of examples for 1 game with various TASes distributed in these tiers?
Currently this is what I think and I'm pretty sure I'm wrong: making slower TASes (making entertainment/speed tradeoff as much as you are under the WR time) will gets the higher tier while a very fast TAS of the same game that for example skips the "best" parts of it will be gets a lower tier because of lack of entertainment
PhD in TASing 🎓 speedrun enthusiast ❤🚷🔥 white hat hacker ▓ black box tester ░ censorships and rules...
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3598)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4738
Location: Tennessee
jlun2 wrote:
adelikat wrote:
No because it wouldn't be a vault submission, it would be _a_ submission. Your vote would be "I did not find this movie entertaining, no". And without sufficient audience response, but still a speedrun record, it would be a vault publication.
Can publications obsolete a higher tier one? Or would it be separate?
