Posted: 12/10/2004 5:30 AM
Post subject: Discussion versus Submission
Quote
DarkKobold
Skilled player (1651)
Joined: 11/15/2004
Posts: 2202
Location: Killjoy
Arcade TASer of 2010 PCE TASer of 2010 Arcade TAS of 2010 Lucky TAS of 2009 Lucky TAS of 2007
This I believe is a first. A forum in which the actual output from the forum is much more active then the actual forum itself. It seems that very little discussion of videos occurs. For example, I posted an early speed run of Shining Force 1 (arguably one of the best Genesis games ever) and it only got one comment. I watched for a few days, and it stayed at the top of the forum however!!! I am not trying to bolster my run, or whine. I am just curious as to why so little discussion of speedruns occur, and yet new speed runs are being submitted every day? Is it the competition that drives people to secrecy? (After I had posted it, I was obviously excited and awaiting comments, so I was checking rather regularly. It seemed *all* boards where rather slow.)
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.
Posted: 12/10/2004 5:45 AM
Quote
Bag_of_Magic_Food
He/Him
Player (206)
Joined: 5/29/2004
Posts: 5712
Hey, yeah, I've only gotten one comment each for my latest Adventures of Lolo 3 and Totally Rad movies. Comments seem to be a bit more plentiful in the Workbench than for less popular games here in NES, which bothers me because I think it's more important to get feedback before a run is completed.
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
Posted: 12/10/2004 5:54 AM
Quote
Bob_Whoops
Former player
Joined: 3/19/2004
Posts: 710
Location: USA
How can you explain the topics with 20+ pages then? Perhaps it is not the busiest of forums, but it gets a fair amount of posting. And remember, great game to play does not equal great game to time attack. If I recall correctly, Shining Force 1 is a stratagy game, and I don't think that that would make a very entertaining movie. Also, admittingly, the Genesis forum has much less activity than ones for the other systems,
Posted: 12/10/2004 5:58 AM
Quote
Bag_of_Magic_Food
He/Him
Player (206)
Joined: 5/29/2004
Posts: 5712
Only the SNES games are getting 20-page topics. :(
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
Posted: 12/10/2004 5:59 AM
Quote
Bob_Whoops
Former player
Joined: 3/19/2004
Posts: 710
Location: USA
and NES -_-
Posted: 12/10/2004 6:40 AM
Quote
DarkKobold
Skilled player (1651)
Joined: 11/15/2004
Posts: 2202
Location: Killjoy
Arcade TASer of 2010 PCE TASer of 2010 Arcade TAS of 2010 Lucky TAS of 2009 Lucky TAS of 2007
And in the last half hour, only one message was posted in the SNES forum, and around 10 in the general. Heck, this post got 4 or so... As far as shinning force... If people can do Final Fantasy and make it interesting, then I sure hope I can make sf interesting. Besides, it would be cool to only hit the absolutely necessary creatures, and end all battles ASAP. Just an observation.
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.
Posted: 12/10/2004 6:42 AM
Quote
Bob_Whoops
Former player
Joined: 3/19/2004
Posts: 710
Location: USA
Well, all the rpgs that are being done are much more popular than Shining Force. And like I said, Genesis recieves very little attention. Not sure if it would be more or less interesting than the other time attacks planned though.
Posted: 12/10/2004 10:44 AM
Quote
nesrocks
He/Him
Player (246)
Joined: 5/1/2004
Posts: 4096
Location: Rio, Brazil
i can only talk for myself here, but i am busy with a lot of stuff, i usually have time to read some topics, make my own run and watch runs of games that i really like, having not played shining force i didnt watch it. but i'm one of the players here, maybe we should encourage the lurkers to post their opinions instead of only reading (i think there's a lot of people that only read the forums)
aka Nesrocks http://www.youtube.com/user/UoBtExFODA https://nesrocks.com https://twitter.com/bitinkstudios
Posted: 12/10/2004 12:51 PM
Quote
Truncated
Editor, Reviewer, Experienced player (979)
Joined: 4/17/2004
Posts: 3109
Location: Sweden
Arcade TAS of 2023 Sega TASer of 2021 Sega TAS of 2021
>Is it the competition that drives people to secrecy? More like lack of interest. If, as you said, no people reply, there's not much point in posting updates. I usually put them on my users page instead. The Genesis forum is a lot worse than the others in this aspect though. Perhaps there just aren't enough Genesis fans around here.
Posted: 12/10/2004 1:16 PM
Quote
TNSe
Emulator Coder
Joined: 10/9/2004
Posts: 453
Location: Norway
Shining Force... I don't think I've ever heard of the game before, and when it comes to genesis runs, I'm a bit more reserved to watch them, since gens forces your desktop resolution into 16bpp. (I've had some unfortunate crashes due to that) If you want to force people to check it out, don't be afraid to join us on IRC. Actually I would encourage it.
Posted: 12/11/2004 12:48 AM
Quote
BoltR
Former player
Joined: 8/12/2004
Posts: 651
Location: Alberta, Canada
My thoughts side slightly with TNSe with this one. While I have heard of Shining Forces, and infact quite like the game, I have issues with gens. I also don't have a goodset of Genesis games, so watching Genesis based movies are rare for me. I also don't really feel making useless posts like "I'm not going to watch this, but I hope it's good" are really worth it. Although if you do finish it, i'll definately give the avi a watch.
Posted: 12/11/2004 12:53 AM
Quote
Bob_Whoops
Former player
Joined: 3/19/2004
Posts: 710
Location: USA
I used to have problems with gens, but I got those fixed. It was a problem with the actual emulator, not the rerecording patch. I'm not sure if I like the rerecording in it. And also, Genesis is the least favorite of nes, snes and genesis. This does not mean that people should not make games for it. There are plently of great games for genesis.
Posted: 12/11/2004 1:44 AM
Quote
nesrocks
He/Him
Player (246)
Joined: 5/1/2004
Posts: 4096
Location: Rio, Brazil
Nes, snes and genesis are my favorite systems. But the general rule for me to watch movies is that i must have played the game quite a lot earlier. If i dont know the game it's most likely to not impress me. I also tend to watch movies made by phil, or walker boh, whose movies quality i trust beforehand, so i know i wont go through the trouble of downloading the submission without knowing if it will be any good. Yea i know that's a bad habit...
aka Nesrocks http://www.youtube.com/user/UoBtExFODA https://nesrocks.com https://twitter.com/bitinkstudios
Posted: 12/11/2004 4:49 AM
Quote
Josh_the_FunkDOC
Former player
Joined: 3/13/2004
Posts: 706
Location: Elyria/Oberlin, OH
Genesis least favorite? Depends on what you're talking about...remember, it sold better than the SNES in the United States for most of the 16-bit era. But yeah, that seems to be how it is on this site. *shrug* -Josh
but then you take my 75 perchance chance of winning, if we was to go one-on-one, and then add 66 and two-thirds ch...percents...i got a 141 and two-thirds chance of winning at sacrifice
Posted: 12/11/2004 5:01 AM
Quote
DarkKobold
Skilled player (1651)
Joined: 11/15/2004
Posts: 2202
Location: Killjoy
Arcade TASer of 2010 PCE TASer of 2010 Arcade TAS of 2010 Lucky TAS of 2009 Lucky TAS of 2007
The genesis sold better than the SNES? That is quite the claim. Have any data to back it up? Not calling you out, just curious. Sorry for turning this into a SF debate. It is more a discussion versus output debate. It seems like the percentage of movies versus registered and regularly posting users is low. Think about a sports forum. 90% of the people who discuss them are fat slow and unathletic, and have no actual attachment other then where they live to a sports team. They contribute 0% and talk 100%. Seems like this board is 75% contribution and 25% talk. In honesty, that is probably a really good thing. New runs all the time.... But at the same time, if people don't discuss the movies, possible optimization might never occur. I learned from Zurreco that I could freeze in air, which led me to find that I could actually fly upwards, therefore shortening some levels a considerable amount. Plus, it is fun to read. :p
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.
Posted: 12/11/2004 5:33 AM
Quote
Josh_the_FunkDOC
Former player
Joined: 3/13/2004
Posts: 706
Location: Elyria/Oberlin, OH
Hmm, not sure about exact data, it is often mentioned in articles and such. Generally, these are the reasons I hear: - Genesis came out first. Obvious, but still worth mentioning. - Sega was the first to focus heavily on sports games. Remember, this was where EA Sports and the Madden series really took off, and where this genre became one of the most (if not THE most) popular in the US. - Sega was the first to tap into the more mainstream market, the type that gobble up the Halos and GTAs of today's world. Their emphasis on "attitude", in their attack ad campaigns and in their mascot, played a big part in this, as did the aforementioned sports games. - Nintendo censored Mortal Kombat, Sega didn't. It cost the former a great deal of credibility among the gaming public, as I recall. I'm sure there's other stuff as well, but that's mainly what I hear. And I said "most of the 16-bit era". The SNES pulled ahead near the end for two main reasons: 1. Sega had put much of their then-recent effort into the Sega CD and 32X, which failed miserably. 2. The release of Donkey Kong Country proved the technical superiority of the SNES, as most were genuinely amazed that a 16-bit system could pull off graphics of that quality. So, I actually would love to see if there's any data to show just how true all of this is, but I wouldn't know where to go about finding it... -Josh
but then you take my 75 perchance chance of winning, if we was to go one-on-one, and then add 66 and two-thirds ch...percents...i got a 141 and two-thirds chance of winning at sacrifice