Is today backwards day? Both of today's "Added" runs have a longer listed time than what they "obsoleted".
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames."
Frames 16:26
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
xnamkcor wrote:
Is today backwards day? Both of today's "Added" runs have a longer listed time than what they "obsoleted".
Your eyes must be going bad, this is a cross-hack obsoletion, and therefore the time isn't relavent.
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.
Is today backwards day? Both of today's "Added" runs have a longer listed time than what they "obsoleted".
Your eyes must be going bad, this is a cross-hack obsoletion, and therefore the time isn't relavent.
If it's a different hack, why doesn't it get it's own entry?
Edit: I just looked at it, and indeed the obsoleted game is different from the new entry. I guess the idea of a different game obsoleting a different game was so obsurd to me I never thought to check.
I look forward to the say when Symphony of the Night obsoletes Super Metroid.
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames."
Frames 16:26
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4089
Location: The Netherlands
xnamkcor wrote:
Nach wrote:
xnamkcor wrote:
Is today backwards day? Both of today's "Added" runs have a longer listed time than what they "obsoleted".
Your eyes must be going bad, this is a cross-hack obsoletion, and therefore the time isn't relavent.
If it's a different hack, why doesn't it get it's own entry?
We have to have a hack quota for every game - otherwise we could flood the site with tons of half-decent hacks of SMB or SMW or whatever. Hacks are considered an extension of the original game, and we don't want to have too many runs of one game or game engine dominating movie lists.
Also, the rest of your post is so obtuse I don't even know what to say. Obviously there is a big difference between cross-hack and cross-game obsoletion, never mind obsoletion between two very different games.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
So, because you can only have so many hack runs per base game, you've decided to have the system say that one hack has obsoleted another hack?
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames."
Frames 16:26
Is today backwards day? Both of today's "Added" runs have a longer listed time than what they "obsoleted".
Your eyes must be going bad, this is a cross-hack obsoletion, and therefore the time isn't relavent.
If it's a different hack, why doesn't it get it's own entry?
We have to have a hack quota for every game - otherwise we could flood the site with tons of half-decent hacks of SMB or SMW or whatever. Hacks are considered an extension of the original game, and we don't want to have too many runs of one game or game engine dominating movie lists.
Also, the rest of your post is so obtuse I don't even know what to say. Obviously there is a big difference between cross-hack and cross-game obsoletion, never mind obsoletion between two very different games.
Is today backwards day? Both of today's "Added" runs have a longer listed time than what they "obsoleted".
Your eyes must be going bad, this is a cross-hack obsoletion, and therefore the time isn't relavent.
If it's a different hack, why doesn't it get it's own entry?
We have to have a hack quota for every game - otherwise we could flood the site with tons of half-decent hacks of SMB or SMW or whatever. Hacks are considered an extension of the original game, and we don't want to have too many runs of one game or game engine dominating movie lists.
Also, the rest of your post is so obtuse I don't even know what to say. Obviously there is a big difference between cross-hack and cross-game obsoletion, never mind obsoletion between two very different games.
But, if we have too many hacks of a game on record, it might confuse people. Therefore we just obsolete one hack with a completely different one without explaining it in the description.
Otherwise you might confuse people.
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames."
Frames 16:26
Nice enumeration of Super Metroid submissions. Here, have a few more:
http://tasvideos.org/3023S.htmlhttp://tasvideos.org/2731S.html
Both of these were rejected in part because the judges decided Super Metroid already had enough branches.
While we're at it, have this publication: http://tasvideos.org/2600M.html which was chosen to obsolete two runs in order to cut down the number of branches.
Also see this discussion thread http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15300 about removing the ingame time branch of Super Metroid in order to save on the number of branches.
To sum up, here's a quote from one of above submissions' judge notes:
DarkKobold wrote:
The only reason for which many people have given that this be published is that it is entertaining. However, Super Metroid is almost unique in its gameplay, as it is extremely non-linear, to the point that there are nearly infinite variations in the routes available to complete the game. In fact, this is so prevalent, that the SM community has created names for various routes that add challenge. (See RBO, suitless, 14% Ice Beam Route, 14% Speed Booster Route, this "GT code route," and more that I'm sure I'm not even aware of.) My point being, is that a highly optimized version of nearly any route through Super Metroid being called a new 'category' would garner a large amount of people saying "this run is very entertaining." SM makes for entertaining TASes. That much can't be argued. That doesn't mean that every route through the game should be published here.
Dyshonest wrote:
Uh... what? Since when did people want a limit to how many runs of [x] game should exist?
Since basically always.
Dyshonest wrote:
And why? Are we operating on limited space?
Technically no, but that doesn't mean we can spend all our movie page space on everything. If we did that, everything would become a cluttered mess. It's also bad for movie variety if half the runs on the site were runs of SMW hacks.
Dyshonest wrote:
Graphical hacks aren't very different from the original, I agree. However real ROM hacks are significantly different from the original whether its a new playable character or new levels like this.
It's still the same game engine.
xnamkcor wrote:
But, if we have too many hacks of a game on record, it might confuse people. (...) Otherwise you might confuse people.
I like how nobody here said anything about confusing people, and yet it's basically your only argument here.
However, bad organisation can definitely make it harder for visitors to find what they want.
xnamkcor wrote:
Therefore we just obsolete one hack with a completely different one without explaining it in the description.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Both of these were rejected in part because the judges decided Super Metroid already had enough branches.
One of them is pointless (PAL? Seriously?) and the other breaks the rule regarding button codes.
Technically no, but that doesn't mean we can spend all our movie page space on everything. If we did that, everything would become a cluttered mess. It's also bad for movie variety if half the runs on the site were runs of SMW hacks.
You seem to think I'm pushing for all things to get immediately accepted and pushed to Moons, or something.
Most SMW hacks are quite... ugly and not entertaining. We currently have three distinctly different ones (SDW, Kaizo and that other one that mostly uses Mega Man things... TSR or something?). I am sure many, many more than three SMW hacks have been submitted but rejected.
Hacks should be accepted because they're entertaining, not because "the current quota of hacks for this game has yet to reach its arbitrary limit". If people find it entertaining (people obviously found Air 2 entertaining)... why not have it?
It's still the same game engine.
We would be in a world of trouble if PS3/360/more current PC TASing was possible then with how much engine recycle goes on nowadays. :P
It really doesn't bother me either way, but it's a pretty silly rule to have regarding hacks. Should Mega Man 1 and 2 be removed because they "share the same game engine"? Or Mega Man 4-6?
Possible compromise... why not just have a category amongst the other ones here (http://tasvideos.org/Movies.html) specifically for ROM hacks?
I proposed something similar for Super Metroid at one point due to the myriad of branches (seven movies in the SNES category are the same game. That's not a bad thing. SM runs are entertaining. But at that point don't they deserve their own page?).
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4089
Location: The Netherlands
Dyshonest wrote:
One of them is pointless (PAL? Seriously?) and the other breaks the rule regarding button codes.
You hit the nail right on the head there - at some point branches become "pointless" and to gruefood they go.
Dyshonest wrote:
You seem to think I'm pushing for all things to get immediately accepted and pushed to Moons, or something.
You seem to push for all half-decent hack (Air 2 really can't be called more than that) runs to be published alongside each other. There are tons of half-decent hacks for SMW or SMB or SM or MM2 or whichever.
Dyshonest wrote:
Most SMW hacks are quite... ugly and not entertaining. We currently have three distinctly different ones (SDW, Kaizo and that other one that mostly uses Mega Man things... TSR or something?). I am sure many, many more than three SMW hacks have been submitted but rejected.
Exactly, and their distinctness is why they can be accepted alongside each other.
However, if you're going to publish additional hacks alongside the current hacks for the sake of publishing them alongside the current hacks, where's the limit?
Dyshonest wrote:
Hacks should be accepted because they're entertaining, not because "the current quota of hacks for this game has yet to reach its arbitrary limit". If people find it entertaining (people obviously found Air 2 entertaining)... why not have it?
http://tasvideos.org/1063M.html Entertainment Rating: 5.9 (from 45 votes)
Votes: 59% approval (55% yes)
Certainly a pinnacle of entertainment right there.
Also, there is no "arbitrary limit". As SMW proves, different hacks can be published alongside each other if they have their own niche and aren't redundant to each other. But we don't need 20 different runs of "Super Mario World with different graphics and new levels (read: different ways to jump/cape right for justice)" or "Super Mario World Ugly Superhard TAS-only Stages Edition".
Dyshonest wrote:
It's still the same game engine.
We would be in a world of trouble if PS3/360/more current PC TASing was possible then with how much engine recycle goes on nowadays. :P
At least those games are built from the game engine up, instead of building directly on top of an existing game. Also, generally such games aren't hacks of other games. Also, most of them are licensed and officially published.
Dyshonest wrote:
It really doesn't bother me either way, but it's a pretty silly rule to have regarding hacks. Should Mega Man 1 and 2 be removed because they "share the same game engine"? Or Mega Man 4-6?
No, because those are licensed and published games. They as games don't need to compete for publication on this site, unlike hacks.
Dyshonest wrote:
Possible compromise... why not just have a category amongst the other ones here (http://tasvideos.org/Movies.html) specifically for ROM hacks?
I proposed something similar for Super Metroid at one point due to the myriad of branches (seven movies in the SNES category are the same game. That's not a bad thing. SM runs are entertaining. But at that point don't they deserve their own page?).
There actually used to be something like that, but it was removed a few years ago. Not exactly sure about the reason, but that page always felt somewhat messy because it threw together hacks of every kind of platform/game.
Also, giving Super Metroid its own page is kind of overdoing it imo. It isn't that special unless you want to include literally every branch ever thought up.
There is actually a system in place for listing all runs of a game, although it's not easily accessible.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
You seem to push for all half-decent hack (Air 2 really can't be called more than that) runs to be published alongside each other. There are tons of half-decent hacks for SMW or SMB or SM or MM2 or whichever.
How many of said entertaining ones end up here? Not many.
Different hacks are, for the most part, different games.
However, if you're going to publish additional hacks alongside the current hacks for the sake of publishing them alongside the current hacks, where's the limit?
Why should there be one period? You said it yourself - data space isn't an issue.
Certainly a pinnacle of entertainment right there.
20 Yes votes isn't bad at all. If a hypothetical run had 100 Yes and 90 No, are you going to say it wasn't viewed as "entertaining"? Quite clearly, it was, it just also had vocal opposers.
Also, there is no "arbitrary limit". As SMW proves, different hacks can be published alongside each other if they have their own niche and aren't redundant to each other. But we don't need 20 different runs of "Super Mario World with different graphics and new levels (read: different ways to jump/cape right for justice)" or "Super Mario World Ugly Superhard TAS-only Stages Edition".
It is indeed arbitrary if both Air 2 and Hard Relay Mario have to be obsoleted by each other when both serve different purposes (Air 2 being a more Kaizo/difficulty-based hack whereas Hard Relay Mario is more puzzle-oriented).
The last bit of your post also doesn't apply to anything we've discussed - good hacks.
At least those games are built from the game engine up, instead of building directly on top of an existing game. Also, generally such games aren't hacks of other games.
A lot of the times it's hard to tell, so many games nowadays even feature the same glitches or quirks.
No, because those are licensed and published games. They as games don't need to compete for publication on this site, unlike hacks.
Why?
There actually used to be something like that, but it was removed a few years ago. Not exactly sure about the reason, but that page always felt somewhat messy because it threw together hacks of every kind of platform/game.
I thought it seemed familiar... Why not have it though? It's a good idea.
Keeps the hacks away from the regular, "licensed and published" games. They're here if people want to see it, but not "cluttering" anything.
Also, giving Super Metroid its own page is kind of overdoing it imo. It isn't that special unless you want to include literally every branch ever thought up.
There is actually a system in place for listing all runs of a game, although it's not easily accessible.
When each branch generally includes radically different gameplay dynamics or solutions to the various problems presented by the game I think it is justifiable.
Again. People here find them entertaining. If they had their own page instead of cluttering up and adding to the "limit" of the SNES page, problem solved, yes?
to be fair though Air 1 (which never had a run here, sadly) was a thousand times better than Air 2...
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4089
Location: The Netherlands
Dyshonest wrote:
You seem to push for all half-decent hack (Air 2 really can't be called more than that) runs to be published alongside each other. There are tons of half-decent hacks for SMW or SMB or SM or MM2 or whichever.
How many of said entertaining ones end up here? Not many.
I don't even know where you're trying to go with this. Most half-decent hacks don't have TASes made for them or submitted here, in part exactly because they have to compete with superior hacks like Super Demo World for the "entertaining SMW hack" spot.
Dyshonest wrote:
Different hacks are, for the most part, different games.
I disagree. For most hacks, gameplay is completely identical, and only tile graphics and/or stage designs are changed. If gameplay is unchanged I wouldn't say it's "for the most part" a different game.
Dyshonest wrote:
However, if you're going to publish additional hacks alongside the current hacks for the sake of publishing them alongside the current hacks, where's the limit?
Why should there be one period? You said it yourself - data space isn't an issue.
Data space isn't an issue. Organisation is.
Dyshonest wrote:
20 Yes votes isn't bad at all. If a hypothetical run had 100 Yes and 90 No, are you going to say it wasn't viewed as "entertaining"? Quite clearly, it was, it just also had vocal opposers.
No, I would say it got a lot of votes. Absolute counts do not mean much (other than maybe popularity, which is not the same as entertainment value).
If a hypothetical run had 100 Yes and 990 No, would you say it's viewed as "entertaining" because a whole 100 people voted yes?
Dyshonest wrote:
It is indeed arbitrary if both Air 2 and Hard Relay Mario have to be obsoleted by each other when both serve different purposes (Air 2 being a more Kaizo/difficulty-based hack whereas Hard Relay Mario is more puzzle-oriented).
Hard Relay Mario is just as well Kaizo/difficulty based. It may have more puzzle elements in it, but they're not too dissimilar in genre.
Dyshonest wrote:
The last bit of your post also doesn't apply to anything we've discussed - good hacks.
Given we've been talking about Air 2 all this time, I was under the impression we were discussing "half-decent hacks and up".
Dyshonest wrote:
A lot of the times it's hard to tell, so many games nowadays even feature the same glitches or quirks.
Yes, game engines can have bugs too. Imagine that.
Dyshonest wrote:
No, because those are licensed and published games. They as games don't need to compete for publication on this site, unlike hacks.
Why?
Because licensed and published games are actually worthy of note as games. Unlicensed games or hacks or crap can be made in two hours by any random person, and thus we need to put a limit on what unlicensed runs or hacks we can accept, lest we get flooded by submissions of any random crap created by any random person with Flash or Game Maker.
Dyshonest wrote:
When each branch generally includes radically different gameplay dynamics or solutions to the various problems presented by the game I think it is justifiable.
So did the PAL and GT runs noted a few posts up. Should those be published too?
Also, I meant making a movie page just for Super Metroid is overdoing it. It has a fair amount of branches sure, but not enough to justify a whole page for itself.
to be fair though Air 1 (which never had a run here, sadly) was a thousand times better than Air 2...
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Has anybody actually addressed why one hack/game obsoleted a different hack? And Air 2 was good enough to get published, and this new one was good enough to get published, right? Are we so desperate for slots in the database that we had to resort to the extremely hacky solution of merging game entries?
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames."
Frames 16:26
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
xnamkcor wrote:
And Air 2 was good enough to get published, and this new one was good enough to get published, right?
No they weren't, see the judge comments.
They're good enough to improve past poor decisions, not good enough on their own. It has been standard practice on the site for several years now to obsolete lesser hacks with better ones.
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.
If Air 2 wasn't good enough to get published how did it get obsoleted? Doesn't being obsoleted mean that at one time it has a published entry? And if the new one isn't good enough, why is it now published?
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames."
Frames 16:26
I don't even know where you're trying to go with this. Most half-decent hacks don't have TASes made for them or submitted here, in part exactly because they have to compete with superior hacks like Super Demo World for the "entertaining SMW hack" spot.
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4089
Location: The Netherlands
Dyshonest wrote:
I don't even know where you're trying to go with this. Most half-decent hacks don't have TASes made for them or submitted here, in part exactly because they have to compete with superior hacks like Super Demo World for the "entertaining SMW hack" spot.
I thought there was no arbitrary limit? There's only one/two slots for an entertaining Game # hack?
If you read what I wrote, I stated that multiple hacks can be published as long as they cover a different niche. Most standard SMW hacks, which have new level design designed for regular playability and maybe some custom graphics, would compete with SDW for the "good/entertaining hack" spot. If it's an impossibly hard type of hack, it competes with Kaizo. And so on.
Dyshonest wrote:
Make a page for them. Problem solved.
And now we have one mess of a page tucked away somewhere. What a solution.
Dyshonest wrote:
Yes, you're right. I forgot how ET and Superman 64 are entertaining, worthy "games".
The exceptions prove the rule. Also, nowhere did I say they had to be entertaining.
Dyshonest wrote:
...the PAL run is just a normal run at a slower speed like all PAL things. It isn't unique.
It had some tactics differences due to how PAL physics work differently from NTSC, as outlined in the submission text.
Dyshonest wrote:
Neither is the GT run, really - it's just activating god mode.
And had a completely unique route unlike any other run associated with it.
Dyshonest wrote:
Not really overdoing it if it means it gets to bypass arbitrary branch limits.
So you want us to put up a special Super Metroid movie listing just so we can publish 20 more random Super Metroid categories to the site?
Dyshonest wrote:
I'm shocked---who voted for Air 2 to obsolete Air 1...? Air 1 was VERY unique for an SMB hack, what with the flight feature...
The 59% of people who voted in the Air 2 discussion thread.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
xnamkcor wrote:
If Air 2 wasn't good enough to get published how did it get obsoleted? Doesn't being obsoleted mean that at one time it has a published entry?
You're making me wonder if you've spent any significant amount of time using our site, such as clicking buttons linking to obsoleted entries.
xnamkcor wrote:
And if the new one isn't good enough, why is it now published?
As I told you already, read the judge comments. Since you're new to the site as your previous comment demonstrates, on each published run, click on "Submission - Author's Comments", and at the bottom, you'll see why judges did what they did.
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.
It's a question of notability in my eyes. The grand issue about most semi-decent hacks is that, usually, a grand total of 5 people played them. Thus only few hacks manage to...
a.be known by enough people to give them some notability.
b.be different enough from the main game to make a TAS of one worthwhile
c.be of a high enough quality to make watching a TAS a pleasant experience.
Generally these points tie into eachother to an extent.
In regards to b., hacks for one game often fall into one of several categories due to conventions, e.g. Kaizo Hacks and Pit Hacks for Super Mario World. Since your average Kaizo Hack is often impossible to tell apart from the next one, we choose to go with the best of its type. In this particular case, it led to Hard Relay Mario obsoleting Air 2 obsoleting Air. Should a run of the latter two games be released that is deemed more entertaining than this one, there's a good chance it would back-obsolete this one.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
I'm expecting to be completely ignored by the ones who ask questions and don't care about the answers, but people in this very thread were saying that they wish this run to obsolete the Air 2 one. This happens because their contents overlap, and one is preferred, due to being/looking/being TASed better.
So if enough people say it was entertaining, and a significant amount of them says, it should obsolete some similarly looking hack, we do it, unless there are issues.
Dyshonest wrote:
Different hacks are, for the most part, different games.
Another proof Dyshonest shouldn't be taken seriously. Several posts in a row he is wondering why one hack of a game obsoletes another hack of the same game, and now he is saying those are hacks of different games.
Man, a hack is when one picks a game, and applies his edits to it. We do not obsolete hacks of one game by hacks of another game. And as long as the game being hacked is the same, hacks can not be called different games with any seriousness. You're constantly missing your own points once again. Please stop trolling.
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.
Joined: 12/22/2006
Posts: 193
Location: Flowood, MS
I fully support this movie obsoleting Air 2. It is more varied, more technically precise, and more entertaining overall. I commend HappyLee for being able to make such an optimized run from such a bitch of a rom hack.
That being said, I believe the run may be just a bit too fast, and some of the solutions are skipped over. In a run like this I think it's important to show off the game as intended. However, as it stands, the run is still superior to my Air 2 run in every way.
Well done!
<adelikat> tony hawk is porn for me
<Comicalflop>my mom is hot
If you read what I wrote, I stated that multiple hacks can be published as long as they cover a different niche. Most standard SMW hacks, which have new level design designed for regular playability and maybe some custom graphics, would compete with SDW for the "good/entertaining hack" spot. If it's an impossibly hard type of hack, it competes with Kaizo. And so on.
Why do they have to compete instead of merely being published? You keep saying there's no (arbitrary) limits, then why is it so imperative hacks compete with eachother?
Also, nowhere did I say they had to be entertaining.
But hacks have to be?
Several posts in a row he is wondering why one hack of a game obsoletes another hack of the same game, and now he is saying those are hacks of different games.
Man, a hack is when one picks a game, and applies his edits to it. We do not obsolete hacks of one game by hacks of another game. And as long as the game being hacked is the same, hacks can not be called different games with any seriousness. You're constantly missing your own points once again. Please stop trolling.
This may be a novel idea (only to you), but can you learn to read?
"Different hacks are, for the most part, different games."
What part of this is so hard to understand for you? Different hacks play and LOOK like different games. There's far more to a game than the game engine.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Exactly as I said. The reason behind hacks judgments that I gave was ignored. Do we need any more proofs? We aren't going to get anything but pure flamewar here.
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.
I don't care if it's "tradition" that a certain number of hacks can exist for a game and if too many show up your make a new hack obsolete an old hack. It's horrible database protocol.
"The guy was fatally injured and wants to be covered by God's tears (rain) before he dies. God is too busy to bother because it wastes frames."
Frames 16:26
