Btw, since we want to (and should) be inclusive, if we end up creating a demo category where "everything else" goes, I think that a TAS of a game with no previous TASes should be accepted by default there (if it doesn't fit in any of the other categories) unless there's a good reason not to.
In other words, same principle as with current Vault: An any%/100% TAS of a new game is accepted there by default regardless of feedback, for the simple reason that every game (that's any%/100%-TASable) deserves a TAS, unless there's a good reason why it shouldn't.
This way if you eg. make a TAS of a board game which doesn't fit anywhere else, you can be pretty certain that it will get published, if there's even a modicum of logic in the stated goal of the TAS.
(Of course obsoletion of existing Demo category TASes becomes a more complex question, but that's its own problem.)
If we don't introduce sensible barriers to Demo entry (as you used to request too), we'll end up with an unmanageable flood of worthless movies. Look how by my system, Chessmaster and Othello runs would be accepted based on feedback, and Scrabble wouldn't. Feedback in rule-breaking cases is the only sensible barrier.
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.
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.
Appearance
TIER1: all any% and 100%
TIER2: all entertaining side goals
TIER3: impressive examples of the rest
TIER4: the most entertaining runs from all of the above
That's overly complicated. With your logic there's like 2 Star tiers. The purpose of Vault tier is to accept movies that are still TASes, but not entertaining enough to be Moon tier. Which is how you keep out boring Vault 'entertainment' TASes.
effort on the first draft means less effort on any draft thereafter
- some loser
No there is not 2 star tiers. The purpose of this is to make speedruns and superplays considered to be on the same level instead of throwing most speedruns in the trash. Demo is its own thing that is not required to exist for the new system. In fact, I think we should start with changing the current 3 categories (as was initially proposed) and expand to 4 at a later time. Apparently the proposed demo is confusing many people.
The current system is closer to having two star tiers than feos' proposal.
While I'm not against a demo category, I agree with dunnius, in that I'd like to fix what we currently have before moving on to anything new.
If we don't introduce sensible barriers to Demo entry (as you used to request too), we'll end up with an unmanageable flood of worthless movies.
There is only a limited amount of games for any given system. For example according to Wikipedia there exist 713 licensed NES games. (If a TAS of a game is by default accepted at the very least to the demo category, likewise by default there ought to be only one TAS of it, unless there's a good reason to accept more.)
But yes, there could be some (subjective) requirement for notability.
That's overly complicated. With your logic there's like 2 Star tiers.
I have to tweak the appearance into this:
TIER1: all any% and 100%
TIER2: all entertaining side goals
TIER3: entertaining rule breakers
TIER4: the most entertaining runs from all of the above
The judging logics has already been fixed accordingly. This way you see that if something isn't an any%/100%, it has to obey the site rules AND be entertaining, to be accepted to Moons, or if it breaks some rules, but is still quite entertaining, it goes to Demo.
The purpose of Vault tier is to accept movies that are still TASes, but not entertaining enough to be Moon tier. Which is how you keep out boring Vault 'entertainment' TASes.
Which we don't want, otherwise we wouldn't have this thread.
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.
TIER4: the most entertaining runs from all of the above
I'd say the most representative runs for all the above.
I am still of the strong opinion that the Star category ought to be a (relatively small) representative sample of what TASing is all about, not just a blind list of "runs with an entertainment rating of X or higher".
A run might be very appreciated for its entertainment value, but if there are already three runs starred that are very similar to that one, that spot ought to go to something that showcases a different aspect of TASing, even if that something is slightly "less entertaining".
I am still of the strong opinion that the Star category ought to be a (relatively small) representative sample of what TASing is all about, not just a blind list of "runs with an entertainment rating of X or higher".
A run might be very appreciated for its entertainment value, but if there are already three runs starred that are very similar to that one, that spot ought to go to something that showcases a different aspect of TASing, even if that something is slightly "less entertaining".
I never intended to suggest changing the Stars logic.
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.
Well, I think we had a small tangent here. I'd like to hear more opinions on a couple of points.
It seems that we're mostly in agreement for changing this site to be less "tier" based and more around having well defined "categories", am I right?
Does anyone have an opinion on changing the list pages to being the less server intensive list of links, rather than the presentation boxes? Also, what do people think of my proposal here for reorganizing the site into game pages?
Pages always seemed to be the least heavy solution to me, and easy to navigate through.
And your link doesn't work.
EDIT: I realized how "pages" may mean basically anything, my idea is do to lists of movies the same as done to search results and forum threads: displaying the entire list broken into pages.
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.
AzumaK wrote: I swear my 1 year old daughter's favorite TASVideo is your R4MI run :3
xxNKxx wrote: ok thanks handsome feos :D
Help improving TASVideos!
Yes, basically, maybe with small changes, but I like their organization system.
Editted to add: Oh, hey, Zeuper posted while I was writing. That's an awesome mockup!
You know the cheats used in MM9 was a gecko code (not in game) instead of an ingame cheat like the Metroid TAS you linked right? Since if you meant the former, what's stopping people from heavily modifying the game using cheats (without calling it a romhack) and claim it's a different branch? Then they could make a romhack of it, and claim a new record as well and say "it's not a cheat now it's a totally different game new record please."
You know the cheats used in MM9 was a gecko code (not in game) instead of an ingame cheat like the Metroid TAS you linked right? Since if you meant the former, what's stopping people from heavily modifying the game using cheats (without calling it a romhack) and claim it's a different branch? Then they could make a romhack of it, and claim a new record as well and say "it's not a cheat now it's a totally different game new record please."
I deliberately emphasized the Demo criteria. If a run breaks some rules but is entertaining, it should be accepted to Demo.
Rules of being optimal and verifiable can't present entertaining high quality content if broken, while many of the rest can be moved aside if that does let us be high quality and entertaining.
So it's not competing with a Records Category in being a record, or with Moons Category in being a side branch, since they demand obeying all the movie rules, and that makes perfect sense.
That's why I impose the only requirement for Demo - good feedback. And yes, if the question is "Should this be published?" again, people become able to address some other worthy aspects of the run that result in its publishable TAS value.
For the reference:
http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=421654#421654http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=421751#421751
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.
If entertainment is the only factor, does running a demoscene ROM count? Especially for things like Atari demos found on youtube; one can technically have a "movie" of 1 frame long and be entertaining since the whole ROM itself is basically a movie.
Also self-playing SMW hacks come to mind.
Atari demos found on youtube; one can technically have a "movie" of 1 frame long and be entertaining
Looking forward to actual cases where that's actually the case.
Meanwhile, I want to remind you that "entertaining" is when about 70% (at least) of viewers who addressed the entertainment value say it was high (to them). Didn't you know how Moons work?
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: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2794
Location: Northern California
It'd still be absolutely impossible to determine an obsoletion chain with cheated movies. What would new movies have to do to obsolete published cheated movies? Or do we just have to accept everything without obsoletion and clutter up the site further and further with movies we can't do anything about?
In theory (but possibly not in practice), every game could be a 1 frame movie with only 1 cheat: One that directly sets the ending flag and plays the credit sequence/ends the game immediately, meaning we'd have the bare minimum movie time and the bare minimum number of cheats, and we'd literally have a site full of unimprovable movies. So we'd need to set restrictions on what could be done with this tier, but how do we set those restrictions? "No immediate ending" would be obvious, but how would we limit cheats? Would obsoletions have to be "faster with less cheats"? Or could it be "faster with more cheats"? What if a run reaches its theoretical max time, and someone gets the exact same time with less cheats? Is that an obsoletion too?
Like I said in the MM9 submission, I'm glad that run exists. I like the concept and I'm sure it's an amazing watch, but there's no way we can publish it here under any tier, new or old. It doesn't matter if it's one single cheat that does nothing but make the run a smoother watch or ten cheats that trivialize the game, we can't publish it. I'm perfectly content with having a dedicated area of the site that shows off runs like this as long as it doesn't require them to be officially published, though. In my mind, the forums serve that exact purpose, but I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to something like Gruefood Delight for cheated/demo tier runs.
I'm of the opinion that every run serves a purpose, and that having a movie published is nothing more than a privilege. It's not the "end goal" of making a TAS, it doesn't make the movie any more legitimate by any means. The end goal of making a TAS is the last frame, and the movie is immediately legitimate upon it being confirmed to sync for the TASer. Whip up an encode, put it on Youtube, post it here and share with your interested friends. That's all you need. Eventually we may reshape the site structure to account for certain demo movies, but that requires a lot of time invested into new rules and new code, and we have much more important priorities in the meantime.
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
It'd still be absolutely impossible to determine an obsoletion chain with cheated movies. What would new movies have to do to obsolete published cheated movies? Or do we just have to accept everything without obsoletion and clutter up the site further and further with movies we can't do anything about?
Um, you know about Moons, right? It can have a lot of branches for games. You know why there's no clutter? If there's a content overlap between some branches, viewers can very well spot it and post details. If the runs are different enough, they are published alongside each other. Otherwise, one obsoletes another. I made some judgments based on that.
Come on guys, do I really need this dose of sarcasm just to remind obvious things everyone knows?
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: 11/13/2006
Posts: 2794
Location: Northern California
feos wrote:
Um, you know about Moons, right? It can have a lot of branches for games. You know why there's no clutter?
No, what's Moons? Is that the tier that houses at least 3 completely unnecessary Super Metroid runs that are cluttering up the site and encouraging people to try to submit even more unnecessary Super Metroid runs?
TASvideos Admin and acting Senior Judge 💙 | CohostwarmCabin wrote:
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
If the amount of Super Metroid branches is your only example of clutter, I'd say we're doing a good job not publishing too similar branches. And it's not related to Demo proposal if you already see 3 completely unnecessary runs.
To me, this is a perfect example of why the system can be considered working well. Note that there was a decision to most likely obsolete both any% and in-game once the new any% appears, so we do try to reduce branch amount (btw that movie I accepted also obsoleted 2 existing branches). We just do it naturally, not by self-imposed hard limits.
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: 10/28/2013
Posts: 130
Location: United States
I'm in support of those arguing that "entertainment" is both too nebulous and too subjective to be a primary organizing principle for the site. (I don't think entertainment is why most people seek out TAS to begin with; it certainly isn't for me.)
The #1 criterion should always be speed, paired with total domination of the game through whatever means. Categorization should flow from that.
Hey, it's been a while since I've been able to post in this thread. I've been busy with a move and the holidays. Still very much in favor of dropping tiers altogether and having everything be in categories.
I really believe that if we take the starting point that Zeuper's link gives us and tweak it just a bit, that would be an amazing first step to improving the organization of the site, and it should be what we concentrate on at the moment.
So Zeuper, with your code how hard would it be to:
Only list games with movies published on the site?
Have the numbers reflect unobsoleted runs only?
Have the list be in alphabetical order first rather than by system?
Have the games listed by most recent publication?
Let the user of the site decide how the list will be populated (give them a choice of sorting options and what to include)?
On the actual game pages can we:
Put the description above the tabs rather than having them hidden in a separate tab we have to click to?
Also, I like each individual game having its own description, but also realize that it would be a huge project and probably require multiple volunteers. That may be for another thread, though.
