They are to be judged solely on whether or not anyone can find any way to improve them. If improvements are known, they are not eligible.
Not really on topic, but I'm still of the opinion that the reputation of the Vault and Moon tiers ought to be reversed (with name changes to reflect it.) Getting to Vault ought to be a hard-earned privilege. After all, a run can get there only in a very narrow set of circumstances: It has to be an any% or 100% game completion, and it must break all existing records. In other words, it has to be the best of the best. And only two runs at maximum (any% and 100%) can reach this privileged top position. The Moon tier should be the "dump for everything else". If a run does not qualify for the privileged position in the Vault, it might nevertheless be published by being relegated to Moons, where everything else is dumped as well. Getting to Moons is not a privilege; it's the dump where the run is thrown when it doesn't qualify for being the best of the best. Just my opinion.
For me, Hydlide was just boring to watch, and I based that on watching it before any of us knew for sure what tier it'd be in. A good majority of judges also agreed at the time that it had to go to the Vault (based on entertainment merit we collectively saw in it, instead of voter feedback). About half of the rating audience still seems to agree, having given it a below-par entertainment rating. I'm going to need to see better rating numbers than that before I really believe that the 80ish% of submission yes votes was actually indicative of people finding the run entertaining on a whole
Also with the movie rating and the entertainment poll question, I believe there is voting bias from if one likes or dislikes a game. Entertainment should be based on how the TAS plays the game, not the game itself.
I don't think it's even possible to take ratings seriously, since indeed they make little sense, when only the people who actually TAS a game know exactly how technical its runs are, and people who see a game for the first time might be not entertained at all and give 3s for a well done movie (I use to do that a lot lately). These 2 don't seem to be improvable, so no matter how you change the system, it'd still make that little sense.
Then remove the 80% threshold from the guidelines if it isn't being followed (my signature is appropriate).
Actually, having one poll question doesn't work. It needs to be split into two questions, one for whether it should be published (optimized enough, etc.) and the other to ask about entertainment. That way a judge can read the entertainment better.
I find it annoying that people will rate the popular games, but can't be bothered to rate other movies on the site.
The idea of the voting question (as it is currently) is to ask about entertainment. Optimization or publishability are determined by the judge and not by votes. The problem is that, regardless of what you ask of the viewers, they will vote their own things which will on occasion not align with the actual question being asked. That is something that cannot be changed (we tried, and basically failed). People still vote "yes for Vault" nearly three years after tiers have been introduced and the voting question changed accordingly.
The point in the Vault/Moon distinction is to resolve the fundamental conflict between two very different aims of tasvideos: to entertain its viewers, and to be an archive of tool-assisted speedruns that catalogues the fastest possible completion times for every game. Hence the Moon tier is set up to house movies that get to exist on the site because they are entertaining (and who cares what crazy goal choice those movies might have, as long as they're entertaining?), and all other movies go to the Vault.
That's what featured movies and newcomer recommendations are for: so that new people to the site get to see the better movies first. There's no reason that any movie we're willing to accept to the site should be hidden away in a dark corner with a sign warning people to turn back. If the stars and newcomer movies are not enough, people browsing are more likely to first view runs form games they know and love, and are thus more likely to be entertained by them.
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
This sure is a thread about discussing Vault runs that are good enough to become Moons.
Barring that, what is this forum's view on necroing threads?
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Necroing is preferred over starting new threads.
It annoys me to no end in other forums when someone would want to post something in the context of a previous (old) discussion, he will be berated for "necroposting" (which is a completely silly thing to complain about IMO.)
You shouldn't need a degree in computer science to get into this hobby.
Speaking of posting something in the context of a discussion, do you have any Vaulted movies you want to see moved to Moons?
