I do think, however, that it's a bad thing the name TASVideos doesn't exactly speak for itself. What is "TAS"? A lot of people don't know this. A lot of people do know what a "NES" is, though, and will get the idea that these are indeed probably videos of games being played, even if it turns out there's more than just NES videos.
Someone said this is a good point. I disagree.
Does for example "youtube" tell to you "this is a site about funny videos" or does "google" tell you "this is an internet search engine"?
A name does not have to be descriptive in order to be known. "TASvideos" is actually more descriptive than many of the most known sites.
A name does not have to be descriptive in order to be known.
But it doesn't make it more known than, say, NESVideos. Although NESVideos in not generally descriptive concerning the site's content, but at least you know what to expect there: the NES videos. Most people know what "NES" is (or at least they can google for it), and the "videos" part is really self-descriptive. Now try to google "TAS" for example.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
I think now that it is changed it probably will not change back.
What about all the old movies that say visit bisqwit.iki.fi/nesvideos/ for more information?
My main beef with tasvideos.org is that TAS stands for tool assisted speedrun, and yet it's been said over and over again that the main goal of these movies isn't speed. However, you're directly contradicting yourself by giving the site a name which implies its contents will be speed oriented, when within the said site the rules say that speed is not the primary goal.
Unless TAS stands for something else, that is.
My main beef with tasvideos.org is that TAS stands for tool assisted speedrun, and yet it's been said over and over again that the main goal of these movies isn't speed. However, you're directly contradicting yourself by giving the site a name which implies its contents will be speed oriented, when within the said site the rules say that speed is not the primary goal.
Unless TAS stands for something else, that is.
That's a good argument.
My defence is that the movies are mostly speed-oriented, but do other things as well, and not all movies need to be speed-oriented.
Just like a video rent store may sell candies.
Joined: 11/22/2004
Posts: 1468
Location: Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Warp wrote:
Omega wrote:
I do think, however, that it's a bad thing the name TASVideos doesn't exactly speak for itself. What is "TAS"? A lot of people don't know this. A lot of people do know what a "NES" is, though, and will get the idea that these are indeed probably videos of games being played, even if it turns out there's more than just NES videos.
Someone said this is a good point. I disagree.
Does for example "youtube" tell to you "this is a site about funny videos" or does "google" tell you "this is an internet search engine"?
A name does not have to be descriptive in order to be known. "TASvideos" is actually more descriptive than many of the most known sites.
That's true.
There's a difference when you compare them to sites such as YouTube and Google, though. Ignoring their sizes for comparison purposes, the reasons why those names work very well is because of the way the sites are laid out. Even though you wouldn't think of those names as belonging to a video site and search engine, it becomes apparent after the first few seconds of looking at the sites.
Maybe this site needs a little bit of a front page redesign to make its purpose and positioning stand out a bit more.
Although I do still think that NESVideos is a bit more descriptive name than TASVideos (even if that description isn't entirely accurate, since we have more than just NES videos here), I do believe that a name such as TASVideos would work, as long as it's apparent after just taking a peek at the front page that this is a site about speedrunning.
My main beef with tasvideos.org is that TAS stands for tool assisted speedrun, and yet it's been said over and over again that the main goal of these movies isn't speed.
And it has been said over and over that that is pure bullshit.
Just read the freaking guidelines. It says "be quick", and that entire section gives guidelines on how to make the run as fast as possible. Also the main principle for movie obsoletion is, surprise surprise, *speed*: The lesser the frames in the movie, the better. When a movie obsoletes another movie by being 10 frames faster, what else could possibly be the main judging principle than speed?
From the 300+ movies published in the site how many can you point at where the main goal is not speed? The only ones I can think of are the various gradius videos, and that's only because they are fixed-speed scrollers (and even in them the goal in the boss fights is to kill them as fast as possible).
What is true is that we do not aim *only* to speed but *also* to entertainment. However, the latter is just a *secondary* objective. There haven't been many videos which have obsoleted another video by being more entertaining but slower (there might have been one or two cases that I faintly recall of, but that's all).
I think that you have a confusion about the expression "we don't want to compete with regular speedrunners, this is only for entertainment purposes" as if it meant something like "we don't aim for speed, only entertainment". It does not mean that.
My main beef with tasvideos.org is that TAS stands for tool assisted speedrun, and yet it's been said over and over again that the main goal of these movies isn't speed. However, you're directly contradicting yourself by giving the site a name which implies its contents will be speed oriented, when within the said site the rules say that speed is not the primary goal.
Unless TAS stands for something else, that is.
That's a good argument.
My defence is that the movies are mostly speed-oriented, but do other things as well, and not all movies need to be speed-oriented.
Just like a video rent store may sell candies.
Don't forget that S can stand for Superplay just as easily as it can stand for Speedrun
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
What is true is that we do not aim *only* to speed but *also* to entertainment. However, the latter is just a *secondary* objective. There haven't been many videos which have obsoleted another video by being more entertaining but slower (there might have been one or two cases that I faintly recall of, but that's all).
WhyAndHow // Goals section wrote:
Although most of our movies intend to play games as fast as possible (tool assisted speedruns, if you will), with respect to art, our main goal is to create movies that are beautiful to watch.
Not long ago, Diman submitted a Gradius movie that was faster than Morimoto's. "No, it's boring to watch, it's not entertainment!" Ok, whatever… We have numerous examples when faster but less entertaining movie obsoleted another well-executed, but more funny one. Do we have any slower, but more "beautiful to watch" movies that obsoleted their faster counterparts? At most, they are put in a separate category (doesn't use warps, doesn't aim for the fastest time, etc).
Now how contradictory is that? The fact that sometimes speed can greatly reduce the entertainment factor makes me think these goals should be reformed and rewrote significantly, if not completely, to denote the fact that we judge movies mainly by the factor of speed, because in their (goals') current state, they spawn numerous controversies pointed out by Dan_.
Bullshit? Maybe. The question is not whether it is bullshit, but where is it located, and what are the consequences.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Joined: 2/28/2006
Posts: 2275
Location: Milky Way -> Earth -> Brazil
This is the point:
NESvideos looks better, sounds better, and IS BETTER.
Besides that, everyone was used to it.
What seems to be irritating is the fact that the name change was decided by veteran users, because they think they don't need to ask the permission of anyone, because they're here for a long time and they are friends with the admin.
A mere POLL could solve this problem.
Thanks.
"Genuine self-esteem, however, consists not of causeless feelings, but of certain knowledge about yourself.
It rests on the conviction that you — by your choices, effort and actions — have made yourself into the
kind of person able to deal with reality. It is the conviction — based on the evidence of your own volitional
functioning — that you are fundamentally able to succeed in life and, therefore, are deserving of that success."
- Onkar Ghate
Bisqwit wrote:
Not long ago, Diman submitted a Gradius movie that was faster than Morimoto's. "No, it's boring to watch, it's not entertainment!"
Oh, sure, giving *one* example (on a fixed-speed scroller game) surely is enough to prove me wrong, yeah. It doesn't matter that several hundreds of movies have been obsoleted by faster entries and many submissions have even been rejected because of not being fast enough. "Hey, there's this *one* entry which was not obsoleted by a faster entry, thus we don't aim for speed." Sure.
Gradius is a rather clear exception to the rule. It's a fixed-speed scroller game where there is very little to optimize for speed and basically everything you *can* do is to show off. The aim for speed would be silly in this game.
At most, they are put in a separate category (doesn't use warps, doesn't aim for the fastest time, etc).
Now how contradictory is that?
There's nothing contradictory in having different types of runs: A run of the type "as fast as possible, whatever it takes to do it" and runs which have some constraints or additional goals to them for entertainment value (but still are as fast as possible to achieve those goals). Just look at all the different Quake done Quick speedruns: There are several different ones with different goals. For example there are runs on easy level and runs on the most difficult level. There are runs where anything goes and runs where the runner has to get 100% kills and secrets. There are runs where the runner is allowed to use only the axe as weapon. There's even a run which runs through the levels in reverse order. And so on.
However, and this is the important bit: Even with the constraints/goals, the main objective is still speed. The exact same thing goes with TAS videos.
The fact that sometimes speed can greatly reduce the entertainment factor
Can you give some examples where speed greatly reduces the entertainment factor?
And what is it that you want? Supermario fooling around, the objective being... what? Who dances the funniest? Superhuman speed is exactly what makes these movies awesome, and achieving extreme tool-assisted speed requires in most games a huge amount of work and dedication. Anyone can easily make a movie where the character fools around and does "funny" things, but not everyone can beat the best (tool-assisted) completion time for the game.
Ah, please don't tell me you are jealous. You would want to make videos yourself but you aren't able to beat people's times?
This is the point:
NESvideos looks better, sounds better, and IS BETTER.
Oh wow, an universal truth... or not.
TASvideos looks better, sounds better, and IS BETTER.
The truth is, I don't care either way. Both have their merits, but sticking with one of the alternatives is a thing which should be done sooner than later, otherwise it will just create confusion.
pirate_sephiroth wrote:
What seems to be irritating is the fact that the name change was decided by veteran users, because they think they don't need to ask the permission of anyone, because they're here for a long time and they are friends with the admin.
I don't see nothing wrong with this. It's his site, he can do whatever he wants with the name. Of course, it's it would be nice to run a poll about the name change, but I don't see it as strongly as you do. After all, a lot of other things have happened on this site without asking the userbase first.
And to the TAS discussion, it's actually True AirSpeed. ;)
[ ref http://www.google.com/search?q=define:TAS&defl=en ]
"Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home."
( Pratchett & Gaiman: Good Omens )
Joined: 2/28/2006
Posts: 2275
Location: Milky Way -> Earth -> Brazil
I know it's his thing and we can't do anything to undo the name change and that he can do whatever comes up to his head and that he rejects my reality and replaces it with his own and bla bla blabla bla bla, but a poll would avoid all this mess.
"Genuine self-esteem, however, consists not of causeless feelings, but of certain knowledge about yourself.
It rests on the conviction that you — by your choices, effort and actions — have made yourself into the
kind of person able to deal with reality. It is the conviction — based on the evidence of your own volitional
functioning — that you are fundamentally able to succeed in life and, therefore, are deserving of that success."
- Onkar Ghate
Bisqwit wrote:
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
Warp wrote:
What is true is that we do not aim *only* to speed but *also* to entertainment. However, the latter is just a *secondary* objective.
So you're saying that, if someone found a way to glitch SMB3 to go straight from startup to endgame sequence, it should obsolete the current run? We keep having this debate about time v entertainment, and the consensus always seems to be 'speed is a form of entertainment, and so we assume that if a movie is faster, it is probably more entertaining.' The problem with your argument is that 'TAS' means that all movies are focused entirely on speed. However, this site is not all speed inclusive, and so to accept 'TAS' as a term for these movies would call for the instant rejection of all non-fastest movies.
Also, for the record, there have been a lot of movies that have been rejected despite being faster. IIRC, Atlantis No Nazo can be beaten by one frame, as many have shown, and yet we haven't accepted it because it adds nothing to the entertainment value of the run. As soon as one faster movie is rejected due to being less entertaining, it sets a precedent that refutes the term 'TAS'. So long as one movie is not as optimal as possible, or so long as a faster movie can not obsolete a slower movie, then the term speedrun is not universal, and therefore should not be applied to these runs.
So nyeh.
Joined: 11/22/2004
Posts: 1468
Location: Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Warp wrote:
What is true is that we do not aim *only* to speed but *also* to entertainment. However, the latter is just a *secondary* objective.
This is a technicality, but isn't it so that entertainment is the primary goal while low completion times are the primary means of achieving this goal? Afterall, speed is very entertaining.
Zurreco wrote:
So you're saying that, if someone found a way to glitch SMB3 to go straight from startup to endgame sequence, it should obsolete the current run?
In this case, it would exist alongside the old run, of course.
