Joined: 3/25/2004
Posts: 459
I like to think scientifically, as I imagine many of the people on these boards do. What is perceived as faster is not interesting to me, you know, unless I was studying cognitive psychology. I choose to conceptualize the speed of a movie by the number of frames because it eliminates the problems of physical reality. Furthermore, I like to conceptualize a game as a mathematical system, rather than a device running within our universe. For example, in our universe, the world record for Mario can become 1 second, if by some bizarre chance the electrical equipment the game was running on misbehaved so as to load to end game sequence. By viewing the game as a mathematical system based on its source code, I can "solve" the game in a more meaningful way than just relying on quantum improbability. (And even though we may not be ever able to make the perfect movie, we can know there is a theoretical best time that cannot be beaten.) By choosing to measure speed by the number of frames, not only do I eliminate problems of human subjectivity and real-world physics, but I also maintain a consistency in viewing video games as idealized mathematical systems. Entertainment is an ancillary goal of the site. I think many of the people who participate here do so questioning the theoretical limits of the game. That question would have a boring answer if we are thinking about the universe outside of our heads, rather than the ones inside.
Senior Moderator
Joined: 8/4/2005
Posts: 5770
Location: Away
Ramzi wrote:
Entertainment is an ancillary goal of the site. I think many of the people who participate here do so questioning the theoretical limits of the game. That question would have a boring answer if we are thinking about the universe outside of our heads, rather than the ones inside.
Well, actually, you are perfectly proving my point with this quote, so I rest my case. :D
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.