About the run: at what point is a run so easy to optimize that it no longer becomes impressive to watch? Honestly, if you know all the questions ahead of time, it takes little to no effort to make a run that beats the game as fast as possible.

At what point do you reject every run, because it comes down to knowing the levels' layout beforehand (in platformers) or know exactly which way to powerup characters (in RPGs)?

The big difference is adaptation. You'll see this on the front page:

These are movies of classic console games being played extraordinarily, using an emulator as a tool to overcome human limitations such as skill and reflex.

I just don't see a huge use of super skill and super reflexes when you can predict everything precisely. Other games are heralded as great works because they have to employ some sort of superhuman "skill" (read: not skill per se, but some sort of handling of the situations at hand) and reflex; both of which come to pass in situations where the player must adapt to the scenario. Just because I know what 1-1 looks like in SMB doesn't mean that I'll be able to match a published run's time without a lot of tinkering and adaptation (assuming I don't copy published runs, that is). On the other hand, I don't think that someone would have such a hard time matching the completion time for this run. See my point now? Also, just because you plan ahead doesn't somehow detract from the effort you put forth in to a run. Planning how you are going to power up in an RPG takes a lot more effort than just rushing the game and throwing points around on the fly. I find the comparison of knowing a platformer's level design and planning an RPG's stat spread to be very flawed. e:

Short summary of an often made post by me: While I believe that speed is important, entertainment matters too. Unfortunately, most people here seem to believe that getting the time that appears next to your submission is the ultimate goal.

I don't want to get in to the whole "is speed a derivative of entertainment or whatnot" debate that this site gets in to every 5 months, but I will say this: most people don't care about time completion if the game is boring: they will reject it. Concordantly, most people will let completion times be non-optimized if entertaining things go down: gained entertainment can and usually will undo lost time. The whole idea that people aim for speed along with entertainment is because there is an ethos that doing things faster is entertaining in and of itself.

...and because the site would be impossible to maintain if all movies just aimed for entertainment. The runs need to be easily comparable to make the judging possible. See, for example, River City Ransom. It has created a problem because it aims for entertainment over speed, and no one has been able to obsolete it despite numerous attempts. Entertainment is just too subjective to be practical.

Yes, but the relevant question here is if the speedrun is entertaining enough to merit a publication. I love gameshows with obscure trivia questions, so this is great. It's like, UBER GENIUS FTW!

The movie is quite well done. PUblish it!

Butter. Lots of butter. (Screenshot of butter)

$0. What a useless run. The point of TASing games like this is to get the highest score possible in the shortest amount of time.

Yes, but the relevant question here is if the speedrun is entertaining enough to merit a publication.

Actually... the question is "Did you like watching this movie?" not "Do you think this should be published?". There's a noticeable difference between the two. Besides, it is pitch dark. This movie is likely to be eaten by a grue. Seriously though, your way of thinking confuses me. Chamale are you okay? Are you okay Chamale?

Chalame, You're right. That's probably why this submission received such a great response. Sarcastically, Jixie

om, nom, nom... blech, stale!

haha, aww, all the new submission accomplished is get the older one grued.