I think a no-vote category where publishing is decided solely on number of frames could create interesting competition.

IMO, this isn't a good idea...if there's no voting, just framecounts, there's the potential to get sloppy runs that are quick only because of new glitches being found and exploited, or a good route through the game.

I think a no-vote category where publishing is decided solely on number of frames could create interesting competition. There could even be some "top 5 fastest times" or whatever, with the fastest one being published, the rest mentioned.

Actually, I mostly referred to the initial (first-generation) submissions. Obviously, once such a movie has been accepted, it's pointless to judge/vote on the subsequent improvements, but I still think that the initial submissions should be treated with caution to minimize the amount of publications for Front Line-type of games or just poorly made movies. Introducing thresholds may help against sneak improvements, though… Not sure if complicating things is better by itself, perhaps someone could suggest something better than "for movies over 5 minutes long, don't submit improvements less than 0.02% of the precedent movie's length".

IMO, this isn't a good idea...if there's no voting, just framecounts, there's the potential to get sloppy runs that are quick only because of new glitches being found and exploited, or a good route through the game.

The cynicist in me would answer to that: And how is that situation any different from the current situation? ;)

Fantastic. Was laughing through the whole run.

I've been lurking the TASvideos site for a while now (maybe a little under a year?) but this video is what made me decide to register in order to state: I approve of this Tool Assisted Silliness. In all honesty, inhuman acts of perfection get old after a while. I've more often been entertained by abuse of game glitches or mechanics in order to tighten up other TAS videos, and this is a fantastic example of glitch/gameplay showcasing that I REALLY enjoyed. I don't know if such glitch/gameplay showcasing is strictly appropriate for tool-assisted gaming (aside from glitches requiring frame precision, at least), but I certainly enjoyed it immensely. More videos of this sort, or (in my fantasies) a sister site or category for goofing around and showing off glitches and gameplay oddities would be immensely appreciated. Thanks for the laughs, adelikat and JXQ!

In all honesty, inhuman acts of perfection get old after a while. I've more often been entertained by abuse of game glitches or mechanics in order to tighten up other TAS videos, and this is a fantastic example of glitch/gameplay showcasing that I REALLY enjoyed. I don't know if such glitch/gameplay showcasing is strictly appropriate for tool-assisted gaming (aside from glitches requiring frame precision, at least), but I certainly enjoyed it immensely. More videos of this sort, or (in my fantasies) a sister site or category for goofing around and showing off glitches and gameplay oddities would be immensely appreciated.

There's only one difficulty: Where to draw the line? If this run had been 1 hour long, would you have approved it? I think many wouldn't. So where is the line of acceptable timewasting?

If this run had been 1 hour long, would you have approved it? I think many wouldn't. So where is the line of acceptable timewasting?

Where the proportion of yes votes becomes unacceptably low.

Then why have rules at all? The only rule needed is: "Submit anything you like and if enough people vote yes, it might be published." It would make the rules page quite shorter.

Then why have rules at all? The only rule needed is: "Submit anything you like and if enough people vote yes, it might be published." It would make the rules page quite shorter.

I don't know. Seriously- I've rewritten this post nine times, and I can't come up with a sensible answer to that question of why rules are explicitly necessary when we are able to discern the interesting, artful movies from the gruefood. I'd be interested to see what Bisqwit has to say about it, but I don't want to put him on the spot.

Where to draw the line?

That's part of why I suggested a separate category for plays with major time-for-entertainment tradeoffs (and actually glancing at previous discussion here it seems to be under consideration anyway - whoops): as Bisqwit mentioned in the publishment acceptance comment, it's very difficult to be objective when "entertainment value" is the only real standard, making strict judgment for public publishing purposes is an open invitation to ugly drama and politics. Different people will have different standards, expectations, and even preference in entertainment, so there really aren't any hard and fast rules about what would be publish-worthy and what wouldn't. I'd be tempted to suggest setting it up as a less structured "here's a place to share screwaround TAS runs, we'll make a .avi for ones that get a lot of public support and the judges like," but that feels somewhat contrary to the professional tone of the site and leaves me a bit nervous about it causing more trouble further down the line. (Though I admit, I haven't really followed the community, so I may not be the best judge of this...) Splitting it off into a "sister site" with that more casual air may get around that, as long as the respective admins/site owners don't have ways to get on one another's nerves too much. But I'm a complete newbie to office politics, so that may just be my fantasies speaking.

where is the line of acceptable timewasting?

Again, this is mostly a personal preference, but I'm inclined to think that taking more than a minute or two (maaaaaybe stretch to 3-5 in very slow games or while showcasing a LOT of glitches with item you'll never encounter again) is where goofing off without moving the game forward tends to get tiresome. Even that may be too long if the goofy actions aren't kept fresh, and hesitating to set something up without a good reason is very very bad. Taking unusual or impossible paths at the cost of time is fine (see: trashcan pit toss), but the speed should at least come close to expert "real" play without any embarrassing slip-ups and proper abuse of frame advance when the 'mistake' isn't a fresh piece of amusement. Avoiding uninteresting backtracking through glitches or suicide (as used in this video) is also wise, and may actually make opportunities for entertaining "one-sided-against-the-player" RNG abuse in RPGs and the like. But, I think I'm on a rather forgiving end of the spectrum as far as professionalism of entertainment runs goes; I wouldn't really object if TAS-quality speed outside of entertainment segments remained the standard. Not that I'd have any place to object anyway, but, y'know.

That's part of why I suggested a separate category for plays with major time-for-entertainment tradeoffs

I agree. If publishing non-speed videos becomes commonplace, they should definitely be clearly separated from the speed-oriented videos, for clarity.

I think you ppl have WAAAY too much time in your hands. Stop talking nonsense and do more TASes that are fun for yourself. You can't please everybody.

HD encode Link to video