Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
CasualPokePlayer wrote:
I did notice one minor thing however. You seem to go to the backpack at the level fadeouts. Sometimes this seems to be for picking an item while the fadeout goes on, but other times it seems to be a case of lag reduction. I've noticed that for the lag reduction (and assuming you aren't picking an item) the Pause menu can be substituted, which could have less lag. However, the gain is very minor and likely outright negated due later lag being thrown off. Not really worthy of rejection, but perhaps something to keep an eye on in case you want to squeeze just a little more timesave in.
Nice find! But yeah it'd require going through the entire movie again, so it can wait for a new iteration indeed.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
ikuyo wrote:
For a PC game, can a settings file be provided for an option that is permanently set on first startup, not modifiable from within the game, and not tied to save data?
Iconoclasts has a flag in its data directory called settings, which contains a flag to know if this is the first time you've opened the game. This is used to allow players to skip an intro cutscene before the title screen that is unskippable otherwise, guaranteeing that the player will see it during their first time booting the game. Once the player has selected New Game, and enters a game, this flag is permanently set. Since iconoclasts uses manual saving otherwise, you don't need to save your new game at all (you can essentially close the game right away and generate no save data while still keeping the first_time flag).
Some systems, such as DOS, expose separate parts of the operating system and/or the game to the user. You are not allowed to manipulate these files except as is normally necessary to play the game, such as "installing" it.
[...]
That means no renaming/copying/deleting/replacing/editing files that affect gameplay. However, editing environment settings or utilizing standard third-party tools in order to get a game to load is allowed as long as the game runs as it's supposed to.
We allow applying cosmetic tweaks via in-game options in PC games, but otherwise it should look like it's the first time you're launching the game, because:
The movie must play the game from the beginning wrote:
Giving yourself a headstart is not allowed. The game must start from a common starting point, which is the very beginning.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
R30hedron wrote:
1) Would having credits play out like this be a valid speed/entertainment tradeoff? Or would it be best to skip all cutscenes to save the 45 seconds? (I’m not concerned about Moons/Vault tiering, since I’m working off of the assumption that the end TAS will be entertaining enough to warrant a speed/entertainment tradeoff like this, but I’d be fine if that assumption is wrong.)
Speed/entertainment trade-offs aren't banned from Vault (as long as you don't go out of your way too much). I think people usually prefer seeing credits if it's an option. But if you opt to skip them as well as all other cutscenes, the game still reaches the proper ending, so it's not a problem.
R30hedron wrote:
2) What would count as the final input for TAS timing for a Fresh File TAS? The moment we kill the King? or do we default to entering the fountain as the final input as we would for an RTA run? Can we count the movement after the credits as “post-completion input”? The relevant portion of the rules suggests that “Extra input does not change the resulting ending”, which is true, but it also suggests that “Extra input is trivial to execute for anyone replaying the movie”. Is holding B to leave the credits, holding right, pressing A once, and pressing R1 to enter the fountain sufficiently trivial?
Doing stuff after credits is indeed post-completion input. The rule says "We always prefer full movies" so it won't be counted against your record in any situation. I personally think completeness and less hassle is better than aiming for digits for the sake of it, especially when the actual ending doesn't happen sooner to reflect those digits.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
I made an encode without cutscenes (using WRAM address 0x12f9). Please verify that I didn't screw it up.
Link to video
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
Can you jump to the second floor directly here, like the nicovideo TAS does it?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
Samsara wrote:
How do we look at games more objectively, then? This is something that's going to take some community discussion to really iron out, but we've started coming up with a potential new system that should greatly expand Vault in a satisfying way, allowing for more runs to be accepted without opening the doors wide enough to accept absolutely everything: Instead of strictly only allowing fastest and full completions in Vault, we would allow any objective goal for a game. By objective goal, we mean "something that is defined or limited by the game itself".
Here are some big examples, but definitely not EVERY example:
Pure fastest completion (GEG, ACE, etc)
Warps (or fastest "intended" completion)
Warpless/All levels (warps are an intended shortcut so not using them counts as an objective goal)
100% (assuming it can be defined objectively)
Score attack (an objective goal with room for improvement in the same vein as fastest completion)
And here's a list of smaller things that are more dependent on the game, but still objective:
Gameplay modes (including things like New Game +)
Number of players
Character choices
In-game defined goals (i.e, achievements, things that reward the player with content)
How would we handle usage versus avoidance of major skip glitch? Avoiding it is not an in-game option, yet it feels natural to allow it. And some major skip glitches wouldn't fit Moons if we consider them non-objective goals.
Years ago I've had an idea of just keeping all MSGs in the Demo tier. Since they are very obviously some kind of tech porn that takes an expert to create and understand its value.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
MESHUGGAH wrote:
- Tool-assisted speedrunning covers many scientific topics as well as an ever increasing materials that can not be fit inside the tasvideos Wiki.
You can still put them on wiki in your personal subpages. If it ends up getting organized well, we could even move it toplevel.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
slamo wrote:
I think the platform for this game should be Windows. While this version of ScummVM runs under Linux, it's just a replacement for the SCUMM engine and should be treated like any emulator: if the game runs authentically with the original Windows game data files, then it should be considered acceptable and should be classified as a game under the original platform. This game also never had an official Linux release, so that might be confusing to viewers looking for this game.
I agree that since it's not a Linux game, but an extra layer that makes this game run on Linux, it shouldn't be labeled as a Linux game.
Since ScummVM is not a rerecording framework either, I wouldn't want it to become an entirely new system at tasvideos like DOOM became, alongside NES, DOS, Windows, and others.
Yet since ScummVM introduces some unofficial tweaks to the game, we can't leave it out entirely. Probably the best option is to put it into the game version field. If the original version gets TASed via Wine or PCem, we'll just drop ScummVM from the version.
As a result, I think this movie should be called Windows Backyard Baseball (ScummVM) "6 Inning Pick Up Game" in 04:45.05 by TiKevin83.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
dwangoAC wrote:
- I like having a system where anyone can upload anything in any category for any game similar to speedrun.com. I'd obviously prefer a few changes compared to how speedrun.com handles things
What would you change?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
libTAS 1.4.2 has been released!
Lua support was added, and input editor was improved. See the full changelog.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
arkiandruski wrote:
I think the plan is to use new names.
Records and Art?
arkiandruski wrote:
I just had a thought. Maybe the "external goals" tier should be judged not necessarily on entertainment so much as whether it provides an interesting experience distinct from the standard branches. I think anything that associates it with the "entertaining tier" goes against the goal of this proposed change.
Yeah there could be many meanings behind "this make sense, I want it to be published", and ideally, we'd list whatever makes sense for us as a community in guidelines for those "not-Moons-anymore".
CoolHandMike wrote:
What exactly does the term Demonstration mean in this context anyway? To me the term demo kind of imparts a meaning of something shown as a proof of concept that may not necessarily be the full featured product. Would a demo have to be a full complete playthrough? Would it even have to be optimized?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
I tried it a few years ago and indeed it's a fever dream. Wii's FlashPlayer is very old, screen resolution is fixed, and you can't load files from local storage, only from online. Which means you start depending on something completely unpredictable.
We have a thread about Flash in Gnash in libTAS, and it worked fine in Bionic. Newer Ubuntu breaks deps, but you shouldn't have problems installing older releases.
FlashPlayer support in libTAS is also being worked on.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
TiKevin83 wrote:
I think this majorly improves some pain points around pretentiousness of the tiers and over-focus on entertainment/audience feedback in the initial response to new submissions for established speedrun categories. It still fails to elegantly handle games with lots of different game end glitch/ACE entry points, where game researchers tend to enjoy optimizing and looking for all these different attack vectors to exploit a game but none of them qualify for publication. I could run through all the examples for Pokemon but one that wouldn't fit in the current description is unintended warps vs ace, eg Legend of Zelda "defeat Ganon" vs "SRM" game end glitch. The way the big examples are described right now leaves out that big chunk of glitched but no ACE type movies which I imagine are intended to still be an allowable category, but I would really like some way also to appreciate movies when there are vastly different glitches from a technical perspective that all satisfy the same branch rules like ACE or no ACE/unintended warps.
Turn Moons into a flag. Assign it to all external goals/player imposed restrictions/concepts that don't explicitly and officially exist in the game. Require them to meet acceptability reasons based on entertainment. As long as a side goal branch meets them, accept. Obsolete a different branch if needed.
If we're not sure whether we want it or not, reject.
If it contradicts some guidelines but we agree that we need it to be an exception because it's so impressive, accept. Probably that's when the Demo flag should come in.
It still fails to elegantly handle games with lots of different game end glitch/ACE entry points, where game researchers tend to enjoy optimizing and looking for all these different attack vectors to exploit a game but none of them qualify for publication.
It doesn't "fail" at it because brainstorming means people with ideas on how to fix something gracefully, should share those ideas even if they sound stupid or opportunistic. If you have some neat solution in mind on how we can accept what is worth accepting ("makes sense", which will probably be our main phrase with this new system), while also resisting against things that are not worth accepting ("doesn't make sense"), please post it!
Samsara wrote:
I do feel there's another discussion to be had about expanding the site in some other way to give more attention to these kinds of TASes without publication, some sort of ascended Userfiles system maybe
Agreed.
InputEvelution wrote:
Doesn't making Moons a category for "the good movies" only continue the problem of Vault being perceived as a bad classification, which is part of what the proposed changes are trying to deal with?
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
Thanks! I'll uncancel it once a movie with annotations is provided.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
Pokota wrote:
Would movies in the Gruefood Delight be re-evaluated if and when the changes are implemented?
Unrejections always happen when the rules significantly change.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
DrD2k9 wrote:
Won't whether or not a movie is published still ultimately be determined by the judge (even if allowing for more flexibility based on viewer feedback from the forum/poll)?
Sure.
DrD2k9 wrote:
I like your idea of condensing all 3 current polls (workbench yes/no/meh, post publication entertainment rating, and post publication tech rating) into a single rating. However, given that "Should this be Published?" doesn't really ask for a rating that fits on a variable scale; perhaps we could instead present viewers of workbench movies with a simple poll that just asks to "Rate This Movie" on the 0-10 rating scale?
Regardless of the poll question another consideration from a rating standpoint would be a 1-5 scale as that is another format many (if not most) users would be familiar with for rating things.
Maybe there's a better way to word the poll question. The main thing is it should be a unified thing.
For example, I got an idea about assigning meaning to entertainment based rating options:
0 - watching this makes me suffer
[...]
10 - this is one of my favorite movies on the site
Though this wouldn't address what record value the audience sees in an objective/internal goal/record movie. I think if we agree on principle, wording can be figured out later, so we don't cook a hare before catching him.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
Bigbass wrote:
So say there was an any% submission, that was acceptable and had feedback that showed it was a very enjoyable movie, would there be any flags available to recognize that it had high entertainment value?
Since entertainment is also a scale, there's no sensible borderline for "okay now we certainly need to add this flag". What we do with this info in terms of site code depends on what the viewer wants with relation to this info.
Bigbass wrote:
Wait, I think I'm a bit lost, which independent concepts are you referring to?
Internal goals that the games explicitly represent/track and player imposed restrictions that don't relate to in-game concepts. I linked the text from Publisher Guidelines that describes this.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
Regarding per-game rules.
We already have game based navigation, it's just not fully developed yet. There could be a tab that contains rules relevant to a specific game, and tags that describe which guidelines they are based on. And then there'd be a page listing those guidelines with a way to list all the relevant games/movies. Technically similar to the current movie class system. That would make it easy to find precedents and catalog judgment reasons better.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
Bigbass wrote:
Is #1 saying that categories like any% wouldn't have any chance of having the Moons flag?
Since it wouldn't be tiers anymore, but 2 independent concepts, there's no negative connotations in "not having player imposed goals".
Bigbass wrote:
feos wrote:
4. Turn submission polls into a 0-10 scale
5. Change the poll question back to "Should this be published?"
I like the idea of #4, but does a scale really fit the question "Should this be published?" As in, would people be likely to primarily use 0 and 10 in place of no and yes? Additionally, if these results were to carry over as publication ratings, does that question also fit with what ratings are supposed to represent?
Perhaps more importantly, would judges prefer having a "Should this be published?" metric or an entertainment/enjoyment metric (like we have now, but as a scale)?
I forgot to mention that I also want technical an entertainment rating to be combined somehow, so it's one scale for submissions and a similar scale for publications, not 3 scales (submission's yes/no/meh, publication's technical 0-10, publication's entertainment 0-10).
The scale would represent how strongly you feel in either direction. For low entertainment games, the poll is almost irrelevant, and there's little to no feedback needed to determine if we want another record branch, because it's not allowed at all. If we want branch limit for records to be less strict, we need viewers' opinions, and we need a poll to represent them better.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
Since I constantly ponder important tasvideos related puzzles offline, here's the system proposal I just came up with.
Turn Moons into a flag. Assign it to all external goals/player imposed restrictions/concepts that don't explicitly and officially exist in the game. Require them to meet acceptability reasons based on entertainment. As long as a side goal branch meets them, accept. Obsolete a different branch if needed.
If we're not sure whether we want it or not, reject.
If it contradicts some guidelines but we agree that we need it to be an exception because it's so impressive, accept. Probably that's when the Demo flag should come in.
Remove Vault as a tier with an icon, and turn it into a default movie collection. Movies without player imposed restrictions go there. Keep accepting new branches until rejectability reasons based on record value are met. Obsolete a different branch if needed.
If we agree that this is too many branches now, reject.
Turn Stars into a flag and assign it based on some automated rules. We have a concept of franchises in the code, so it can be arranged.
Turn submission polls into a 0-10 scale and carry over poll results to publications. That way the crowd that votes on submissions is no longer completely different from the crowd that rates publications.
Change the poll question back to "Should this be published?" and treat poll results according to presence of external goals, which is finally a clear borderline.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
Playaround can't go to Vault.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
We learned about it from the manual.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
The concept of "objective goal" is actually already used on the site, in branch labeling.
Publisher Guidelines wrote:
The point of branches is to highlight specific goals that runs may conform to. These goals are highlighted, because they introduce gameplay differences into TASes that are significant enough to be published as separate branches. Two kinds of goals exist:
Internal condition - something the game directly and unambiguously offers as an optional component of play which significantly affects what is seen from the game (warp usage, player amount, character choice).
External condition - something the players limit themselves to (exact completion percent, pacifist, certain glitch set).
In this post by Warp, those 2 concepts are called "goals" and "restrictions".
The proposal I had in mind is that we have more branches allowed for Vault (or whatever it ends up becoming) based on objective/internal goals, and then all the subjective/external restrictions intended for Moons would need to be entertaining to be published.
The good thing about objective/internal goals is that they have objective limit for every game. It's not like allowing them all would automatically mean that we need to accept infinite amount of arbitrarily esoteric branches.
Sure the number could be really high if there's a variety of options and their types, which leads to insanely high number of all possible permutations for compound goals. For example, all characters and their combinations for 1P, 2P, 3P, 4P, warps, warpless, hard, normal, easy, etc - that would be crazy to allow it all.
Yet, as long as it's not limited to just "fastest combination of all options" (the thing we call any%), it may become a nightmare to determine the borderline of acceptability. The borderline when "now it's actually too many branches".
"Too restrictive" is what we have now. It's painful to handle in way too many situations, and limits TASers in creativity. It depends on whatever the current judges agreed about, which may change over time and with different judges.
"Too loose" on the other hand results in indefinite amount of branches, even if it's tied to something objective. It may disappoint people because they feel it doesn't "make sense" to publish that many.
So maybe instead of defining hard rules for fine borderlines, we should instead come up with generalized guidelines for blurred borderlines? After all, the actual borderline between clear record and entertaining side goal is never this
but something closer to this
For the extremes, if it's a super clear record, we don't need it to be entertaining (game end glitch), and if it's super entertaining, we don't care about its record value (playarounds). But in the middle, there's some overlap of uncertainty (dunno how to draw it), when we're not sure about acceptace on either ground. And those are the worst to deal with. Which kinda means, if we invent a way to handle this middle ground gracefully, the system will be more satisfying and robust.
Indeed it looks like we just want to go back to pre-tier system, because those aren't even layers anymore, just 2 separate entities that sometimes have overlap. But what we need to adjust compared to old TASVideos is lowering the entertainment cutoff and increasing the branch count cap.
This is probably a nice reason to try switching from global and absolute rules to per-game rules? Per-game rules decided by judges and the TASers and the audience? Per-game rules that would reflect what makes sense for a given game?
At this point it's obvious that we can't come up with rules that work for all games. I've been doing this for years, together with admins and judges, and there's some progress. But it's at the cost of Movie Rules constantly expanding, making it impossible to remember them all for judges and to comprehend them all for TASers. And it gets gradually harder to adjust, because by becoming more complex, the system becomes more fragile. More aspects have to be considered every time, more mental resources are required to wrap your head around it. And finding the right balance between technicality and entertainment also becomes more difficult as fundamentally new situations pop up. And we can never be sure we have enough outlook and expertise to handle everything in a future-proof way.
So I'm starting to think that asking ourselves "What should be fine to accept?" is a question impossible to answer in a satisfiable way. And making rules out of it won't ever be an enjoyable endeavor.
Coming up with generalized guidelines based on "What we all agree we should keep rejecting?" is a much more helpful solution, that could then be applied on a per-game basis depending on what a given game has to offer.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11304
Location: RU
CasualPokePlayer wrote:
I did some work studying the RNG of this game and how it affected the pipe room wait.
[...]
tl;dr the shortest wait possible is 2617, which this TAS happens to get. It is not possible to my knowledge to shorten the wait.
Awesome job!
CasualPokePlayer wrote:
I am curious if anyone else feels positive towards this movie, or the reasons otherwise, and if it should belong in the Vault like the currently published movie.
I wasn't entertained, because platforming is slow paced and feels basic. There's nothing surprising in it if you just watch. Voted No.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
but something closer to this
For the extremes, if it's a super clear record, we don't need it to be entertaining (game end glitch), and if it's super entertaining, we don't care about its record value (playarounds). But in the middle, there's some overlap of uncertainty (dunno how to draw it), when we're not sure about acceptace on either ground. And those are the worst to deal with. Which kinda means, if we invent a way to handle this middle ground gracefully, the system will be more satisfying and robust.