Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Memory wrote:
One thing that hasn't really been brought up as far as I know is that just because the minimum amount of effort to create an optimal submission is considered low, that doesn't mean it is the maximum amount of effort one could put in. Take the recent Zool run. The author put additional effort into ensuring that the time was as fast as possible, even botting it. It just so happened that that was all there was left.
If people did like proper analysis of these so called "trivial" games, they might find something new. They might not. But I think there's value and meaning in that for sure.
Research has been put into that movie because the game was already complex enough to be considered non-trivial, so once again, it successfully encouraged competition, which in turn led to those crazy results. I don't understand reasons not to appreciate competition for leading to all the improvements that people keep finding. Of course our whole take on competition is special, as we encourage team work, openness, sharing techniques and developments. But since no movie is absolutely perfect, there's always room for an educated, instrumented "doubt". And since you never know if you'll even find those improvements, finding them also becomes a game on its own!
And yes, if we considered a game trivial, and then someone found a way to make TASing it challenging again, it becomes acceptable, as the rule says.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Challenger wrote:
Also, how TMNT 4: Turtles in Time TAS is going? Your last wip posted was 3 years ago.
I'm curious too.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Last race is also good. The weak spot of your previous TG2 movies was the start-up, where I easily optimized gear shifts and gained speed sooner, but here it finally looks optimal. The questionable turn where you drive on the grass is necessary not to crash later. Nitro usage I didn't test, because it would be a part of a full-blown new TAS attempt, since it's probably the hardest part of routing.
If no one feels like testing other levels for a week, I'd consider this worth submitting.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Builds from 5.0-11231 until 5.0-13180 have audio/video desync in AVI dumps, first frame will be missing. If the first frame repeats, all its duplicates will also be missing. It can't be fixed on user end. Use older or newer versions.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Memory wrote:
My view is partially derived from a distaste of certain biases in regards to sports games, some of them codified into the rules. They are treated as same-y simply due to sharing the same basic rules as the sports they are derived from. From a technical perspective they can be quite different from each other. It seems weird to me to apply this standard to sports games and not other similar games. In a way, isn't the goal of many platformers to head right? What about Tetris variants? It's just odd to me to single out sports games.
I don't think it's random bias, but rather a concern that similar sports games provide similar TAS technicality and similar viewer experience, much like versions of the same game that are too similar to have as branches.
I've read the discussion that led to this rule, and it doesn't look like there can be an easy borderline that everyone could fully agree on, or a clear comprehensible solution that everyone would love. Games vary in how different they can be, for a human and for a TAS, so we just need to understand the spirit of the rule, and it'd be easier to apply.
Mothrayas wrote:
Which game obsoletes which is decided by which game makes a more technically impressive run. - This is certainly arguable, I suppose. I wrote it like this to make it still sound in line with the Vault mentality (tech over entertainment, trying to be reasonably objective), as "whichever game is better" is a very subjective as well as vague question.
I think technicality can be compared by whether or not the same TAS techniques are required for both games, or one allows to showcase some unique aspects. From having tested both 1-on-1's, technicality looks very similar.
Again, it's obvious here that the rules of those games aren't identical, but I still feel there's way too much similarity between them, as explained. Lumping them together may not feel perfect, but if we need to find a clear cut, it's in how this rule's intention compares to intentions of similar rules.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Post the movie and the savestate.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Developing honest internal interest and finally deciding to jump in feet first is not the same as getting poked and bluntly asked. Let people speak up for themselves.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Judging is an elaborate job. It requires doing research in order to check if the movie is optimal, legitimate, and entertaining. It involves helping people develop TAS skills and encouraging them to contribute more, and on a higher level. It's a responsibility of being fair and open while deciding what content should represent the site.
To cover all these aspects, a judge needs to take their time and assess everything that's relevant to a given movie. And to handle this qualitatively, one needs to be sure that fellow judges are taking on other movies in the workbench, and no one is under heavy stress. It's always better to judge less movies with more care (and then recreate if needed), than to have many in your queue, trying to deliver decisions sooner and slowly burning out.
So to help our judges stay more relaxed and focused, I'm calling for new judges!
Here are the role requirements:
http://tasvideos.org/Roles.html#Judge
As my signature says, if you deal with the Movie Rules and try to apply them, you're taking your TASing to a new level. And to do that, you should be able to understand the rules and the principles behind them, judging not only by the letter, but also by the spirit of the law. But don't worry, every time you're not sure about something, you can always ask me and other judges. It's my duty to provide sensible explanations and to help you make a proper decision.
If you have at least a few hundred player points and at least a few movies published, if you're around on the workbench forum and chats, discussing submissions and WIPs, and you would like to take this hobby to the new level described above, please send me a private message on forum, and we'll discuss 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: 11287
Location: RU
Warp wrote:
CoolHandMike wrote:
Having a lot of low quality and not entertaining published runs would diminish the overall worth of the site. Is there something wrong with userfiles? Even they get a place on the front page and can act as a library for tases.
How many submissions do you expect to see of TASes for games that are not trivial to speedrun by a human but have a completely trivial TAS?
Since that was the answer that I've given before, and it now got questioned further, here's what I can reply with.
We shouldn't base our rules on hope that there won't be many such movies, because it's subjective and based on lack of knowledge ("we don't know exactly how many such games are out there, so we presume only few"). If low-effort movies are allowed, it automatically means they are encouraged, because people tend to prefer low-effort work if the outcome is the same.
Now the borderline is high, and people try to work on something good. If the borderline goes lower, in addition to games that fit the suggested rule, people would also submit trivial games that are even simpler than expected, and figuring out the new borderline will take a while. People would be testing "how low you can go", potentially having fights hoping to allow even more trivial games just because they feel the site should blindly be a record database for everything.
Currently I can't say we see serious demand in this area, with lots of TASers sending simplistic games and getting upset over rejections, making this a trend, implying that the rules aren't thorough enough. But in this thread I only see some people expressing feelings, and no one posting convincing reasons pro that rule change. Feels obscure.
It's meaningful because it gives an interesting piece of information: How fast can the game be completed theoretically, assuming perfect play?
Perfect play isn't how we measure movie quality. If you easily achieve perfect time in a trivial game, it's of the same quality as playing SMB in a sloppy, lazy way. I can't consider lazy play a meaningful record that you need TAS tools and skills for.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Level 1 looks good, without changing nitro I optimized the start-up a bit, but didn't get any time gain overall. Checking last level...
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.
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: 11287
Location: RU
I'm doing exactly the same thing with aspect ratio as mame itself! Indeed most arcade games were meant for CRT TVs, and some of them used things like vertical orientation or multiple screens. I account for all that.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Set 1:1 pixel size in config - display - aspect ratio.
About missing roms, does it run in mame 0.220?
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: 11287
Location: RU
Having tried test-tasing both games, I don't think either is trivial, and both require the same approach: keep adjusting simple actions in time in order to align them for perfect overall manipulation, while randomness is constantly fighting back, swallowing your improvements. The number of available actions is low, but here it's higher per level than in the other version, so it's just A LOT of simple adjustments. Very dumb and tedious, but there is some TAS challenge to it.
Due to more variety, both visible and internal, I still prefer this version.
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: 11287
Location: RU
This game is indeed similar in TAS to its other version, but it feels much more annoying. In addition to random enemy behavior (and randomly failing to grab the ball), it also has random delays, and not a lot of room to manipulate it, because each level consists of just one round (or whatever it's called).
Here's a movie where I reach the third enemy some frames sooner, but grabbing the ball just stopped working: http://tasvideos.org/userfiles/info/63205307056897331
I tried delaying some prior actions but that resulted in being slower than this submission, in various ways.
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.
If you want to get your WIPs reviewed, post them in threads for games you're TASing and ask for feedback. If people acknowledge that they can't beat your times, only then consider it worth submitting. It's basically how most of the TASers take this hobby: they submit only when there's no feasible improvements to think of.
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: 11287
Location: RU
Weird strat in first level.
https://i.imgur.com/k2oP0M1.png
This game is somewhat simplistic in a TAS, but definitely not trivial. Throwing farther takes time, horizontal aiming takes time, enemies are random, and after one has been improved, the next one may refuse to co-operate. You can manipulate them by delaying your action, so that also takes time. I won 57 frames after shota and then was only 37 (iirc) frames ahead after monkey.
http://tasvideos.org/userfiles/info/63188588720498157
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: 11287
Location: RU
And what's the question?
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: 11287
Location: RU
Maybe if you read more than a single sentence you'll find out that these questions have already been answered?
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: 11287
Location: RU
It was very hard but I watched it all. At first it felt like a nice game, but I lost interest after the first 10 minutes. That's when I had time to realize that the music is dull and repetitive, the character is disturbing (why does his head look like a hand?), the levels are huge, and carrying those items around feels like a waste of time. If this all was packed in 10 minutes, I'd most likely vote Yes. But here it's a 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.
Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Site Admin, Skilled player
(1238)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11287
Location: RU
Arc wrote:
Is it more precise to say that we don't want to publish movies that play a game as the creators' intended if such gameplay is trivial?
In other words, if a trivial game gets broken, it can become non-trivial.
Here is the simplest example I can think of:
Imagine a simple game that you win by walking the character 2 pixels to the right, and the character can move 1 pixel per frame.
The intended gameplay is trivial because someone could do it perfectly on their first playthrough with no knowledge of the game just by holding right for 2 frames.
But then imagine that a TASer discovers that by holding L+R, the character obtains hyperspeed and moves 2 pixels to the right in 1 frame.
Since this trick is unintended by the creators and the TASer has demonstrated special knowledge and/or talent to obtain a faster time, the "game" is no longer trivial, right?
We do recognize this in the triviality rule, here's the wording:
The game-play needs to standout from non-assisted play, and must not be seen as trivial. Note that a game is considered trivial until proven otherwise. If getting perfect times everywhere is not challenging, such a game is considered trivial. If later a technique is found that makes TASing it challenging, that game becomes acceptable.
Maybe it's not exactly what you mean, but relying on developer intent alone is shaky ground, so we have to add something more verifiable. But with that requirement we still tried to account for your scenario.
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: 11287
Location: RU
DrD2k9 wrote:
Implementation?
For such trivial-to-make TASes that would still demonstrate super-human ability, would it be impossible to publish them without authorship attribution? Or simply have authorship be attributed to "Many Tasers." Or even "Trivial to TAS"?
With any of those options, no one person has to be identified as the TAS author for attribution reasons. This would eliminate any player points comparison/headache that would result from any one member claiming they were first or that they should get the points for authorship.
The staff could even create a member with the name "Trivial to TAS" for such a purpose. Then when a trivial to TAS game is submitted, the game can be published under this authorship regardless of who actually made the submission. A note could be placed in the judgement notes describing this publication action. This would allow for publication of non-trivial-to-play superhuman runs even if they are trivial-to-make.
Regarding productivity and practicality: if a superhuman TAS is judged to have such simple optimization that it's deemed trivial-to-make, then judgement shouldn't be that hard on whether it's optimized or not (and since we're talking about Vault, there's not reason to consider entertainment). Judgments would essentially be mere formality and shouldn't require much effort on the judge's part..
This overthrows the entire purpose of the site as I explained to you thoroughly in private, but it was seemingly not recognized at all.
Allowing trivial-to-make movies will flood us with movies that hold zero speedrun record value, resulting in net drain on movie quality on the site. We spent years of effort to encourage TASers to invest themselves into improving their skills in order to be published, the whole obsoletion system is designed to recognize hard work, and as a result, optimization standards are slowly rising, the movies are steadily getting better in that regard.
We also explicitly require judges to understand the difference between submissions that are easy to improve and the ones that are hard to improve. If something is easy to improve, it means not enough work has been put into the movie, and therefore it's too sloppy to be published. You're suggesting to disregard this whole thing for movies that are trivial to make. And I'm still waiting for a single reason that would imply the site would be better from hosting them.
DrD2k9 wrote:
I can see where someone could use my basic perspective to try and argue for Dragon's Lair or a 'choose an adventure' type game, but the counter argument in many if not most of those cases would be that there's no in-game benefit/value derived by optimizing the input time.
Even in casual play, pressing a direction in Dragon's Lair on the first possible frame vs the last possible frame doesn't change the gameplay or progress; all obstacles to the predefined game progress remain the same regardless of when (in the appropriate time window) that direction is pressed. Time optimization is only affected by the frame delay within that window when the button is actually pressed (a direction press 5 frames later than the earliest possible frame adds exactly 5 frames to the overall time of the run). This isn't the case for games like Duck Hunt.
From a casual play perspective in Duck Hunt, the frame on which a duck is shot does result in changes to gameplay action and therefore adds potential for an in-game benefit/value of time optimization. If not shot immediately, the duck will fly around based on RNG; meaning the gun would need repositioned/aimed. Also the randomized position that the duck flies to before it's shot determines the fall distance and thus introduce another factor in time optimization beyond simply how much time it took the player to pull the trigger; a duck shot higher on the screen falls a further distance and costs extra time beyond the number of frames the player delayed before the shot (shooting 5 frames later than the earliest possible frame may result in greater than a 5 frame delay on the overall run). This means that the both aiming time and firing frame of the gun are actions that impact time optimization from a in-game benefit/value standpoint. This potential in-game variation due to game-play choices provides the in-game benefit/value of optimization: 'Shooting a duck lower on the screen, yields waiting less time before the next duck releases.'
Yes it's trivial to make the Duck Hunt TAS itself because of the tools available. Shots can be made to occur on the first possible frame with the gun pointed in the right place. It's not hard to optimize. But the in-game benefit/value optimization is still present This is the point in optimizing 1-duck mode in Duck Hunt; killing the ducks as quickly as possible to minimize fall distance. It just so happens that it's easy to do this optimization in a TAS environment.
The grey area with the in-game benefit argument is games like Deja Vu or Shadowgate. Speed of input doesn't necessarily affect the gameplay result or create in-game changes. However, those games still at least have the argument of cursor movement optimization beyond general menuing (where Dragon's Lair, choose an adventure, and such games do not even have this optimization challenge).
To put it shortly, there is a reason to optimize the shot frame in Duck Hunt beyond it was the first possible frame to do so.
This reason is the reason the game is not trivial and a speed record of it has value.
EDIT: I want our site to offer even more comprehensive picture of how TASing is superior to human play, but the current approach to triviality prevents some obvious superhuman TASes from being published.
Optimization is not a binary thing, and just having it there is not enough to have a published movie. Optimization is a scale, and we want as much of it as reasonably practicable, because it directly determines the movie quality. We want movie quality to be high. Low-effort movies get rejected because of that. If optimization is not challenging, the movie quality is also low.
You rely so much on what's possible for humans, but humans are evolving as well. Over the course of 10 years I've been watching TAS and RTA scenes, humans were able to pull of TAS strats on nearly daily basis. Exactly because competition is there! They just strive to optimize it, and it gradually gets better for everyone.
Dragster TAS times have been matched by humans, even though we couldn't envision that 8 years ago when Vault was made, to demand that all human records must be beaten and the movie must obviously look better than the best human record. Humans got better and they're catching up with TAS!
Demanding that a movie must be clearly superior is not reasonable anymore, because then we end up with old published TASes that have been beaten by RTA, but no TAS improvement gets accepted because "humans have matched the times".
Relying on "majority of casual players" is even less convincing, because that requires collecting statistics about a sphere that's completely separate from what we deal with here, and also impossible to collect. Vault requires clear cuts, and you suggest to introduce "human element", however vague and subjective it may be. And for what purpose? In order to be able to reduce the overall movie quality. Brilliant.
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: 11287
Location: RU
The publication process hasn't started. BTW:
Judge Guidelines wrote:
Improvements and obsoletions
Avoid meaningless publications. It may turn the audience away when a large improvement is possible, yet each small incremental change with no visible differences in gameplay finds its way onto the main page. If the submitted movie is clearly improvable as well, it should (usually) be rejected.
Small improvements have and will be published, but only in a situation where it seems reasonable that only those small optimizations are left. If larger known improvements aren't implemented, it may be grounds for rejection.
While it is expected that the new run should use all tricks and techniques known at the time, it is not uncommon for new time-saving techniques to be found during the later stages of making a run. Ideally, the run should be restarted or edited to allow for inclusion of these new discoveries, however, if restarting will be especially time consuming, exceptions can be made to this rule per judge's discretion
.
Considering how demanding this game is to publish (its dump doesn't fit on a half-TB drive, takes lots of time to get around to investing the required space and encoding time while other submissions are also there), I'd suggest spending more time on making sure whatever strategy you're using is the best, instead of submitting every intermediate update.
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: 11287
Location: RU
I don't see you taking any of my arguments and explaining why they are bad or wrong, you simply keep declaring your own statements and posing rhetoric questions that have already been answered.
I pointed out several times that this rule is only for games that may be eligible for Vault, yet you spend paragraphs describing how the whole site isn't meant to only target competition. It doesn't! The site targets both entertainment and speed, one being subjective (artistic merits that can be recognized by viewers), another being objective (time competition). Vault only holds the latter.
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: 11287
Location: RU
What kind of "double standard" and how are the authors related?
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.
