Dear authors,
Please change the camera angles to something more stylish and sensible, and resubmit so that we — the audience — could vote yes on this fruit of labor.
:)
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
I didn't find the camera angles that bad, though the zooming in and out after beating Bowser was really irritating. Future advice for alternate camera angles (and I did like some of them):
- Always make it clear where Mario is headed
- Try to always have a considerable area visible (so don't zoom in so far)
- Try not to get the camera stuck staring at a platform, even if you're not going anywhere (such as when you BLJ)
Anyway, yes vote.
I think you guys are overreacting to the camera angles. Unless you can spot exactly where the 3 frames were saved in real time, you ALREADY know what Mario is doing from the last run, so what's the problem? Do we really need our hands to be held to understand what's going on?
I, for one, liked the new camera angles, specifically because I didn't know which way they were going. It felt like I was actually watching something new, but since the actual game improvement was so minor, I still knew what was going on from watching previous runs.
If it had the same camera angles, I still bet some people would be saying, "it's not different enough from the last one and 3 frames is nothing" and reject it on those grounds. Some people are way too hard to please.
One of the reasons I enjoy watching TAS videos is many times, somewhere during the run, my jaw drops to the floor and I just go, "WTF?" at the awesomeness. This run gave me that feeling. It was unexpected and I liked it.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Takarifreak wrote:
I think you guys are overreacting to the camera angles. Unless you can spot exactly where the 3 frames were saved in real time, you ALREADY know what Mario is doing from the last run, so what's the problem?
What about all those people who come along who haven't seen the previous run?
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Yes vote. I was surprised to see that the improvements were noticeable, which is a testament to how perfected these sections are becoming. I also enjoyed the new camera angles, though they were a bit closer than I'm usually comfortable with, they provided a nice change of pace to really differentiate the run.
Guys, stop arguing about the camera angles.
Have you ever TAS Super Mario 64? It's not like it was possible to hex their improvements with new camera angles. They'll need to re-do EVERYTHING from A to Z just to change some camera angles that THEY like (the AUTHORS)? It's like asking J.K. Rowling "could you please make Harry Potter's hair red? I'd prefer it like that". That's total non-sense. It's their work, not yours. Just rate it lower than the previous movie, if you want, or better, keep watching the old movie instead?
Re-doing everything would take many re-records, MHSing and hard work.
And about "not noticing the 3 frames improvement" I mean... how could you? Who noticed the 1 FRAME improvement in [1715] NES Super Mario Bros. "warps" by HappyLee in 04:57.31? I surely didn't, but still wanted the run to be published because it pushed the game to it's limit.
I surely didn't. But that run was the most entertaining and visually pleasing version ever. In this case, it seems most believe that the visual quality was significantly degraded.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Nahoc, that argument doesn't hold water. If I don't like what J. K. Rowling writes, I won't buy her books; i. e., I'll be voting with my wallet. If I'm not entertained by camera angles in the submission — something that the authors had complete control over — I'll be voting with a system specifically designed for it.
The general argument against this submission isn't about three frames being too little to publish it. It's about entertainment value of this run being too low compared to the previous one that these three frames don't warrant the replacement. There's a significant trade-off that didn't have to be. In the case with SMB there was no trade-off; on the opposite, it was an improvement on both counts.
We have a very similar precedent here.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
They'll need to re-do EVERYTHING from A to Z just to change some camera angles
honestly, I don't believe that… the run doesn't abuse luck, I don't see what the problem is with removing some letters from a text file?
it's kind of gay that they tried to make their run unique and everyone hates on them though
edit: ok I was wrong, Nahoc explained to me why they'd have to redo everything to change the camera angles, and it makes sense; it's a real shame if this run gets rejected due to arguably worse entertainment
They'll need to re-do EVERYTHING from A to Z just to change some camera angles
honestly, I don't believe that… the run doesn't abuse luck, I don't see what the problem is with removing some letters from a text file?
it's kind of gay that they tried to make their run unique and everyone hates on them though
edit: ok I was wrong, Nahoc explained to me why they'd have to redo everything to change the camera angles, and it makes sense
o_O
Wow. That really sucks. I'll feel so sorry for Mickey if this run were to be rejected just because of some dumb debate on camera angles.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Camera angles matter. If the same 3 frames had been saved, but the camera had been similar to the previous run, I would have voted yes. If they had made it 'Mario cam' the entire time, I would have voted no. Entertainment, and focus on aesthetics (when possible), does matter, and should be taken into account with judging. Moozooh already linked the precedent I was going to mention, and that was with a movie that was improved by 20 frames.
Camera angles matter. If the same 3 frames had been saved, but the camera had been similar to the previous run, I would have voted yes. If they had made it 'Mario cam' the entire time, I would have voted no. Entertainment, and focus on aesthetics (when possible), does matter, and should be taken into account with judging. Moozooh already linked the precedent I was going to mention, and that was with a movie that was improved by 20 frames.
But this would force the TASer's to redo the ENTIRE movie, which is highly demotivating.
it's kind of gay that they tried to make their run unique and everyone hates on them though
It's also kind of gay you still think people hate on them in the first place.
jlun2 wrote:
But this would force the TASer's to redo the ENTIRE movie, which is highly demotivating.
Well, if the TASers produce the movies for themselves, they can do whatever they want and nobody would have a right to say anything. If the TASer produces the movies for an audience, the audience has a say in what it likes or dislikes. TASvideos is a site that exists for its audience in the first place, which is why there is a judging system installed in the submission process.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
It would be dumb if this got rejected for these reasons.
If I were Mickey/snark/ToT, and this got rejected for this reason, I sure as hell wouldn't submit anything else here and would just keep my stuff on YouTube.
I thought the new camera angles were actually much more entertaining than previous runs. You see a lot of stuff you usually never see and made it look much different from the previous TAS. Along with the 3 frame improvement, I see no reason not to accept it.
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
moozooh wrote:
Well, hopefully not everybody is so immature as to go sulk in a corner after a first case of public critique, right?
Well, hopefully not everybody is so immature to bitch about camera angles when the authors were trying to do something new and different instead of publishing the 'same' run again, right?
[inappropriate conduct edited out]
EDIT by DarkKobold
