Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
Really? Editing for inapropriate conduct? More like edited because you don't agree with it.
How is this post allowed, but mine isn't?:
Angerfist wrote:
Warp:
Stop talking! You need to sit your skank ass down and learn when to shut... the FUCK UP! COMPRENDE!? Put a fucking limit to your discussion man! How long did you intend to discuss things? Move along. Do not consider this as sarcasm or a joke, consider it as a direct insult! Wanna discuss the word insult? How and from where it originated?
Would this make you happier? A clean version?
You people from TASVideos need to reconsider your double standards on entertainment. Most of you know nothing about what it's like to TAS SM64. Feel free to go back to your 'left and right' NES games until you get an idea of what TASing a 3D platformer is like.
Really? Editing for inapropriate conduct? More like edited because you don't agree with it.
How is this post allowed, but mine isn't?:
Would this make you happier? A clean version?
You people from TASVideos need to reconsider your double standards on entertainment. Most of you know nothing about what it's like to TAS SM64. Feel free to go back to your 'left and right' NES games until you get an idea of what TASing a 3D platformer is like.
That is fine. Thank you.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
Joined: 8/15/2005
Posts: 1941
Location: Mullsjö, Sweden
There were some of the camera angles that I weren't in favor of, like most of BitFS. I do find it sort of interesting to see something new though, considering that this game has been TASed so many times up to now. If the run would have used the same camera angles like the previous run, there would be people saying that "it looks too much like the previous run, no vote".
No matter what you do, people will have different opinions on things and there is no need to start blaming people for it, like some are doing way too often. Just accept that there are those who don't like the exact same thing as you do.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Hey sonicpacker:
I do know what it's like to TAS a 3D game. It's not fun. Several people said they disliked my movie because it made them nauseous. And somehow I managed to withstand that criticism and continue TASing. So get off your high horse and realize that these movies are meant to be entertaining, and everyone is entitled to their opinion of what entertainment is. Chill out.
Since when did 'not enough frames were saved' become a reason to reject?
^
an improvement is an improvement, the site should always publish the fastest movie
I think that in this case the question is that if the movie looked the same as the existing publication, this could simply be considered a routine upgrade and there would be nothing odd about it. However, since this movie (at least potentially) changes the entertainment factor in a considerable way. and since the difference in time is so minuscule, the question becomes whether this movie is more or less entertaining than the existing one. Certainly if a submission is 3 frames faster but significantly less entertaining, it puts its publishworthiness into question. (And no, this was not an opinion on whether this submission is less entertaining or not.)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Warp wrote:
I think that in this case the question is that if the movie looked the same as the existing publication, this could simply be considered a routine upgrade and there would be nothing odd about it. However, since this movie (at least potentially) changes the entertainment factor in a considerable way. and since the difference in time is so minuscule, the question becomes whether this movie is more or less entertaining than the existing one. Certainly if a submission is 3 frames faster but significantly less entertaining, it puts its publishworthiness into question. (And no, this was not an opinion on whether this submission is less entertaining or not.)
I love such your posts, thanks.
I also have only one question, since I never played any N64 game.
Does the 3-frame emprovement necessarily affect the camera movements? Was it at all possible to get different angles holding the same speed?
BTW, I don't like the game itslef, it annoys me with its sound effects. So I personally don't care about angles. I just prefer more crazy looking runs to less crazy ones. This movie looks mad enough to please me. Yes vote.
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.
Joined: 1/30/2011
Posts: 11
Location: United States
I think the only reason the camera angles were like this was because they felt it gave Super Mario 64 a new look prior to 'entertaining' the audience. After seeing so many SM64 TASes, I think the new camera angles are something new and fresh that did give the game a new look. Also, saving 3 frames on a run others worked forever on is pretty impressive, in my opinion.
If the run would have used the same camera angles like the previous run, there would be people saying that "it looks too much like the previous run, no vote".
I don't think so, because that would be stupid.
AzumaK wrote: I swear my 1 year old daughter's favorite TASVideo is your R4MI run :3
xxNKxx wrote: ok thanks handsome feos :D
Help improving TASVideos!
I don't care if this run was to be rejected. But... I just hoped everyone enjoy our TAS! If you don't like this camera angles, I'm sorry... It's difficult to put out the best choices for all viewers.
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.
Please. You're quite clearly starved for attention with your petty trolling on these forums.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Does the 3-frame improvement necessarily affect the camera movements? Was it at all possible to get different angles holding the same speed
You can perform any set of movements at any camera angle as far as I know. The joystick positions are extremely dependent on the current state of the camera though, so redoing this is quite a time investment. If the camera is behind you, you might hold up and right, while if the camera is in front of you, you might hold down and left to traverse the map in the same fashion. 2 of the 3 frames saved in this submission are in spots where the camera was largely unchanged.
Just thought I'd pipe in to say I saw the submission, saw it was submitted today, saw it was an improvement of just three frames, saw it had five pages of responses already, and immediately thought to myself, "Flame war".
I haven't read everything yet, but it looks like I guessed right.
You can perform any set of movements at any camera angle as far as I know. The joystick positions are extremely dependent on the current state of the camera though, so redoing this is quite a time investment. If the camera is behind you, you might hold up and right, while if the camera is in front of you, you might hold down and left to traverse the map in the same fashion. 2 of the 3 frames saved in this submission are in spots where the camera was largely unchanged.
Crazy idea: If the movement speed is not dependent on the position of the camera, and thus any movement can be replicated in the exact same way with any camera position, perhaps the changes in joystick positions could be automatically adjusted for changed camera angles with a little script/program? (Although trying to do this might induce desyncs easily, but the possiblity could be worth researching.)
The improvements are almost zero. Most camera positions are confusing. That's a no from me.
By the way... It is possible to open the front door from inside to enter the castle (there was a competition just for that task, but I'm not sure where). The door that is under water at the beginning gets you to the lower part of the castle. Has someone tried to open that door from inside? This would save much more time if it is possible.
The improvements are almost zero. Most camera positions are confusing. That's a no from me.
By the way... It is possible to open the front door from inside to enter the castle (there was a competition just for that task, but I'm not sure where). The door that is under water at the beginning gets you to the lower part of the castle. Has someone tried to open that door from inside? This would save much more time if it is possible.
Here's the video you're looking for:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m99SVW91hcU
And, yes, a lot of investigation was made on what we call the "moat door" to skip Bowser 1. We haven't found a solution yet.
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 1047
Location: California
mmbossman wrote:
Hey sonicpacker:
I do know what it's like to TAS a 3D game. It's not fun. Several people said they disliked my movie because it made them nauseous. And somehow I managed to withstand that criticism and continue TASing. So get off your high horse and realize that these movies are meant to be entertaining, and everyone is entitled to their opinion of what entertainment is. Chill out.
Hey mmbossman:
It is fun. I get a lot of joy out of making SM64 and SA2B TASes. Most 3D games aren't as complex as SM64 anyway. Understanding the physics takes months, and even a couple years to understand. Especially with all the tricks that aren't anywhere near obvious or 'logical'. It requires a ton of testing, hence the high amount of rerecords which is far higher than an average TAS on this site. And I know that everyone is entitled to their own opinion about entertainment. My point is that the run is an improvement, and if it were to be rejected because of CAMERA POSITIONING, then I'm losing all faith I had in this site - not that I had much to begin with after all the things I've read on here.
My other point is that this site has immense double standards (this goes for more than just judging movies, but treating members of the community differently as well). My other other point is that DarkKobold shouldn't be a moderator because he is a power obsessed and only wishes to change things because he is biased against them.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Our guidelines call for keeping the movie watchable. The question is what defines watchable?
Till now, this section only covered audio, I added video to it. I tried to keep the guidelines generic.
The question to be asked here is twofold:
1) Is something about the camera angle annoying? Does it give you a headache?
2) Do the camera angles chosen hide details that really need to be seen. Meaning, do we hear Mario off doing who knows what, but we can't see a thing, or something similar.
If the answers to this line of inquiry is no, that's no reason to keep this from being accepted.
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.
Joined: 6/13/2006
Posts: 3300
Location: Massachussetts, USA
Nach wrote:
2) Do the camera angles chosen hide details that really need to be seen. Meaning, do we hear Mario off doing who knows what, but we can't see a thing, or something similar.
This raises problems. What about already established games where the character does things offscreen, like in SMW, or the Sonic games? By those rules, they'd be rejected.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Comicalflop wrote:
Nach wrote:
2) Do the camera angles chosen hide details that really need to be seen. Meaning, do we hear Mario off doing who knows what, but we can't see a thing, or something similar.
This raises problems. What about already established games where the character does things offscreen, like in SMW, or the Sonic games? By those rules, they'd be rejected.
Does it ruin the watchability? Also, is it done for a purpose?
If no time is saved by it, don't ruin the watchability. If time can be saved, how much does it ruin the watchability? How long are these periods where you can't see the action?
Balancing the various guidelines, there's no reason why SMW and Sonic should not be accepted.
Here however, from what I understand, it didn't save any time. So the question is, is something really missing?
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.
2) Do the camera angles chosen hide details that really need to be seen. Meaning, do we hear Mario off doing who knows what, but we can't see a thing, or something similar.
This raises problems. What about already established games where the character does things offscreen, like in SMW, or the Sonic games? By those rules, they'd be rejected.
Those games, the camera isn't chosen, and even then, people clamor for camhacks.
This game, the author(s) gets to choose camera angles.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
