I won't make the mistake of arguing votes again... just going to point out that the game appealed to me because of its goofy nature, and that did inform my vote. So, on some level, I'd say the game can be an important factor.
However, by all means, it comes down to this: everyone should vote however they wish. That's what I've learned.
Joined: 4/21/2004
Posts: 3517
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Warp wrote:
AngerFist wrote:
This does not look like a tas
I'm curious to know what your argumentation is.
The gameplay is fluid and flawless, there are many close calls and at least one glitch exploitation. Looks like a quite typical TAS to me.
The gameplay is fine, Nitrogenesis did a nice job with that. I have no idea what your typical tas is but apparently my standard is higher than yours. I want to see a fun, exciting game where the author masters like a god various challenges. It's not 100% necessary for me that a game must be a very popular and exciting game. There are games where an author made the game look very interesting and entertaining via crazy manuevers. In this case, it felt like taking a nice warm walk in Stockholm.
Warp wrote:
Granted, it might be that with enough practice someone could achieve something close to this via regular play. However, that's no excuse to reject the TAS.
It is for me. This is a freaking 2 minute run, a well-oriented speedrunner should be able to mimic everything we saw in this run. We go through walls, almost exploit all poles in every stage and whatnot in Super Mario Bros. The game itself is completed in less than 5 minutes in our current tas (don't remember if the sda run has reached that goal yet). SDA counts differently from us.
Nitrogenesis wrote:
Guys I come from the DidyKnogRacist communite, and you are all wrong, tihs is the run of the mileniun and everyone who says otherwise dosnt know any bater! I found this run vary ease to masturbate too!!!! Don't fuck with me, I know this game so that mean I'm always right!StupedfackincommunityTASVideoz!!!!!!
Arc wrote:
I enjoyed this movie in which hands firmly gripping a shaft lead to balls deep in multiple holes.
natt wrote:
I don't want to get involved in this discussion, but as a point of fact C# is literally the first goddamn thing on that fucking page you linked did you even fucking read it
Cooljay wrote:
Mayor Haggar and Cody are such nice people for the community. Metro City's hospitals reached an all time new record of incoming patients due to their great efforts :P
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4090
Location: The Netherlands
AngerFist wrote:
This does not look like a tas, pretty bad game choice and therefore I have to vote no.
My thoughts exactly. I agree with everything AngerFist said.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
moozooh wrote:
Hey, if God exists, he's evidently not pissed.
But if you try hard enough...
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: 2/20/2010
Posts: 209
Location: I'm in space
Like I said before
goldfish wrote:
YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYES I have been WAITING for someone to make a TAS of this shitty game!! Looks & sounds horrible, and almost put me to sleep before the 2 minutes were up, but voting YES anyway because, IMHO, "bad game choice", though undeniable, is trumped by the game's legendary status.
Plus the new glitch is neat. I vote "yeah, whatever, just make it go away".
Oh, play it cool. Play it cool. Here come the space cops.
Granted, it might be that with enough practice someone could achieve something close to this via regular play. However, that's no excuse to reject the TAS.
It is for me. This is a freaking 2 minute run, a well-oriented speedrunner should be able to mimic everything we saw in this run.
This is the first time I see the argument "if an unassisted speedrunner would be capable of doing a run that is similar to the TAS, that's grounds for rejecting the TAS".
Well, we'll just have to disagree. I think that's a really lousy argument. (I also think it's detrimental. We are not competing with unassisted speedrunners. So what if they can achieve similar feats with some games? What does that matter?)
Joined: 4/21/2004
Posts: 3517
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Warp wrote:
Well, we'll just have to disagree. I think that's a really lousy argument. (I also think it's detrimental. We are not competing with unassisted speedrunners. So what if they can achieve similar feats with some games? What does that matter?)
It means it aint feeling, looking and smelling like a tas. Read my post again. And I didn't attack your opinion by saying its "lousy".
Nitrogenesis wrote:
Guys I come from the DidyKnogRacist communite, and you are all wrong, tihs is the run of the mileniun and everyone who says otherwise dosnt know any bater! I found this run vary ease to masturbate too!!!! Don't fuck with me, I know this game so that mean I'm always right!StupedfackincommunityTASVideoz!!!!!!
Arc wrote:
I enjoyed this movie in which hands firmly gripping a shaft lead to balls deep in multiple holes.
natt wrote:
I don't want to get involved in this discussion, but as a point of fact C# is literally the first goddamn thing on that fucking page you linked did you even fucking read it
Cooljay wrote:
Mayor Haggar and Cody are such nice people for the community. Metro City's hospitals reached an all time new record of incoming patients due to their great efforts :P
Joined: 4/2/2009
Posts: 376
Location: Porto Alegre - Brazil
I vote Yes, because there is no game that could be more God-like than this =P and it's the first biblical game on the site, if I'm not mistaken.. plus it's a regular woman running at 40miles/h, carrying a baby on her head.. she has no Megaman powers, no Mario fireballs, no Sonic spindash, and she can finish her quest in 2 minutes? Does Sonic has to carry Tails? .. Does Mario has to carry Toad? Does Megaman has to carry Rush?? O_o (wait, I think he actually has to carry Rush...)
YES.I can make a LIST os TASes more boring than this one.
My first language is not English, so please excuse myself if I write something wrong. I'll do my best do write as cleary as I can, so cope with me here =)
(ﾉಥ益ಥ）ﾉ
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
The argument has been raised that "other TASes are less entertaining than this one that have been published".
Normally, a boring TAS would need to have at least a modicum of technical merit to be even considered for acceptance (and, conversely, a run with less-than-average technical merit would need to be supremely entertaining to be considered for publication).
I see neither entertainment nor technical merit (or, indeed, the possibility for either) here, so I do not understand how this can be considered for publication in any sense.
I also cannot pass up the opportunity to quote the oft-stated maxim around here that making a mistake in the site's past does not excuse making it again in the present.
The argument has been raised that "other TASes are less entertaining than this one that have been published".
Gee, you could at least quote me or Warp... It could help the discussion, you know...
sgrunt wrote:
Normally, a boring TAS would need to have at least a modicum of technical merit to be even considered for acceptance (and, conversely, a run with less-than-average technical merit would need to be supremely entertaining to be considered for publication).
well, in my book "completely avoiding any contact with enemies while not stopping at all" and "using glitches to finish the game" seems like a nice tecnical merit...
sgrunt wrote:
I see neither entertainment nor technical merit (or, indeed, the possibility for either) here, so I do not understand how this can be considered for publication in any sense.
This TAS have only two minutes, it's fast paced and uses glitches.
Also, it's far from being the worst game ever TASed.
sgrunt wrote:
I also cannot pass up the opportunity to quote the oft-stated maxim around here that making a mistake in the site's past does not excuse making it again in the present.
The way I see the site doesn't host "mistakes", just movies people do not care enough to work in improving it =)
Acheron86 wrote:
just going to point out that the game appealed to me because of its goofy nature, and that did inform my vote.
I want to see a fun, exciting game where the author masters like a god various challenges
Moses's not a god, but he'll be someday his prophet! ...I think
My first language is not English, so please excuse myself if I write something wrong. I'll do my best do write as cleary as I can, so cope with me here =)
(ﾉಥ益ಥ）ﾉ
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
OmegaWatcher wrote:
Gee, you could at least quote me or Warp... It could help the discussion, you know...
If I can capture the essence of your argument, is an exact quotation necessary?
OmegaWatcher wrote:
"completely avoiding any contact with enemies[...]"
Is it much of a technical challenge to pull this off? Given the absurdly simple gameplay, I submit that it is not. Further, as a rule, the site audience generally prefers movies making creative use of taking damage to save time rather than strict no-damage runs.
OmegaWatcher wrote:
"using glitches to finish the game"
I count one glitch; did you see more than one? With respect to the one glitch, is it a significant time saver? [submission 3171]By way of comparison[/submission], it is not. Does it significantly alter gameplay? Seeing as the result is merely to let the player character continue running to the right with slightly less impediment, it is not. Does the glitch, therefore, have significant technical merit? I submit that it does not.
OmegaWatcher wrote:
Define "fast paced". Usually that describes runs which require quick reaction times on the part of the player and, arguably, a continual feeling of imminent danger - that one little mistake can cause everything to go horribly wrong. Perhaps it's just me, but I don't sense that here.
OmegaWatcher wrote:
and uses glitches
See above discussion of the one glitch of which I'm aware.
OmegaWatcher wrote:
Also, it's far from being the worst game ever TASed.
I repeat,
sgrunt wrote:
I also cannot pass up the opportunity to quote the oft-stated maxim around here that making a mistake in the site's past does not excuse making it again in the present.
There have been [movie 230]runs accepted[/movie] [movie 363]under dubious[/movie] [movie 1646]circumstances[/movie] before; the point of my bringing this up is that if a poor quality run is accepted, the community will tend to look upon this with shame and embarrassment (just look at the general reception the first of those movies has had in the time since it's been published).
I accept that I'm not exactly the easiest person around here to please (just look at the average entertainment rating to give runs), but I can't think of a single redeeming characteristic that this run puts forward that would stand up to the judges' careful scrutiny.
the point of my bringing this up is that if a poor quality run is accepted, the community will tend to look upon this with shame and embarrassment
It all comes does to the definition of "poor quality".
The only truly "shameful" TAS that has ever been on the site (that I remember of), and for a rather long time at that, was that LoZ:OoT TAS that was slower than the unassisted record. (It's a bit embarrassing to have an officially published TAS which is significantly slower than the unassisted speedrun of the same game.)
Can you consider a TAS embarrassing if it's just the game itself that is simplistic, straightforward and doesn't lend itself to marvelous technical achievements? I wouldn't. I'd just rate it low on technical.
AngerFist wrote:
And I didn't attack your opinion by saying its "lousy".
Btw, I would like to point out that I do not object to your "no" vote. You are, of course, free to vote however you like, and your opinion is as valuable as anybody else's. What objected to was the idea that if a TAS would look similar to an unassisted speedrun of a game, that's grounds for rejecting the TAS. I do consider that to be a bit silly of a reason.
I think one reason I'm not inclined to balk at this game's publication is because most of the argument against it haven't been used consistently. I realize of course that the publication of questionable games in the past shouldn't justify what happens in the future, but given the sheer amount of early-gen console runs we already have, I feel like this one would just be a humorous drop in the pond. There is already a massive amount of meh-quality games that have been accepted; if the spirit of the rule is to avoid adding to that, I have to question why we keep around so many other games.
Of course nobody wants to be the person who depublishes the first one, but I think unless we go back and clean up the mess that was made long ago, being consistent on this rule now is sort of... pointless. And since it's pretty clear nobody is going to unpublish anything, ever, I have to wonder if it's worth it to be so picky now, when we've already got a massive library of questionable games that are less entertaining than this one.
Anyway, again I realize this argument isn't one that will justify the publication of this run... but you can see why people would say, "come on, what's one more? at least this one's short and funny." It has novelty appeal, which is more than can be said for some other runs. For that, I'm sure it'll at least find a home in Gruefood Delight.
People seems to be bashing this game just because it has been known as a bad game... But seriously, any bad rated game reviewed by AVGN becomes more than a challenge for TASers and automatically becomes entertaining if you want my 2 cent.
Yes vote for TASing a VERY bad game.
sgrunt wrote:
Come on, you didn't take the worst of the worst, you took WORSE examples there. I think it's more fair to compare this game to Deadly Towers, or Milon's Secret Castle, or even Dragon's Lair.
I'm afraid if you were a judge, you would only accept most popular or best rated games, or only the games you have played?
I cannot help but agree with the rejected submissions you linked there, and I'm a pro-hater of YHTBTR myself, and I still agree that Bible game is a bad game, but yet if rejecting this run for bad game choice, I wouldn't know where to set the bar. Probably much higher than lots of games on the site right now.
I voted meh the last time. The new glitch does enough to push it to a yes to me. I think any new viewer would find it slightly amusing, which is good enough to publish.
Also, I really enjoyed the improved boss fight and better ammo management.
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
Warp wrote:
Can you consider a TAS embarrassing if it's just the game itself that is simplistic, straightforward and doesn't lend itself to marvelous technical achievements?
It's not the TAS itself that would be considered shameful. As [wiki WelcomeToTASVideos]noted elsewhere[/wiki] (emphasis mine),
Site mission statement wrote:
TASvideos.org is committed to providing the best in tool-assisted speedruns and superhuman play. Our runs are held to high standards, and only high quality runs will be published on the site.
Accepting a run which doesn't live up to our expectations for high technical quality, whether by incompetence on the part of the runner or merely by selecting a game which just doesn't have sufficient complexity to showcase the technical intricacies which we're looking for (which are normally flagged as being a bad game choice, and which I'm arguing this run falls into), is something I would consider to be against one of the site's stated principles, and would be viewed as shameful by most (inside or outside) observers.
Wak017 wrote:
Yes vote for TASing a VERY bad game.
sgrunt wrote:
Come on, you didn't take the worst of the worst, you took WORSE examples there. I think it's more fair to compare this game to Deadly Towers, or Milon's Secret Castle, or even Dragon's Lair.
I'm afraid if you were a judge, you would only accept most popular or best rated games, or only the games you have played?
I cannot help but agree with the rejected submissions you linked there, and I'm a pro-hater of YHTBTR myself, and I still agree that Bible game is a bad game, but yet if rejecting this run for bad game choice, I wouldn't know where to set the bar. Probably much higher than lots of games on the site right now.
Funnily enough, this is not at all the point I was making - I was pointing out, contrary to what was stated, that "it was short" does not constitute a valid argument for accepting a game. That said, I can't help but point out the hypocrisy of your two statements: "I like this run because the game was very bad" vs. "Those games are very bad and should have been rejected", not to mention your later statement that "a lot of the very bad games on this site should not have been published in the first place".
Further, nowhere did I state that I solely like runs of games that are popular. There are [movie 1236]runs[/movie] [movie 1451]of[/movie] [movie 1145]relatively[/movie] [movie 1307]obscure[/movie] [movie 1717]titles[/movie] that I enjoy greatly (note also that I have not played any of the games in question); in each of those cases the run either demonstrates something unique about the game or gameplay or obvious superhuman playing ability. Neither of those is evidenced at all here.
Is this run really sufficiently entertaining that we can overlook its negligible technical value, or technically interesting enough to overlook it being boring to (at least a large minority of) viewers, both of which could conceivably lead to a run getting accepted? As I've argued, neither of these is the case and the run should be rejected.
Gee, you could at least quote me or Warp... It could help the discussion, you know...
If I can capture the essence of your argument, is an exact quotation necessary?
could help make the discussion less impersonal, after all we're fans, not members of a giant corporation.
sgrunt wrote:
OmegaWatcher wrote:
"completely avoiding any contact with enemies[...]"
Is it much of a technical challenge to pull this off? Given the absurdly simple gameplay, I submit that it is not. Further, as a rule, the site audience generally prefers movies making creative use of taking damage to save time rather than strict no-damage runs.
I count one glitch; did you see more than one? With respect to the one glitch, is it a significant time saver? [submission 3171]By way of comparison[/submission], it is not. Does it significantly alter gameplay? Seeing as the result is merely to let the player character continue running to the right with slightly less impediment, it is not. Does the glitch, therefore, have significant technical merit? I submit that it does not.
Ok, I misused the plural. ok. So, you're saying this glitch is not big enough to be counted. Not every game is Mega Man 2 or Super Mario 64, you know...
sgrunt wrote:
...wow, now you're generalising for the sake of generalising. You took joke submissions and menu debugs to make a point. TASes made without an purpose besides giving a chucke.
You presented 11 TASes under 2 minutes. The site published more than 30.
Worst part? That doesn't prove anything. At at. That's part of a point in the next part of the sentence, that got cut out for no good reason.
sgrunt wrote:
OmegaWatcher wrote:
it's fast paced
Define "fast paced". Usually that describes runs which require quick reaction times on the part of the player and, arguably, a continual feeling of imminent danger - that one little mistake can cause everything to go horribly wrong. Perhaps it's just me, but I don't sense that here.
Defining fast paced: Non-stop running, from enemies, hazards, glitches. It's under 2 minutes because it's fast. Hence, fast paced. Not everyone runs just like Sonic.
sgrunt wrote:
I repeat,
sgrunt wrote:
I also cannot pass up the opportunity to quote the oft-stated maxim around here that making a mistake in the site's past does not excuse making it again in the present.
There have been [movie 230]runs accepted[/movie] [movie 363]under dubious[/movie] [movie 1646]circumstances[/movie] before; the point of my bringing this up is that if a poor quality run is accepted, the community will tend to look upon this with shame and embarrassment (just look at the general reception the first of those movies has had in the time since it's been published).
I'll try to explain better. The best way to overcome your mistakes is to fix them. If exclusion is not an option, the community should make a new submission, making it better and fixing the mistake.
I tried to be all poetic last post about this, guess it didn't work =(
My first language is not English, so please excuse myself if I write something wrong. I'll do my best do write as cleary as I can, so cope with me here =)
(ﾉಥ益ಥ）ﾉ
He sent the eleventh plague, the plague of birds. The birds carried women and children offscreen, but no frames were saved.
