My thoughts, with some wording fixes. Add a Demo tier for runs done by bots, hacks, multitases and such stuff.
About the botted runs, some runs like that glitched Megaman run for the NES relies heavily on bots. It would be strange to see it listed in "Demos" instead of the vault/stars.
Oh, and this also applies to games that rely heavily on luck, like the wizardry games for the Nes.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
I meant Concept demos like the runs ENTIRELY done by bots, lol.
EDIT:
I think the tier (at least for vault) must be decided by a judge as he accepts the movie. And the future placing must depend on rating: whether it is a vault movie or a regular one (moons/stars are still assigned by trained monkeys starmen). So we seem to need a rating borderline to consider movies vault worthy (6.0?). Also, for each tier we may have a thread for complaints and suggestions, moving the run here or there if the audience disagrees with the current placing.
That is: at the moment of publication, place the run to a certain tier, then allow it to navigate on its own, then if people ask, sticky it to some tier.
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.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Did I forget to mention it's for Demo tier? Anything arbitrary may potentially go there, we just need to set the border between this and rejection.
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: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Well, it must be notable by something. But personally I don't see a problemwith minigames and stuff.
The point was to place deadly boring but still very notable runs to a better place than drowning them in 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.
Maybe the name "demo" is not perfect, but I like that idea.
I can imagine a tier where multi-game runs, bot-only runs or things like really heavy glitched runs (SMW, Pokémon yellow, etc... the ones that completely destroy a game by memory corruption and stuff like that) are stored.
The mad scientist tier :P
But it can be some kind of category, if not a tier... I just feel like they need to have a special distinction so that people can find them easily.
But I'm not sure for the inclusion of those heavy glitched runs, anyway, it's just an idea.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Let's leave Glitched runs on their own, their ENTERTAINMENT value is still very high. But after all... why not? :P
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.
IL's are possible in almost every type of game. The best idea would be to only have separate IL-movies in cases where the fastest way involves a different strategy than the full game run.
I could also imagine a single movie that does every level of a racing game as fast as possible.
Current project: Gex 3 any%
Paused: Gex 64 any%
There are no N64 emulators. Just SM64 emulators with hacky support for all the other games.
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
If it is good, those can be publisher in main tier (and if happens to become seriously impressive, perhaps even stars). You mean cases where the run becomes boring as heck because of the game?
If it is good, those can be publisher in main tier (and if happens to become seriously impressive, perhaps even stars). You mean cases where the run becomes boring as heck because of the game?
yeah, kinda like a lot of Atari 2600 games
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
IL's are possible in almost every type of game. The best idea would be to only have separate IL-movies in cases where the fastest way involves a different strategy than the full game run.
I could also imagine a single movie that does every level of a racing game as fast as possible.
So yea, a TAS of pretty much everything. Is that really needed? If a game had a huge amount of levels, there would be a ton of "mini" TASes submitted then...
I don't really like the idea of "vault" as being "below" regular movies. In some cases, it will be. In other cases, a run aiming to be a pure speedrun will be just as entertaining as entertainment goals in other runs.
However, this can be fixed with a pretty small change, IMO. The idea is that runs can be accepted due to being entertaining, or due to being fast; and some runs will (obviously) count as both. Runs which are fast but not entertaining go in the "vault" tier, and runs which are both fast and entertaining, or merely entertaining, go in the "regular" tier, just with this suggestion; but the regular tier makes a distinction between movies that are records (any% or 100%), and movies that aren't aiming merely for the fastest possible completion in any% and 100%. That way we can have a list of entertaining movies to look through, but if someone's looking just for records for a game, they can look through the list of any% or 100% records, regardless of whether they're in the vault, or in the regular tier.
Summary: just because a run's entertaining, shouldn't disqualify it from being a record.
So we are talking about as many as 100 stars based on current publication numbers; more than doubling the number of starred movies.
I fear that if starred runs are too numerous, they will somewhat lose the original intent of stars, ie. to act as a guide to the newcomer, like "if you don't know what TASing is all about, watch these first."
Of course if we go to having different categories of "stars", it might be a bit too much and make things even more confusing. (I'm all about categorizing things into hierarchies, I'm a bit of a perfectionist like that, but I also try to be pragmatic.)
Once upon a time, TASvideos was all about entertaining movies. Now with the Vault tier, it's all about world records. Causual viewers will consider almost all of the movies boring.
Having more publications will make it harder to find the entertaining ones. And as game choice now doesn't matter any more, there will be a lot of runs for boring games. And now even dropping all entertainment requirements, there will be even more boring TASes for them.
Well, that would be the possible "worst case" at least.
OK, let's build a TAS speedrun archive. Let's do the same as SDA already does for non-assisted runs. But let's keep this archive strictly separated from the rest of the site.
If the idea behind the tiers is to build such an archive, it should be enough to have a "speedrun" section, and a "superplay" section on the site. We can still keep stars and moons, their meaning wouldn't be changed. If a "speedrun+superplay" movie is beaten by a less entertaining "pure speedrun", we can modify the goals of the superplay movie afterwards. This will most likely create somewhat esoteric goals ("use MIPS the rabbit to pass through the door", "don't warp to the end of the game"), but this shouldn't be such a big problem.
Reassigning goals for those runs would also allow for future improvements with the same goals and restrictions.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
I'm strictly against separating in speedrun/superplay fashion. Because that means the GOAL would lead to a tier, which is weird. Only HOW AWESOME is the movie oerall must matter. Be it a glitched run, a 100% run, or any%. Boring result = welcome to vault. Ratings can help us decide whether it is a vault movie.
Stars and moons are at all manually assigned if I got it right. Demos are the only thing that may be judged by goal (perverted goals, almost rule breakers that are still entertaining, etc). And the rest runs should remain regular.
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.
