Joined: 5/1/2004
Posts: 4096
Location: Rio, Brazil
i watched the movie by arc (sorry i don't know how to use famtasia very well so i didn't see ur movie), but i think that showing what happens at extreme mistakes shows better the humanly impossible factor than just doing some perfect scores. it's ok to do a perfect score once, but as u got 3 free tries you want to make 3 different extreme things instead of 3 equally perfect ones. i'm not saying you did all perfect, as you said you didn't, i'm just pointing out how i think the track and field movie should be done
Shortly said, I refused the Track'n Field submission because its goal seemed to be "ego", not "entertainment".
Its only motivator was to "beat" Arc.
So why did you accept the SMB video that was 19 frames faster than mine? It wasn't more entertaining than mine, he just did everything about the same as me but just changed about 1 or 2 things to save a small fraction of a second. You also knew I was currently working on an improved version which was going to be completed very soon, so the other person's video seemed to be "ego", not "entertainment".
Why should the author's motive be important? For example, if I made an amazing video, but my motive was to "prove that I'm the master of the universe," how do my intentions change the video? You can't tell why the person made a time attack by just watching it, so the importance of ego puzzles me; what if Phil instead said that his point was to show perfection rather than aesthetics, would the video have been accepted? I think we should judge the quality of the author's video apart from his or her character, but maybe it's just me...
I have to say that all this "hey, I make a better score, why won't you publish it" attitude is a bit childish.
Different games have different goals due to their very design: Not all games are suitable for timeattacking simply because there's no time to beat. In some games it's not the playthrough time which counts, but for example the score you get (and often getting a higher score means that the complete playthrough is actually slower).
However, there's an important difference between games suitable for timeattacking and the other types of games where playthrough speed is irrelevant. In the first type of games playing through the game as fast as possible is exactly the thing which makes it awesome and entertaining: You often require so awesome planning, acrobatics, timing and precision that that in itself makes it very entertaining to watch.
However, in a game where score is the goal, making an entertaining video can be harder. If the highest score is achieved by repeating the exact same perfect achievement several times, that can get boring.
Track&field is a good example of this: In most cases you have three attempts to get a score. Making the exact same achievement in all three attempts is boring, and in this case even useless: The scores are not summed up, only the best one counts.
Thus it's only natural that you get the highest possible score once and do something funny and entertaining in the other attempts (if it's possible). If something like that gets you to laugh, that's a thousand times better than watching the exact same perfect achievement three times.
The goal of the track&field video is to show how funny things happen when you extend the physics of the game to their limits (or to show "hidden" features purposedly coded into the game, such as the falling ufo). Certainly in some of the events (such as archery) this is not possible, but whenever it is possible, that is the goal. Even though getting the highest score in each event is also a goal, the goal is not fastest playthrough nor highest sum of scores.
As for beating other people's videos, I think it's polite to consult first with the author of the original video, specially if he has put tons of efforts in it (which usually results in many versions of the timeattack), unless you can really greatly exceed his achievements with many truely innovative tricks.
If you have some idea which could save a couple of seconds in a timeattack, give the author a hint. It's not a nice feeling that you have spent so much time on some timeattack, polishing it as much as you can and making many new version of it, and then someone else submitting a 2 seconds faster version which overrides all your hard work without even having the chance of doing it yourself.
I'm not saying the castlevania video falls into this category. These are just some general thoughts about trying to beat other people's videos. Be considerate and don't just insensitively try to demolish his beloved "child" without even giving him a chance of polishing it himself.
If he does not want to implement the ideas himself, or you can clearly outperform him, specially if there have been only one or two versions of the video, or if quite many people have made new versions of the video, then it might be ok to just give it a try without asking. However, if a video has had only one author, and it's going on v8 or whatever, and you can only beat his time by a couple of seconds, then it may be considerate to ask the original author first...
I have to say that all this "hey, I make a better score, why won't you publish it" attitude is a bit childish.
It's not my words but yeah I think so.My video is better and it shouldn't be refused.
Warp wrote:
The goal of the track&field video is to show how funny things happen when you extend the physics of the game to their limits (or to show "hidden" features purposedly coded into the game, such as the falling ufo). Certainly in some of the events (such as archery) this is not possible, but whenever it is possible, that is the goal. Even though getting the highest score in each event is also a goal, the goal is not fastest playthrough nor highest sum of scores.
Can you watch my video before saying such things.You can see a bonus in the archery event.
Warp wrote:
As for beating other people's videos, I think it's polite to consult first with the author of the original video, specially if he has put tons of efforts in it (which usually results in many versions of the timeattack), unless you can really greatly exceed his achievements with many truely innovative tricks.
hmm you and Bisqwit are thinking very strangely.Olympic games yooohoo it's competition.I think sports games are good for competition.Btw Bisqwit was consulted before I start Castlevania.He said to me that he doesn't care if I do one.So you and Arc should consult before writing such conclusion.
hmm you and Bisqwit are thinking very strangely.Olympic games yooohoo it's competition.I think sports games are good for competition.Btw Bisqwit was consulted before I start Castlevania.He said to me that he doesn't care if I do one.So you and Arc should consult before writing such conclusion.
Please read my whole post. I said Castlevania did not fall into this category. I was speaking more generally to everyone, not just to you regarding to a specific event.
I have redone T&F now it should be Bisqwit rules compliant.What it is improved in this new run!?
Bonus obtained at the long jump.
9:48 seconds for the 110m hurdles.1 frame was lost in my last version probably caused by a desync.
Bonus obtained at the triple jump.
Total score is 218500.
Joined: 3/21/2004
Posts: 32
Location: the Netherlands
Woah, some heated discussion going on here...
I haven't seen either movie, but I can already give my opinion. I think that since this is Bisqwit's site, we should all be grateful he makes these videos available. If there's some video he doesn't accept, that's too bad for the maker, but things like that happen. It's not the end of the world. If you want to be sure your run gets published, don't do a game that's already been done.
If you want to be sure your run gets published, don't do a game that's already been done.
Both choices are equally uncertain.
Doing a movie of a new game:
- Your movie might be uninteresting, because it's bad or the game is bad.
Beating someone's movie:
- Your movie could be less interesting than the existing one.
Beating your own movie has the highest chance to get published, because I usually trust that the author knows what he's doing for his own movie.
Or Phil can encode it himself and send it to Arc or Palatinums sites if Bisqwit does not want it.
Bisqwits site is not the only time attack site.
So far I have found Phils and Genistos time attacks to be among the highest quality time attacks I have seen though.
Ok, I have seen the european version by phil now, and to be honest, I have absolutely no idea of why it was added as a supplement instead of obsoleting. Great work phil!
Ok, since there's 3 and too much movies of that game and were done with Famtasia, I think one done with FCEU that obsoletes all 3 should be made. But what must I do to perform that?
Imo, doing a 2 player could satisfied everyone because I could do those flawed moves in Arc's movies and do other things that you want + I could obtain extra bonuses that are not in any movies.
What's your opinion? Especially you Bisqwit.
P.S. I don't want that "He is doing that run for ego" attitude. Otherwise, I am losing my time.
Imo, doing a 2 player could satisfied everyone because I could do those flawed moves in Arc's movies and do other things that you want + I could obtain extra bonuses that are not in any movies.
The competitive Player 1 and his silly brother Player 2, who doesn't really care all that much about winning?
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, ...
Oh my, reviving a two-year old thread.
(No offense meant, please continue. But I have no further opinion to express besides the one(s) I expressed on the IRC channel a few hours ago.)
