I can think one one in particular I'd like to see applied to movies..."Takes damage only where necessary." Super Metroid is a game where this could be applicable; you can't technically make a no-damage TAS of it because you have to let Mother Brain fry you with her Hyper Beam to progress the battle with her. But you could have a "Takes damage only where necessary" run of it.
Another category, along the same lines, would be "Only takes damage intentionally." This could be applied to DarkKobold's Shining Force run.
I can think one one in particular I'd like to see applied to movies..."Takes damage only where necessary." Super Metroid is a game where this could be applicable; you can't technically make a no-damage TAS of it because you have to let Mother Brain fry you with her Hyper Beam to progress the battle with her. But you could have a "Takes damage only where necessary" run of it.
You can complete the whole game without taking damage, using the skip from the newest run, but I can't imagine it making a very entertaining run (not really un-entertaining but not very different from what already exists, only slower).
IMO the damage tags could be removed completely because they are obsolete.
Not taking damage is acceptable only when it doesn't make the run slower. If taking damage makes the run faster, then it automatically becomes mandatory because not doing it is wasting frames for no good reason. (There's no such goal as "not taking damage.")
The only other situation where taking damage is acceptable is when it's inevitable.
When there's a choice of taking or not taking damage, neither of which will make the run any faster, the default for a "perfect" run is, obviously, to not to take it.
"Takes damage to save time" is completely equivalent to "this game can be completed faster by taking damage".
"Does not take any damage" is completely equivalent to "this game can not be completed faster by taking damage".
These should be rather obvious, so I don't see why the tags are necessary at all.
IMO the damage tags could be removed completely because they are obsolete.
Not taking damage is acceptable only when it doesn't make the run slower. If taking damage makes the run faster, then it automatically becomes mandatory because not doing it is wasting frames for no good reason. (There's no such goal as "not taking damage.")
Heaven forbid somebody make a stylistic choice.
If you're going to start dismantling every category that could possibly have something to do with not going as fast as ab-so-fucking-lutely possible, why don't we just trash any non-glitched run, since not using that glitch is wasted frames that could be spent making the movie shorter?
If you're going to start dismantling every category that could possibly have something to do with not going as fast as ab-so-fucking-lutely possible, why don't we just trash any non-glitched run, since not using that glitch is wasted frames that could be spent making the movie shorter?
Your slippery-slope argumentation was uncalled for.
To get back to the main topic, I'd like to see a 'category' for all gruefood that is fastest completion of a game that was 'too boring to publish'. (Not a published avi, not an image file, or even a description, only a game/rom name, and matching input-movie file)
This would allow competition for even the unpublishable games, and maybe some games that are borderline publishable could be put in this category to make everyone happy.
Essentially, a record book for TASes, which removes the goal of entertainment. (Also, no crazy 100% completed, no glitches, etc categories. Straight goal of getting to the end however fastest possible, with same rule of hardest difficulty, etc.)
This won't happen here, since Bisq has made it pretty obvious that it is out of line with the goals of this site.
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.
Seen Alden/GruefoodDelight? That encompasses a bit more than you propose, but was a major part of my intention. That reminds me, I should add Front Line...
And if the consensus is that we should stick to "art", I could point to several published movies that ought to be removed...
Yeah, I really like your Gruefood delight page. I wish you would add all the bad game choice ones, and put them in alphabetical order.
I also wish I had a million dollars, so take that wish with the same level of adherence.
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.
I fully agree with P.JBoy. Especially since the topic was created with Super Metroid as an example, which... if it were ever needed to have a sixth (!) published movie category for Super Metroid, it certainly wouldn't be "Takes damage only where necessary".
We already have two tags "Takes damage to save time" and "Takes no damage", and they are doing fine.
Warp wrote:
Not taking damage is acceptable only when it doesn't make the run slower.
I'd phrase this slightly different. Not taking damage is acceptable only if it is more entertaining than a the version that takes damage. In this case, only the movie that doesn't take damage should be published (if taking damage saves lots of time in quite a few places, then obviously this is more entertaining). I think Warp's phrase is too strict, because of for instance Jackie Chan's Action Kung Fu. That entire movie would have only been about 20 frames faster with taking damage... but it would be a lot less entertaining, since it loses a lot of the sense of perfection of the movie.
I think Warp's phrase is too strict, because of for instance Jackie Chan's Action Kung Fu. That entire movie would have only been about 20 frames faster with taking damage... but it would be a lot less entertaining, since it loses a lot of the sense of perfection of the movie.
Does that mean there are at most 20 places where damage can be taken, and no more? That doesn't sound too bad to me.
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player
(3574)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4754
Location: Tennessee
DarkKobold wrote:
I'd like to see a 'category' for all gruefood that is fastest completion of a game that was 'too boring to publish'. (Not a published avi, not an image file, or even a description, only a game/rom name, and matching input-movie file)
This would allow competition for even the unpublishable games, and maybe some games that are borderline publishable could be put in this category to make everyone happy.
Essentially, a record book for TASes, which removes the goal of entertainment. (Also, no crazy 100% completed, no glitches, etc categories. Straight goal of getting to the end however fastest possible, with same rule of hardest difficulty, etc.)
I like this idea too. I would love to see TASVideos be the official record book too, without deviating from its main objective. In this category, stylistic choices wouldn't matter, movie categories other than any% (and perhaps 100%?) wouldn't matter. Judgement would be easy, so there wouldn't be a time commitment with it.
This won't happen here, since Bisq has made it pretty obvious that it is out of line with the goals of this site.
Actually, I have heard Bisqwit mention on more than one occasion the possibility of opening the site up to all games.
Re: Warp
Takes no Damage means "Taking damage could make the movie faster, but the author chose not to". All games with this tag mean exactly that (yeah, yeah, there maybe a few incorrect labels out there).
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I for one, would really like a section like that added.
Honestly, it would be smart to add here before someone creates a competing site dedicated only to that, because I think there is a decent sized audience for it.
Uh, my idea wasn't to actually label the category boring - boring is too subjective for my tastes. Just an 'unpublishable' list of movies- for example, the latest OoT movie. It's a record holder, but 'unpublishable' for various faults.
This serves a few purposes. The queue is overloaded, and it would reduce the need to 'publish' borderline entertainment movies. As adelikat said, it would making judging 'boring' movies easier, and not hurt feelings, and all that crap. Finally, if you wanted to view a run for a game, and didn't find it in the main list, you could find the best suboptimal one (whether for entertainment, playing, etc) in this list. (As oppose to searching the forums, which is like asking for a million dollars.)
Alden- Genesis Outrun.
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.
I do think this would be a good idea, if only because it would encourage people to work on unTASed but marginal games, as often such runs are appreciated by fans of the game but end up being rejected as too dull for the general ordinance
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Xkeeper wrote:
DarkKobold wrote:
The queue is overloaded
Hahahahahahahahahahah.
You must not have been here very long.
DarkKobold: Joined: 2004-11-15
XKeeper: Joined: 2004-12-23
D'oh.
On topic, I think a subsection just dedicated to "records" and not to anything subjective is a grand idea. It would make boring games easy to locate for fans of the game, and it still keeps the front page relatively uncluttered.
