One of Nesvideos finest TAS is done!! JXQ's 100% run!

DJGrenola:

is in the group Global Moderator.

registered on 2004-10-11 03:16:49 am.

Location: ein Banning

view all posts by DJGrenola

DJGrenola

2006-04-23 01:33:22 pm

urmom

urdad

Quote from moozooh:

Quote from Arkarian:

I have known nate long enough to be able to believe his personality (rather than thinking it's a lie) and what he says, and that is why I can say I know him. Forming an image of a person in one's mind is not reality - you're just putting your own mind's twist on how the person behaves.

1. Time does not characterize the degree of knowing oneself. That becomes very representative in some kind of relationships such as between children and their parents.
2. One cannot percieve a reality without putting his own mind's twist to it. In other words, either all you percieve is a "reality", or there is no such thing as "reality" at all.
3. Don't use something you can never prove as a basis.
Thus, you may tell me the person's "not like that" all the time, but if it acts like that, it doesn't make any difference to me. And it doesn't have to, apparently.

Quote from Arkarian:

Additionally, I am a mod: you cannot argue with that fact. Finally, as I am a mod, I have the power to judge what is and what is not considered flaming. I do not need to give a clear definition of it, as there is none. Flaming is whatever a mod or admin believes is flaming. It can be loosely defined in the rules, but, when it all comes down to it, the mods/admins have the final say about flaming and how to punish it. As a mod, I do have a clear, individual understanding of flaming, and that's all that matters - as I am the one who wields the power.

Such a beautiful position you got there! How was it like?.. "Good... Bad... I'm the guy with the gun." ;)

More bait. This is irrelevant bickering and has nothing to do with TAS/anti-TAS. We make no progress while it goes on.

Quote from moozooh:

Quote from Arkarian:

No, please do. Because you have provided no counterargument, you have nothing to stand on. By solely laughing at me, you are explicating to everyone that you have no counterargument: you are simply trying to make me look bad. In fact, how can you argue with what I just said? A cyborg run is not a true run with a real-life time. It takes hours and hours to complete one, so the final ":39" is not, in fact, the true time.

Ok, that's simple: you can say JXQ's 00:39 is a real time because the game states that (you cannot argue with that), and it was not cheated (that means the end time is solely a result of a player's input).

I dispute this. It's not solely the result of a player's input, it's the result of the player's input plus the ability to warp time, something that an unassisted runner does not possess. It's a bit like suggesting that an athlete who uses steroids should be allowed to compete on the same terms as one who does not.

Quote from moozooh:

There is no such thing as "tool-assisted time" (or just "time") in this world.

There is. It's the difference between a time achieved unassisted versus a time achieved using an emulator. You know this, no matter how philosophically you try to argue against it.

Quote from moozooh:

But wait, I'm going to take this morony to some extent! Now, Behold! :D

bait

Quote from moozooh:

1. You can't say Scarlet's 00:55 is a real time, cause it was multi-segmented (so, the time spent on the game was much much more than 55 minutes).
2. You can't say Smokey's single-segmented 00:38 is a real time either, cause the game didn't count the minutes wasted on the room transitions and item acquisition.
Now go argue with that, if you still think that argument had some logic in itself.

The difference is crystal clear. Tools are used to achieve TAS times and not used to achieve non-TAS times. Comparing the two is unfair to the console runner.

Quote from moozooh:

Quote from Arkarian:

What issue are you referring to?

This one:

Quote from Arkarian:

I think you have an issue with misunderstanding.

Quote from Arkarian:

Both Saber and Grenola have been around this site and know nate much better than DXQ does. That has nothing to do with them agreeing with DXQ on some of his points.

I fail to see logic in this statement.
-- Both Saber and Grenola know Nate better than JXQ does;
-- they agree with him;
-- thus, JXQ has some issues with misunderstanding (huh?), but Saber and Grenola have not.
Care to explain?

Guys, if you want to have a discussion about TAS, fine. Picking holes in ark's logic is not related to the morality or otherwise of TAS and can only make things worse. Ark is trying to defend Nate because he feels he ought to, but we're losing sight of the issue.

[quote="moozooh"][quote="Arkarian"]I have known nate long enough to be able to believe his personality (rather than thinking it's a lie) and what he says, and that is why I can say I know him. Forming an image of a person in one's mind is [i]not[/i] reality - you're just putting your own mind's twist on how the person behaves.[/quote]
1. Time does not characterize the degree of knowing oneself. That becomes very representative in some kind of relationships such as between children and their parents.
2. One cannot percieve a reality without putting his own mind's twist to it. In other words, either all you percieve is a "reality", or there is no such thing as "reality" at all.
3. Don't use something you can never prove as a basis. 
Thus, you may tell me the person's "not like that" all the time, but if it acts like that, it doesn't make any difference to me. And it doesn't have to, apparently.

[quote="Arkarian"]Additionally, I am a mod: you cannot argue with that fact. Finally, as I am a mod, I have the power to judge what is and what is not considered flaming. I do not need to give a clear definition of it, as there is none. Flaming is whatever a mod or admin believes is flaming. It can be loosely defined in the rules, but, when it all comes down to it, the mods/admins have the final say about flaming and how to punish it. As a mod, I [i]do[/i] have a clear, individual understanding of flaming, and that's all that matters - as I am the one who wields the power.[/quote]
Such a beautiful position you got there! How was it like?.. "Good... Bad... I'm the guy with the gun." ;)[/quote]

More bait. This is irrelevant bickering and has nothing to do with TAS/anti-TAS. We make no progress while it goes on.

[quote="moozooh"][quote="Arkarian"]No, please do. Because you have provided no counterargument, you have nothing to stand on. By solely laughing at me, you are explicating to everyone that you [i]have[/i] no counterargument: you are simply trying to make me look bad. In fact, how [i]can[/i] you argue with what I just said? A cyborg run is [i]not[/i] a true run with a real-life time. It takes hours and hours to complete one, so the final ":39" is not, in fact, the true time.[/quote]
Ok, that's simple: you [b]can[/b] say JXQ's 00:39 is a real time because the game states that (you cannot argue with that), and it was not cheated (that means the end time is solely a result of a player's input).[/quote]

I dispute this. It's not solely the result of a player's input, it's the result of the player's input plus the ability to warp time, something that an unassisted runner does not possess. It's a bit like suggesting that an athlete who uses steroids should be allowed to compete on the same terms as one who does not.

[quote="moozooh"]There is no such thing as "tool-assisted time" (or just "time") in this world.[/quote]

There is. It's the difference between a time achieved unassisted versus a time achieved using an emulator. You know this, no matter how philosophically you try to argue against it.

[quote="moozooh"]But wait, I'm going to take this morony to some extent! Now, Behold! :D[/quote]

bait

[quote="moozooh"]1. You [b]can't[/b] say Scarlet's 00:55 is a real time, cause it was multi-segmented (so, the time spent on the game was much much more than 55 minutes).
2. You [b]can't[/b] say Smokey's single-segmented 00:38 is a real time either, cause the game didn't count the minutes wasted on the room transitions and item acquisition.
Now go argue with that, if you still think that argument had some logic in itself.[/quote]

The difference is crystal clear. Tools are used to achieve TAS times and not used to achieve non-TAS times. Comparing the two is unfair to the console runner.

[quote="moozooh"][quote="Arkarian"]What issue are you referring to?[/quote]
This one:
[quote="Arkarian"]I think you have an issue with misunderstanding.[/quote]

[quote="Arkarian"]Both Saber and Grenola have been around this site and know nate [i]much[/i] better than DXQ does. That has nothing to do with them agreeing with DXQ on some of his points.[/quote]
I fail to see logic in this statement.
-- Both Saber and Grenola know Nate better than JXQ does;
-- they agree with him;
-- thus, JXQ has some issues with misunderstanding (huh?), but Saber and Grenola have not.
Care to explain?[/quote]

Guys, if you want to have a discussion about TAS, fine. Picking holes in ark's logic is not related to the morality or otherwise of TAS and can only make things worse. Ark is trying to defend Nate because he feels he ought to, but we're losing sight of the issue.

JXQ:

registered on 2006-04-22 12:02:31 pm.

view all posts by JXQ

JXQ

2006-04-23 01:34:03 pm

Foreword: I forwarded Red Scarlet's concern to Bisqwit; the comparison has since been removed.

Arkarian, how can you seriously say this:

Quote from Arkarian:

Cyborg runs, like them or not, are an entirely different genre and are not something that nate wants to document here. That's his decision entirely, and everyone needs to respect that.

And then in the same post, say this:

Quote from Arkarian:

Quote from JXQ:

you are operating on a site which he has full control of and influence over.

Whether you understand this yet or not, that's completely untrue.

Which one is it?

Quote from Arkanian:

The only reason we mods/admins edit posts is if they contain something that breaks the forum's rules - that's it.

It's very easy to remove something under the guise of this (repeats Angerfist's Fusion post as example). And yes I know it was undeleted - but only after the deleting was called out as unfair.

Quote from Arkanian:

I took the quotation marks as referring to the fact that the :39 is not a real time. It has been tool-assisted; therefore, it is a "time". The quotes had no derogatory value that I could see.

You and I are so on different sides of the fence here. Remove the quotes, and the post has the same meaning. The quotes are, as I said, at attempt at a reaction (although it was very minor and not insulting). On the other hand, Nate's signature was not minor and was insulting, and an attempt at trolling. Am I sensitive about it? Yes, but I've seen Nate needlessly and brutally come down on others in the past (example - Saturn should be subject to "instant damnation" for doing a TAS RBO run), and so when his insults childishly turn to me, I'm going to respond. And the fact that my post was a flame, yet Nate's post was fine because I don't "know" him is obviously biased and unfair. Just because I haven't specifically made posts to him doesn't mean I don't "know" him. Maybe I even know him better than you do.

Foreword: I forwarded Red Scarlet's concern to Bisqwit; the comparison has since been removed.

Arkarian, how can you seriously say this:
[quote="Arkarian"]Cyborg runs, like them or not, are an entirely different genre and are not something that nate wants to document here. [b]That's his decision entirely, and everyone needs to respect that.[/b][/quote]
And then in the same post, say this:
[quote="Arkarian"][quote="JXQ"]you are operating on a site which [b]he has full control of and influence over.[/b][/quote]
Whether you understand this yet or not, that's completely untrue.[/quote]
Which one is it?

[quote="Arkanian"]The only reason we mods/admins edit posts is if they contain something that breaks the forum's rules - that's it.[/quote]
It's very easy to remove something under the guise of this (repeats Angerfist's Fusion post as example).  And yes I know it was undeleted - but only after the deleting was called out as unfair.

[quote="Arkanian"]I took the quotation marks as referring to the fact that the :39 is not a real time. It has been tool-assisted; therefore, it is a "time". The quotes had no derogatory value that I could see.[/quote]
You and I are so on different sides of the fence here.  Remove the quotes, and the post has the same meaning.  The quotes are, as I said, at attempt at a reaction (although it was very minor and not insulting).  On the other hand, Nate's signature was not minor and was insulting, and an attempt at trolling.  Am I sensitive about it?  Yes, but I've seen Nate needlessly and brutally come down on others in the past (example - Saturn should be subject to "instant damnation" for doing a TAS RBO run), and so when his insults childishly turn to me, I'm going to respond.  And the fact that my post was a flame, yet Nate's post was fine because I don't "know" him is obviously biased and unfair.  Just because I haven't specifically made posts to him doesn't mean I don't "know" him.  Maybe I even know him better than you do.

arkarian:

is in the group Administrator.

registered on 2004-09-01 04:15:32 pm.

Gender: male

Location: ellicott city, md, usa

view all posts by arkarian

arkarian

2006-04-23 01:49:12 pm

mindfulness

fully erect

Quote from JXQ:

Arkarian, how can you seriously say this:

Quote from Arkarian:

Cyborg runs, like them or not, are an entirely different genre and are not something that nate wants to document here. That's his decision entirely, and everyone needs to respect that.

And then in the same post, say this:

Quote from Arkarian:

Quote from JXQ:

you are operating on a site which he has full control of and influence over.

Whether you understand this yet or not, that's completely untrue.

Which one is it?

I'll tell you: first of all, the first quote of mine that you have there is me talking about whether or not to document cyborg runs. That matter is nate's sole decision, as this is his site, and an issue as large as that should be left to him. The second quote of mine is my response to you saying that nate has TOTAL control of everything. "Everything" and "just the matter of whether or not to include cyborg runs on the site" are two different things. The former, nate would certainly ask the rest of the Forum Management for their input or even for them to make changes themselves. The latter, being much more vital to the site, is mostly in nate's hands.

Quote from JXQ:

It's very easy to remove something under the guise of this (repeats Angerfist's Fusion post as example). And yes I know it was undeleted - but only after the deleting was called out as unfair.

Sure, it's easy, but the Forum Management here would never do something like that. Can you prove our honesty? No, you just have to take our word for it as decent people.

Quote from JXQ:

Maybe I even know him better than you do.

Don't even try to say that.

[quote="JXQ"]Arkarian, how can you seriously say this:
[quote="Arkarian"]Cyborg runs, like them or not, are an entirely different genre and are not something that nate wants to document here. [b]That's his decision entirely, and everyone needs to respect that.[/b][/quote]
And then in the same post, say this:
[quote="Arkarian"][quote="JXQ"]you are operating on a site which [b]he has full control of and influence over.[/b][/quote]
Whether you understand this yet or not, that's completely untrue.[/quote]
Which one is it?[/quote]
I'll tell you: first of all, the first quote of mine that you have there is me talking about whether or not to document cyborg runs. That matter [i]is[/i] nate's sole decision, as this is his site, and an issue as large as that should be left to him. The second quote of mine is my response to you saying that nate has TOTAL control of [i]everything[/i]. "Everything" and "just the matter of whether or not to include cyborg runs on the site" are two different things. The former, nate would certainly ask the rest of the Forum Management for their input or even for them to make changes themselves. The latter, being much more vital to the site, is mostly in nate's hands.

[quote="JXQ"]It's very easy to remove something under the guise of this (repeats Angerfist's Fusion post as example).  And yes I know it was undeleted - but only after the deleting was called out as unfair.[/quote]
Sure, it's easy, but the Forum Management here would [i]never[/i] do something like that. Can you prove our honesty? No, you just have to take our word for it as decent people.

[quote="JXQ"]Maybe I even know him better than you do.[/quote]
Don't even try to say that.

DJGrenola:

is in the group Global Moderator.

registered on 2004-10-11 03:16:49 am.

Location: ein Banning

view all posts by DJGrenola

DJGrenola

2006-04-23 02:15:00 pm

urmom

urdad

Quote from AngerFist:

Quote from DJGrenola:

It was considered, but the conclusion was reached that the less power wielded in this thread the better..

So the rules about off topic is basically useless huh?

I think "flexible" rather than "useless".

Quote from AngerFist:

Quote from DJGrenola:

Don't tell the mods how to do their job.

I wrote "shouldnt", meaning something they should probably do, not an order and they can perfectly answer for themselves.

Quote from DJGrenola:

She didn't say Bisqwit wrote it. Stop seeing things that aren't there.

Which is why I wrote: "not that would make any difference" and stop replying for her, she can answer for herself.

okay fine, I give up. I'm not going to get beaten to death over this, and maybe I just did more harm than good.

was nice meeting you all.

JXQ:

registered on 2006-04-22 12:02:31 pm.

view all posts by JXQ

JXQ

2006-04-23 02:18:48 pm

Quote from Arkarian:

The former, nate would certainly ask the rest of the Forum Management for their input or even for them to make changes themselves. The latter, being much more vital to the site, is mostly in nate's hands.

I said that Nate has control over the site (which makes me distrust the objective view of its content), and you reply by saying he only controls things that are "vital" to the site. Your point more or less agrees with mine, but the difference is that you trust Nate and I don't. Based on his actions in this and previous threads, trying to assure me that this site operates the way you say it does is hopeless. I don't trust him based on things I've seen him do, and with you wielding your mod powers about like you do, I don't really have a reason to believe you anyway.

And perhaps I do know Nate better. Maybe he's just done a better job of disguising himself from those who defend his actions so viciously. Either way, I hope you realize that no matter how much you try to ignore it by pointing out that you "know" him, and that you "know" Nate would never do such a thing - he's still trolling on his own website against myself, and (in this case indirectly) the TAS community, and now you're trying to defend that. I think that's ridiculous.

[quote="Arkarian"]The former, nate would certainly ask the rest of the Forum Management for their input or even for them to make changes themselves. The latter, being much more vital to the site, is mostly in nate's hands.[/quote]
I said that Nate has control over the site (which makes me distrust the objective view of its content), and you reply by saying he only controls things that are "vital" to the site.  Your point more or less agrees with mine, but the difference is that you trust Nate and I don't.  Based on his actions in this and previous threads, trying to assure me that this site operates the way you say it does is hopeless.  I don't trust him based on things I've seen him do, and with you wielding your mod powers about like you do, I don't really have a reason to believe you anyway.

And perhaps I do know Nate better.  Maybe he's just done a better job of disguising himself from those who defend his actions so viciously.  Either way, I hope you realize that no matter how much you try to ignore it by pointing out that you "know" him, and that you "know" Nate would [i]never[/i] do such a thing - he's still trolling on his own website against myself, and (in this case indirectly) the TAS community, and now you're trying to defend that.  I think that's ridiculous.

moozooh:

registered on 2006-01-11 12:51:46 pm.

Gender: male

Location: Moscow

view all posts by moozooh

moozooh

2006-04-23 02:19:59 pm

Quote from DJGrenola:

More bait. This is irrelevant bickering and has nothing to do with TAS/anti-TAS. We make no progress while it goes on.

I understand this, now tell it to Arkarian as well. Moreover, his position is highly authoritative and most of that "I am a mod" paragraph doesn't make much sense anyway.

Quote from DJGrenola:

I dispute this. It's not solely the result of a player's input, it's the result of the player's input plus the ability to warp time, something that an unassisted runner does not possess. It's a bit like suggesting that an athlete who uses steroids should be allowed to compete on the same terms as one who does not.

You may dispute this until forever. The thing is, the final time is not warped in any way. Movie replay isn't warped, either.
Note that the Special Olympics athletes do not whine about the regualr athletes' time just because they can't do this and that equally good. You may replace Special Olympics with Junior Olympics (or however they are called), you'll get the same. Buy the way, it wasn't my analogy, either. Time is time, no matter how "unfair" do you consider it to be.

Quote from DJGrenola:

There is. It's the difference between a time achieved unassisted versus a time achieved using an emulator. You know this, no matter how philosophically you try to argue against it.

Then tell me, why does, say, "Quake Done Quick With A Vengeance" video count 12:23 as its completion time? It is segmented as hell, and the segments are being redone tons of times, YET the final "time" is 12:23! It implies that the game was completed in 12:23, but it was not. I don't get it, honestly.

You know why is that? I can tell. You decide what's fair and what's not just because you feel so, without any really rational basis. That's not philosophy, and not even close to it. That's why I'm not going to argue against it anymore, as it isn't going anywhere. Your feelings are your feelings, I have no intention to hurt or change them. This topic is now closed.

Quote from DJGrenola:

The difference between the two is crystal clear. Tools were used to achieve one time and not the other. Comparing the two is unfair to the console runner.

Read the example with the Olympic Games above.
Still, note that I didn't compare the times! I did point a huge flaw in Ark's logic. And I didn't even said a word about comparing them.

Quote from DJGrenola:

Guys, if you want to have a discussion about TAS, fine. Picking holes in ark's logic is not related to the morality or otherwise of TAS and can only make things worse. Ark is trying to defend Nate because he feels he ought to, but we're losing sight of the issue.

Well, I think Nate can defend himself if he feels a need to. I didn't ask Ark to do this, but I couldn't refuse myself to challenge his claims and statements.

[quote="DJGrenola"]More bait. This is irrelevant bickering and has nothing to do with TAS/anti-TAS. We make no progress while it goes on.[/quote]
I understand this, now tell it to Arkarian as well. Moreover, his position is highly authoritative and most of that "I am a mod" paragraph doesn't make much sense anyway.

[quote="DJGrenola"]I dispute this. It's not solely the result of a player's input, it's the result of the player's input plus the ability to warp time, something that an unassisted runner does not possess. It's a bit like suggesting that an athlete who uses steroids should be allowed to compete on the same terms as one who does not.[/quote]
You may dispute this until forever. The thing is, the final time is not warped in any way. Movie replay isn't warped, either.
Note that the Special Olympics athletes do not whine about the regualr athletes' time just because they can't do this and that equally good. You may replace Special Olympics with Junior Olympics (or however they are called), you'll get the same. Buy the way, it wasn't my analogy, either. Time is time, no matter how "unfair" do you consider it to be.

[quote="DJGrenola"]There is. It's the difference between a time achieved unassisted versus a time achieved using an emulator. You know this, no matter how philosophically you try to argue against it.[/quote]
Then tell me, why does, say, "Quake Done Quick With A Vengeance" video count 12:23 as its completion time? It is segmented as hell, and the segments are being redone tons of times, [i]YET[/i] the final "time" is 12:23! It [i]implies[/i] that the game was completed in 12:23, but it [b]was not[/b]. I don't get it, honestly.

You know why is that? I can tell. You decide what's fair and what's not just because you [i]feel[/i] so, without any really rational basis. That's not philosophy, and not even close to it. That's why I'm not going to argue against it anymore, as it isn't going anywhere. Your feelings are your feelings, I have no intention to hurt or change them. This topic is now closed.

[quote="DJGrenola"]The difference between the two is crystal clear. Tools were used to achieve one time and not the other. Comparing the two is unfair to the console runner.[/quote]
Read the example with the Olympic Games above.
Still, note that I [i]didn't compare[/i] the times! I did point a huge flaw in Ark's logic. And I didn't even said a word about comparing them.

[quote="DJGrenola"]Guys, if you want to have a discussion about TAS, fine. Picking holes in ark's logic is not related to the morality or otherwise of TAS and can only make things worse. Ark is trying to defend Nate because he feels he ought to, but we're losing sight of the issue.[/quote]
Well, I think Nate can defend himself if he feels a need to. I didn't ask Ark to do this, but I couldn't refuse myself to challenge his claims and statements.

SABERinBLUE:

is in the group Global Moderator.

registered on 2004-03-06 12:11:57 pm.

Location: Waco, TX

view all posts by SABERinBLUE

SABERinBLUE

2006-04-23 02:23:10 pm

Cook of the Sea

Quote from JXQ:

It's very easy to remove something under the guise of this (repeats Angerfist's Fusion post as example). And yes I know it was undeleted - but only after the deleting was called out as unfair.

Angerfist's post was a mistake, and I believe I raised hell with the staff over its deletion before anyone complained in the thread about it. That doesn't erase the mistake, but it does show that not the whole staff thinks like nate here.

Quote from moozooh:

I fail to see logic in this statement.
-- Both Saber and Grenola know Nate better than JXQ does;
-- they agree with him;
-- thus, JXQ has some issues with misunderstanding (huh?), but Saber and Grenola have not.
Care to explain?

Dunno where you got the idea that I agree with nate here. Nate's my friend of a couple years but I make no secret of the fact that I am diametrically opposed to him on this issue. He won't budge; I have tried to budge him many times. But I'm loyal to this site and I will defend nate's character. Plus, as scarlet said, he holds the keys to the city, so he can do what he wants.

EDIT: Ah, I forgot to speak on the "time" issue. This has been a problem in the past. My thinking on this is that luke's post would have been better worded as:

congratulations on "your" time.

There is no question that the time was achieved. It was displayed on the screen by the game, thus it is a time. However, JXQ's sole ownership of the time can be called into question as he had help getting it. I'm not implying anything negative by this, merely stating where the line actually is.

For example, Alex J. Murphy gets shot up and is turned into Robocop. Then he grabs a steel bar and ties it into a knot. Was the bar tied into a knot? Hell yes it was. The bar will attest to the fact that it was indeed tied into a knot. But did Alex J. Murphy tie it into a knot? Well, yes, but he had help from the cybernetic devices that make him Robocop.

Commenting further on things that have been placed in quotes, allow me also to implore you guys not to take the phrase "cyborg run" as an insult. I coined it last november and tossed it at bisqwit in a nomenclature proposal. My goal was to eliminate the term "emu rape" from use here on m2k2, as it had bothered me and many other people. I wanted to further friendly relations between the two sites. While the proposal died on the nesvideos forums, bisqwit himself liked the idea and it's up in the glossary on the nesvideos site.

I'm not asking you guys to use the term, but please, please don't misconstrue it as an insult. It could not be further from an insult.

[quote="JXQ"]It's very easy to remove something under the guise of this (repeats Angerfist's Fusion post as example).  And yes I know it was undeleted - but only after the deleting was called out as unfair.[/quote]

Angerfist's post was a mistake, and I believe I raised hell with the staff over its deletion before anyone complained in the thread about it.  That doesn't erase the mistake, but it does show that not the whole staff thinks like nate here.

[quote="moozooh"]I fail to see logic in this statement.
-- Both Saber and Grenola know Nate better than JXQ does;
-- they agree with him;
-- thus, JXQ has some issues with misunderstanding (huh?), but Saber and Grenola have not.
Care to explain?[/quote]

Dunno where you got the idea that I agree with nate here.  Nate's my friend of a couple years but I make no secret of the fact that I am diametrically [i]opposed[/i] to him on this issue.  He won't budge; I have tried to budge him many times.  But I'm loyal to this site and I will defend nate's character.  Plus, as scarlet said, he holds the keys to the city, so he can do what he wants.

EDIT:  Ah, I forgot to speak on the "time" issue.  This has been a problem in the past.  My thinking on this is that luke's post would have been better worded as:

congratulations on "your" time.

There is no question that the time was achieved.  It was displayed on the screen by the game, thus it is a time.  However, JXQ's [i]sole[/i] ownership of the time can be called into question as he had [i]help[/i] getting it.  I'm not implying anything negative by this, merely stating where the line actually is.

For example, Alex J. Murphy gets shot up and is turned into Robocop.  Then he grabs a steel bar and ties it into a knot.  Was the bar tied into a knot?  Hell yes it was.  The bar will attest to the fact that it was indeed tied into a knot.  But did Alex J. Murphy tie it into a knot?  Well, yes, but he had help from the cybernetic devices that make him Robocop.

Commenting further on things that have been placed in quotes, allow me also to [i]implore[/i] you guys not to take the phrase "cyborg run" as an insult.  I coined it last november and tossed it at bisqwit in a nomenclature proposal.  My goal was to eliminate the term "emu rape" from use here on m2k2, as it had bothered me and many other people.  I wanted to further friendly relations between the two sites.  While the proposal died on the nesvideos forums, bisqwit himself liked the idea and it's up in the glossary on the nesvideos site.

I'm not asking you guys to use the term, but please, [i]please[/i] don't misconstrue it as an insult.  It could not be further from an insult.

moozooh:

registered on 2006-01-11 12:51:46 pm.

Gender: male

Location: Moscow

view all posts by moozooh

moozooh

2006-04-23 02:26:08 pm

Quote from SABERinBLUE:

Dunno where you got the idea that I agree with nate here.

No no, not with Nate -- with JXQ!

transience:

registered on 2005-03-03 09:52:08 am.

Location: z z 9 plural z alpha

view all posts by transience

transience

2006-04-23 02:27:10 pm

twenty eight fifty

i get the feeling that a majority of the people on this forum are just going to let this die because it just isn't interesting / important anymore. we've been down this road before and nothing good ever happens. at this point, it's an argument over semantics.

Quote from JXQ:

On the other hand, Nate's signature was not minor and was insulting, and an attempt at trolling. Am I sensitive about it? Yes, but I've seen Nate needlessly and brutally come down on others in the past (example - Saturn should be subject to "instant damnation" for doing a TAS RBO run), and so when his insults childishly turn to me, I'm going to respond.

i find it somewhat comical that you're taking the quote as nate insulting you when he didn't even say it. i haven't seen you say a thing about monster erb. it's like you want to be offended by nate so you have more material to work with.

Kyrsimys:

registered on 2006-04-23 02:13:16 pm.

view all posts by Kyrsimys

Kyrsimys

2006-04-23 02:30:07 pm

Quote from DJGrenola:

I think the issue is that not everybody does know the difference, and I'm going to have to beg to differ. There is everything wrong with comparing a TAS with a speedrun. It's like comparing apples to oranges. They are not the same thing.

I really don't get this. Of course a TAS and a speedrun are two totally different things, but why can't you compare their times? Of course there is no point in comparing them directly as in "JXQ's time is 0:39 and Scarlet's time is 0:55 so JXQ must be a better player and there must be something wrong about Scarlet's run", but why can't you compare them like "The TAS time is 0:39 and the speedrun time is 0:55, so it must mean that there are many things you can do with tools in this game that you can't replicate on a console". Of course the times should be compared! The first thing people here wanted to know about this run was the time, and I'm not surprised. It's INTERESTING. It shows the big difference there is between TASes and speedruns.

Anyway, my take on this thread is that it's once again become a silly fight about semantics and such, and it should not be continued when the tone is as hostile as it is. What's surprising to me here is seeing JXQ's and moozooh's almost hostile and provocative posts, although I do understand where they are coming from and that this is a frustrating matter to us TASers.

Edit: Oh and.. hi!

[quote="DJGrenola"]I think the issue is that not everybody does know the difference, and I'm going to have to beg to differ. There is everything wrong with comparing a TAS with a speedrun. It's like comparing apples to oranges. [i]They are not the same thing.[/i][/quote]
I really don't get this. Of course a TAS and a speedrun are two totally different things, but why can't you compare their times? Of course there is no point in comparing them directly as in "JXQ's time is 0:39 and Scarlet's time is 0:55 so JXQ must be a better player and there must be something wrong about Scarlet's run", but why can't you compare them like "The TAS time is 0:39 and the speedrun time is 0:55, so it must mean that there are many things you can do with tools in this game that you can't replicate on a console". Of course the times should be compared! The first thing people here wanted to know about this run was the time, and I'm not surprised. It's INTERESTING. It shows the big difference there is between TASes and speedruns.

Anyway, my take on this thread is that it's once again become a silly fight about semantics and such, and it should not be continued when the tone is as hostile as it is. What's surprising to me here is seeing JXQ's and moozooh's almost hostile and provocative posts, although I do understand where they are coming from and that this is a frustrating matter to us TASers.

Edit: Oh and.. hi!

moozooh:

registered on 2006-01-11 12:51:46 pm.

Gender: male

Location: Moscow

view all posts by moozooh

moozooh

2006-04-23 02:38:57 pm

Quote from Kyrsimys:

What's surprising to me here is seeing JXQ's and moozooh's almost hostile and provocative posts, although I do understand where they are coming from and that this is a frustrating matter to us TASers.

Well usually I try to stay neutral and polite, at least if my opponent's words make sense. Sometimes they doesn't, and I can't refuse myself some harmless little mockery. %)
No offense meant, anyway. I don't position myself on another side of a barricade, I just like justice (TM). :D

JXQ:

registered on 2006-04-22 12:02:31 pm.

view all posts by JXQ

JXQ

2006-04-23 02:40:51 pm

transience, perhaps you missed this:

Quote from JXQ:

It didn't bother me that MonsterERB was asking for the game time (it was just easy to make light of in my post). I believe the reason it was not said immediately was because I also didn't put it in the description until a few days later so that those watching it on Nesvideos could see it for themselves. What did bother me was that he came to a thread about a Super Metroid tas and decided to say "I don't like tool-assisted runs. [sarcastic comment about re-records]."

Nate may not have directly insulted me, but advertising someone else's insult to me, combined with having a track record for needlessly bashing TASing, equates to an attack in my book. I'm glad you're somewhat amused.

13M13:

registered on 2005-12-03 05:10:54 am.

view all posts by 13M13

13M13

2006-04-23 02:50:21 pm

l'appel du vide

Just want to clarify the editing deal. I did, in fact, edit my post; because, however, it was the last post in this thread at the time, no edit message appeared.
That's how it works.

Quote from Kyrsimys:

Anyway, my take on this thread is that it's once again become a silly fight about semantics and such, and it should not be continued when the tone is as hostile as it is. What's surprising to me here is seeing JXQ's and moozooh's almost hostile and provocative posts, although I do understand where they are coming from and that this is a frustrating matter to us TASers.

I agree with this post.

Ryan Ferneau:

registered on 2005-04-13 04:59:51 pm.

view all posts by Ryan Ferneau

Ryan Ferneau

2006-04-23 03:36:25 pm

You may be correct, Mr. Garfield! I know I've pretty much run out of things to argue about, anyway. So um... how about that Space Jump? Pretty fast way of jumping, huh?

Kejardon:

registered on 2004-12-07 07:21:36 pm.

Gender: male

view all posts by Kejardon

Kejardon

2006-04-23 04:11:43 pm

Embarrasing Fact: Power suit made by lowest bidder

Wall jump > Space jump

SABERinBLUE:

is in the group Global Moderator.

registered on 2004-03-06 12:11:57 pm.

Location: Waco, TX

view all posts by SABERinBLUE

SABERinBLUE

2006-04-23 04:19:41 pm

Cook of the Sea

Hey Millsy, where's the link to your mirror? My dorm connection has creative differences with torrents.

AngerFist:

registered on 2005-07-03 10:00:40 am.

Gender: male

Location: Stockholm, Sweden

view all posts by AngerFist

AngerFist

2006-04-23 04:49:58 pm

Quote from Ryan Ferneau:

anyway. So um... how about that Space Jump? Pretty fast way of jumping, huh?

Best part was how he entered Ridley :D

Red Scarlet:

registered on 2004-01-20 01:26:46 pm.

Gender: female

Location: My house

view all posts by Red Scarlet

Red Scarlet

2006-04-23 06:02:49 pm

I('d) like to watch (some MP3 runs)

Quote from moozooh:

Sadly, I don't know what in the world have lead you to this thought.

Because JXQ is asking people here to do what has been done by several players (myself included) for years already.

Quote from DJGrenola:

Red, I think he was talking about the use of tools to improve console times via practice or finding new tricks, not that tas *runs* are a natural progression from console ones.

Which befuddles me, because as he already knows from the Fusion 0% topic being created, it is already being done long before yesterday. So I don't get why he's even asking this. People have been using the roms to find out stuff for some of these games for years. I know I used savestates while trying to see if I could pull something off or not before doing them on the console.

Quote from AngerFist:

Wrong. The author chose to write that (not Bisqwit but that wouldnt make any difference) and there is absolutely nothing wrong with comparing a speedrun with a tas as long as you know the difference + every tas .avi states in the beginning how that certain run was made. Also, we are sick and tired correcting ourselves everytime a speedrunner/speedrun community complains, no more compromising. We couldnt care less because we've done all the changes that where possible.

Nowhere did I say Bisqwit himself wrote it. The author did, and whoever puts those up accepted it. You guys flaunt how they aren't compared, yet here is a crystal-clear example of it being done so. I'd have to say you are wrong here. Which doesn't matter now, due to..

Quote from JXQ:

Foreword: I forwarded Red Scarlet's concern to Bisqwit; the comparison has since been removed.

Oh..ok. It's outdated by Dragondarch's run anyway now. Thank you, though.

Personally I think the whole thing about "time" having quotations is because that :39 is not achievable by a human being playing in real-time on the cartridge, nor was it achieved in that matter in this case. That is why they are using quotation marks. If you think it is, then by all means I would love to watch you perform your run with the same route and tricks used on the cartridge.

Quote from JXQ:

(which makes me distrust the objective view of its content)

It's already been said that this site was originally designed for Sequence Breaking Prime and Fusion (and later on the other games). Nate, as the owner of the site, has decided not to include many things that are as of still on emulator+slowdown only. He prefers the consoles and putting up tricks that aren't emulator-specific. That's his choice.

Quote from JXQ:

he's still trolling on his own website against myself, and (in this case indirectly) the tas community

Which Nate has every right to do on his site. The internet isn't a democracy. Surely the same thing is said at bisqwit's forum.

What I don't get is why most of you guys from Bisqwit seem to ONLY respond to these types of topics here. I'm sure I'll be given links showing otherwise though. But it seems like the majority of posts by you guys are in these topics, where you say the same things with the same confrontational attitude. It shows that things are not as peachy from the emuvid side as you guys want to believe. It creates a stigma. Posts by Ryan and moozah certainly aren't helping your case.

Quote from moozooh:

You may dispute this until forever. The thing is, the final time is not warped in any way. Movie replay isn't warped, either.
Note that the Special Olympics athletes do not whine about the regualr athletes' time just because they can't do this and that equally good. You may replace Special Olympics with Junior Olympics (or however they are called), you'll get the same. Buy the way, it wasn't my analogy, either. Time is time, no matter how "unfair" do you consider it to be.

Get a :39 100% on the console doing the exact same stuff with only 5 seconds of mistakes then, since it is the same thing. I await your video. Time is not the same time when it is achieved through different realities. Yeah, my video is segmented. With 5 save points and an automatic one. JXQ's video uses over 100,000 save points, 99,999+ which are invisible and use up none of the game's timer. That's probably why quotations were used, to differentiate, not segregate.

Quote from moozooh:

You know why is that? I can tell. You decide what's fair and what's not just because you feel so, without any really rational basis.

You're doing the same thing with all your analogies.

Quote from Kyrsimys:

but why can't you compare them like "The tas time is 0:39 and the speedrun time is 0:55, so it must mean that there are many things you can do with tools in this game that you can't replicate on a console". It shows the big difference there is between TASes and speedruns.

That's exactly how they should be discussed, imo. Thank you.

Quote from AngerFist:

Best part was how he entered Ridley

I believe I entered it a very similar way (enemy boost from a fireball via the first head thing instead of the 2nd). :o

[quote="moozooh"]Sadly, I don't know what in the world have lead you to this thought.[/quote]

Because JXQ is asking people here to do what has been done by several players (myself included) for years already.

[quote="DJGrenola"]Red, I think he was talking about the use of tools to improve console times via practice or finding new tricks, not that tas *runs* are a natural progression from console ones.[/quote]

Which befuddles me, because as he already knows from the Fusion 0% topic being created, it is already being done long before yesterday.  So I don't get why he's even asking this.  People have been using the roms to find out stuff for some of these games for years.  I know I used savestates while trying to see if I could pull something off or not before doing them on the console.

[quote="AngerFist"]Wrong. The author chose to write that (not Bisqwit but that wouldnt make any difference) and there is absolutely nothing wrong with comparing a speedrun with a tas as long as you know the difference + every tas .avi states in the beginning how that certain run was made. Also, we are sick and tired correcting ourselves everytime a speedrunner/speedrun community complains, no more compromising. We couldnt care less because we've done all the changes that where possible.[/quote]

Nowhere did I say Bisqwit himself wrote it.  The author did, and whoever puts those up accepted it.  You guys flaunt how they aren't compared, yet here is a crystal-clear example of it being done so.  I'd have to say you are wrong here.  Which doesn't matter now, due to..

[quote="JXQ"]Foreword: I forwarded Red Scarlet's concern to Bisqwit; the comparison has since been removed.[/quote]

Oh..ok.  It's outdated by Dragondarch's run anyway now.  Thank you, though.

Personally I think the whole thing about "time" having quotations is because that :39 is not achievable by a human being playing in real-time on the cartridge, nor was it achieved in that matter in this case.  That is why they are using quotation marks.  If you think it is, then by all means I would love to watch you perform your run with the same route and tricks used on the cartridge.

[quote="JXQ"](which makes me distrust the objective view of its content)[/quote]

It's already been said that this site was originally designed for Sequence Breaking Prime and Fusion (and later on the other games).  Nate, as the owner of the site, has decided not to include many things that are as of still on emulator+slowdown only.  He prefers the consoles and putting up tricks that aren't emulator-specific.  That's his choice.

[quote="JXQ"]he's still trolling on his own website against myself, and (in this case indirectly) the tas community[/quote]

Which Nate has every right to do on his site.  The internet isn't a democracy.  Surely the same thing is said at bisqwit's forum.

What I don't get is why most of you guys from Bisqwit seem to ONLY respond to these types of topics here.  I'm sure I'll be given links showing otherwise though.  But it seems like the majority of posts by you guys are in these topics, where you say the same things with the same confrontational attitude.  It shows that things are not as peachy from the emuvid side as you guys want to believe.  It creates a stigma.  Posts by Ryan and moozah certainly aren't helping your case.

[quote="moozooh"]You may dispute this until forever. The thing is, the final time is not warped in any way. Movie replay isn't warped, either.
Note that the Special Olympics athletes do not whine about the regualr athletes' time just because they can't do this and that equally good. You may replace Special Olympics with Junior Olympics (or however they are called), you'll get the same. Buy the way, it wasn't my analogy, either. Time is time, no matter how "unfair" do you consider it to be.[/quote]

Get a :39 100% on the console doing the exact same stuff with only 5 seconds of mistakes then, since it is the same thing.  I await your video.  Time is not the same time when it is achieved through different realities.  Yeah, my video is segmented.  With 5 save points and an automatic one.  JXQ's video uses over 100,000 save points, 99,999+ which are invisible and use up none of the game's timer.  That's probably why quotations were used, to differentiate, [i]not[/i] segregate.

[quote="moozooh"]You know why is that? I can tell. You decide what's fair and what's not just because you feel so, without any really rational basis.[/quote]

You're doing the same thing with all your analogies.

[quote="Kyrsimys"]but why can't you compare them like "The tas time is 0:39 and the speedrun time is 0:55, so it must mean that there are many things you can do with tools in this game that you can't replicate on a console".  It shows the big difference there is between TASes and speedruns.[/quote]

That's exactly how they should be discussed, imo.  Thank you.

[quote="AngerFist"]Best part was how he entered Ridley[/quote]

I believe I entered it a very similar way (enemy boost from a fireball via the first head thing instead of the 2nd).  :o

arkarian:

is in the group Administrator.

registered on 2004-09-01 04:15:32 pm.

Gender: male

Location: ellicott city, md, usa

view all posts by arkarian

arkarian

2006-04-23 07:02:30 pm

mindfulness

fully erect

Kyrsimys, I want to thank you for posting here. Your points are valid (I agree with everything you've said), and you present them in a helpful, well-thought out way. This forum could use more users like you.

Quote from moozooh:

Well, I think Nate can defend himself if he feels a need to. I didn't ask Ark to do this, but I couldn't refuse myself to challenge his claims and statements.

I think you're forgetting that this is a forum and that I am allowed to post in any topic I wish, stating my opinions (within the rules, of course). This means that you don't have to ask me for my opinion for me to be able to give it. I was not defending nate because I don't think he can defend himself; I was indirectly defending him by stating my view of the matter at hand - there's a large difference between the two.

Quote from moozooh:

I understand this, now tell it to Arkarian as well. Moreover, his position is highly authoritative and most of that "I am a mod" paragraph doesn't make much sense anyway.

If I am not allowed to defend myself when someone speaks against me, then I am not allowed to live. It doesn't matter if it's completely on-topic or not: a person is always permitted to defend themself.

Quote from JXQ:

I don't trust him based on things I've seen him do, and with you wielding your mod powers about like you do, I don't really have a reason to believe you anyway.

I have not used my moderator powers once in this entire thread. And even if I had, why would that invalidate my points?

Kyrsimys, I want to thank you for posting here. Your points are valid (I agree with everything you've said), and you present them in a helpful, well-thought out way. This forum could use more users like you.

[quote="moozooh"]Well, I think Nate can defend himself if he feels a need to. I didn't ask Ark to do this, but I couldn't refuse myself to challenge his claims and statements.[/quote]
I think you're forgetting that this is a forum and that I am allowed to post in any topic I wish, stating my opinions (within the rules, of course). This means that you don't have to [i]ask[/i] me for my opinion for me to be able to give it. I was not defending nate because I don't think he can defend himself; I was indirectly defending him by stating my view of the matter at hand - there's a large difference between the two.

[quote="moozooh"]I understand this, now tell it to Arkarian as well. Moreover, his position is highly authoritative and most of that "I am a mod" paragraph doesn't make much sense anyway.[/quote]
If I am not allowed to defend myself when someone speaks against me, then I am not allowed to live. It doesn't matter if it's completely on-topic or not: a person is always permitted to defend themself.

[quote="JXQ"]I don't trust him based on things I've seen him do, and with you wielding your mod powers about like you do, I don't really have a reason to believe you anyway.[/quote]
I have not used my moderator powers once in this [i]entire[/i] thread. And even if I had, why would that invalidate my points?

nate:

is in the group Administrator.

is in the group deutschsprachiger Moderator.

registered on 2003-09-15 06:16:34 pm.

Gender: male

Location: lubbock, tx, usa

view all posts by nate

nate

2006-04-23 07:22:24 pm

君だけの

光になると

first of all, everyone who's new: welcome to my forum.

my previous and only other post in this topic was an attempt to focus this topic on the reason it was created: jxq's new tas. for reference, the unedited post of baxter's i quoted and the post i quoted it in are reproduced below:

Quote from Baxter:

I think AngerFist made this topic to let people, who want to see it, know that it is available... and not to start a tas vs regular speedrun thread.

The amount of rerecords doesn't measure skill, since a tas and a regular speedrun aren't compairable anyway. Using as less as possible rerecords for a tas is just stupid, since a movie which is 1 frame faster and has 100 times more rerecords can be considered better. Besides; you can get your rerecord count as low as you want...

Quote from nate:

Quote from Baxter:

I think AngerFist made this topic to let people, who want to see it, know that it is available... and not to start a tas vs regular speedrun thread.

[defends tas for the rest of his post]

:/

any further debate in this thread will be deleted.

and many thanks, monster, for being so siggable.

even now when i read baxter's post, i feel obligated to moderate him for responding to the off-topic anti-tas posting that had been going on almost from the moment this topic was created. but importantly, this off-topic material only seems to constitute the second paragraph of his post - my post was in fact a reiteration of his first paragraph. when i replaced his second paragraph with "[defends tas for the rest of his post]", i was poking fun at the useful, then useless nature of his post in my eyes. had he limited his post to its first paragraph, i might not have even needed to post in this topic, and we would not be having this conversation now.

i have no idea whether baxter is in fact a taser. that he is or is not would have no effect on my post as i wrote it, because i threatened him and everyone else not for defending tas, but for arguing about tas. i desperately wanted this topic to be different in that the bias the tasers suffer from here would be mysteriously absent from it, but babysitting the forum 24/7 is not realistic, and so i did the next best thing when i got here: i tried to stop the off-topic posting from continuing.

due to past comments i have made on the subject of tas, it was perhaps inevitable that guest tasers here would interpret my threat as against them, when it was in fact intended to protect them. i would not have deleted or threatened to delete posts that occurred outside of this topic regarding the nature of tas, because they would not be off-topic there. the incident mentioned earlier in this thread (whereby angerfist posted what looked like an announcement for another tas in d.fangs's tas's topic and had it deleted as off-topic posting) was similar to this incident in that the forum management attempted to correct off-topic posting, only to be greeted by accusations of anti-tas bias. indeed, as past transgressors, the burden is on the forum management here to make moderation decisions crystal clear when they involve tas, and i do believe that said incident was amicably resolved (the offending post was undeleted and made a topic unto its own - exactly what it should have been in the first place).

grenola's posts attempting to clarify my stance on tas were quite accurate. i would very much like to not only state my grievances clearly, but also to cite them with examples, so that everyone can understand where i am coming from, but that would be off-topic. further, i am "in the crunch" at the end of my final semester of my undergraduate education right now, making it necessary for me to hold off on that until later. i think that once i present my viewpoint, it will become clear to everyone why i seem to be friendly to the concept of tas, putting both time and money into its development here, and yet at the same time seem to be so hostile toward the tas "mothership" as it were.

for the reasons outlined above, i knew that i should not post here again unless i had watched jxq's tas and was prepared to comment on it, thereby setting a good example for everyone, and i have done so. i enjoyed most:

the ceres escape,
the dedication to arm pumping (that must've gotten old!),
entering kraid's lair,
the energy tank room after kraid,
the norfair bubble room (going up to speed booster),
leaving after high jump,
climbing the red brinstar shaft (for the first time),
heading in to xray (the snotball avoidance),
the phantoon fight,
the top room of the wrecked ship (my favorite moment in the entire video),
the maridia turtle room items,
using the wave beam to open the door in the room after botwoon,
the blue suit and shinespark after draygon,
the chozo statue in lower norfair (power bombing only what is necessary to drain the lava and open the floor),
going through the room right before ridley,
going up the big green brinstar room (to the left of the noob bridge),
the shinespark through first pirate room in old tourian,
entering the upper-left area of the landing site,
and all of new tourian.

in addition, i was curious as to why you declined to use mockballs coming up from getting missiles and after the bombs boss. there seems to be some slowdown when samus touches the ground after moving through the air, and i thought that this was why scarlet made such extensive use of mockballs in her 0:55, specifically at those locations.

first of all, everyone who's new: welcome to my forum.

my previous and only other post in this topic was an attempt to focus this topic on the reason it was created: jxq's new tas. for reference, the unedited post of baxter's i quoted and the post i quoted it in are reproduced below:

[quote="Baxter"]I think AngerFist made this topic to let people, who want to see it, know that it is available... and not to start a tas vs regular speedrun thread.

The amount of rerecords doesn't measure skill, since a tas and a regular speedrun aren't compairable anyway. Using as less as possible rerecords for a tas is just stupid, since a movie which is 1 frame faster and has 100 times more rerecords can be considered better. Besides; you can get your rerecord count as low as you want...[/quote]

[quote="nate"][quote="Baxter"]I think AngerFist made this topic to let people, who want to see it, know that it is available... and not to start a tas vs regular speedrun thread.

[defends tas for the rest of his post][/quote]
:/

any further debate in this thread will be deleted.

and many thanks, monster, for being so siggable.[/quote]

even now when i read baxter's post, i feel obligated to moderate him for responding to the off-topic anti-tas posting that had been going on almost from the moment this topic was created. but importantly, this off-topic material only seems to constitute the second paragraph of his post - [i]my[/i] post was in fact a reiteration of his first paragraph. when i replaced his second paragraph with "[defends tas for the rest of his post]", i was poking fun at the useful, then useless nature of his post in my eyes. had he limited his post to its first paragraph, i might not have even needed to post in this topic, and we would not be having this conversation now.

i have no idea whether baxter is in fact a taser. that he is or is not would have no effect on my post as i wrote it, because i threatened him and everyone else not for defending tas, but for arguing about tas. i desperately wanted this topic to be different in that the bias the tasers suffer from here would be mysteriously absent from it, but babysitting the forum 24/7 is not realistic, and so i did the next best thing when i got here: i tried to stop the off-topic posting from continuing.

due to past comments i have made on the subject of tas, it was perhaps inevitable that guest tasers here would interpret my threat as [i]against them[/i], when it was in fact intended to [i]protect them[/i]. i would not have deleted or threatened to delete posts that occurred outside of this topic regarding the nature of tas, because they would not be off-topic there. the incident mentioned earlier in this thread (whereby angerfist posted what looked like an announcement for another tas in d.fangs's tas's topic and had it deleted as off-topic posting) was similar to this incident in that the forum management attempted to correct off-topic posting, only to be greeted by accusations of anti-tas bias. indeed, as past transgressors, the burden is on the forum management here to make moderation decisions crystal clear when they involve tas, and i do believe that said incident was amicably resolved (the offending post was undeleted and made a topic unto its own - exactly what it should have been in the first place).

grenola's posts attempting to clarify my stance on tas were quite accurate. i would very much like to not only state my grievances clearly, but also to cite them with examples, so that everyone can understand where i am coming from, but that would be off-topic. further, i am "in the crunch" at the end of my final semester of my undergraduate education right now, making it necessary for me to hold off on that until later. i think that once i present my viewpoint, it will become clear to everyone why i seem to be friendly to the concept of tas, putting both time and money into its development here, and yet at the same time seem to be so hostile toward the tas "mothership" as it were.

for the reasons outlined above, i knew that i should not post here again unless i had watched jxq's tas and was prepared to comment on it, thereby setting a good example for everyone, and i have done so. i enjoyed most:

the ceres escape,
the dedication to arm pumping (that must've gotten old!),
entering kraid's lair,
the energy tank room after kraid,
the norfair bubble room (going up to speed booster),
leaving after high jump,
climbing the red brinstar shaft (for the first time),
heading in to xray (the snotball avoidance),
the phantoon fight,
the top room of the wrecked ship (my favorite moment in the entire video),
the maridia turtle room items,
using the wave beam to open the door in the room after botwoon,
the blue suit and shinespark after draygon,
the chozo statue in lower norfair (power bombing only what is necessary to drain the lava and open the floor),
going through the room right before ridley,
going up the big green brinstar room (to the left of the noob bridge),
the shinespark through first pirate room in old tourian,
entering the upper-left area of the landing site,
and all of new tourian.

in addition, i was curious as to why you declined to use mockballs coming up from getting missiles and after the bombs boss. there seems to be some slowdown when samus touches the ground after moving through the air, and i thought that this was why scarlet made such extensive use of mockballs in her 0:55, specifically at those locations.

moozooh:

registered on 2006-01-11 12:51:46 pm.

Gender: male

Location: Moscow

view all posts by moozooh

moozooh

2006-04-23 07:29:22 pm

Quote from Red Scarlet:

Because JXQ is asking people here to do what has been done by several players (myself included) for years already.

That's the one thing that buggers me: you use the emulators, you know it, all of us know it. Yet some of you (MonsterERB in particular) will not fail to express their dislike towards them and all that is associated with them, up to the point of disdain. That alone makes me want to scream "WTF!"

Quote from Red Scarlet:

That's probably why quotations were used, to differentiate, not segregate. [...] Personally I think the whole thing about "time" having quotations is because that :39 is not achievable by a human being playing in real-time on the cartridge, nor was it achieved in that matter in this case. That is why they are using quotation marks. If you think it is, then by all means I would love to watch you perform your run with the same route and tricks used on the cartridge.

What I didn't get, is why did Arkarian go so sensitive about it. It's like we're moving in a world of some tabooed categories and labels which need to be thought up very thoroughly before one expresses his thought, to avoid hurting someone's purest feelings.

Although I'm speaking seriously, I'm just getting fun. Playing games is fun, watching videos is fun. But when Nesvideos people come here, the athmosphere quickly changes to something less fun even before the actual disputes begin (moreover, that sudden change is the main reason they start!). Why?

Quote from Red Scarlet:

You're doing the same thing with all your analogies.

My analogies' point is not to make a dubious statement, but rather to disprove it. With them, I show the fallacy that leads one into making such a statement. I understand the subjective (I should better say, religious) nature of these disputes, and I try to reveal it, to show how truly ridiculous it is. I always try to look from the other side. And, what's most important, I never complain.

That's why your above statement is not quite right. If you look more closely, you'll see that I rarely make statements and assumptions. And all of them really do have a rational basis that can be disputed on equal terms. Almost nobody try to do that on equal terms, though. The top-10 of the most popular answers to my posts always included "you just don't know", "you just don't understand", "it's all wrong", all kinds of frustration, and all kinds of "cum hoc ergo propter hoc" stuff without a single more or less rational explanation.

I got used to being hated by the majority of the internet forums I visit for that precise reason: my constant use of "what makes you think you are right" type of questions were never tolerated by the vast majority of people I was arguing with. They are always confident they're right. They are not going to adopt something else in their subjective realitry. I wholeheartedly believe that type of people starts 99% of all the conflicts in the world. You may disagree with it, and you may dispute it. I won't mind anything.

Quote from Arkarian:

I think you're forgetting that this is a forum and that I am allowed to post in any topic I wish, stating my opinions (within the rules, of course).

Umm, nope. I didn't forget that. :P It's just that DJGrenola considered my answer to you a bait. Ok, let it be a bait.
However, your sudden showing off made me imagine that you can define and bend the rules any time you can, so that doesn't really matter, does it? ;)

Quote from Arkarian:

a person is always permitted to defend themself.

I have nothing to object here. Though one should defend themself wisely.

Edit: Woah... Nice post you wrote up there, Nate.

[quote="Red Scarlet"]Because JXQ is asking people here to do what has been done by several players (myself included) for years already.[/quote]
That's the one thing that buggers me: you use the emulators, you know it, all of us know it. Yet some of you (MonsterERB in particular) will not fail to express their dislike towards them and all that is associated with them, up to the point of disdain. That alone makes me want to scream "WTF!"

[quote="Red Scarlet"]That's probably why quotations were used, to differentiate, not [i]segregate[/i]. [...] Personally I think the whole thing about "time" having quotations is because that :39 is not achievable by a human being playing in real-time on the cartridge, nor was it achieved in that matter in this case. That is why they are using quotation marks. If you think it is, then by all means I would love to watch you perform your run with the same route and tricks used on the cartridge.[/quote]
What I didn't get, is why did Arkarian go so sensitive about it. It's like we're moving in a world of some tabooed categories and labels which need to be thought up very thoroughly before one expresses his thought, to avoid hurting someone's purest feelings.

Although I'm speaking seriously, I'm just getting fun. Playing games is fun, watching videos is fun. But when Nesvideos people come here, the athmosphere quickly changes to something less fun even before the actual disputes begin (moreover, that sudden change is the main reason they start!). Why?

[quote="Red Scarlet"]You're doing the same thing with all your analogies.[/quote]
My analogies' point is not to make a dubious statement, but rather to disprove it. With them, I show the fallacy that leads one into making such a statement. I understand the subjective (I should better say, [i]religious[/i]) nature of these disputes, and I try to reveal it, to show how truly ridiculous it is. I always try to look from the other side. And, what's most important, I never complain.

That's why your above statement is not quite right. If you look more closely, you'll see that I rarely make statements and assumptions. And all of them really do have a rational basis that can be disputed on equal terms. Almost nobody try to do that on equal terms, though. The top-10 of the most popular answers to my posts always included "you just don't know", "you just don't understand", "it's all wrong", all kinds of frustration, and all kinds of "cum hoc ergo propter hoc" stuff without a single more or less rational explanation.

I got used to being hated by the majority of the internet forums I visit for that precise reason: my constant use of "what makes you think you are right" type of questions were never tolerated by the vast majority of people I was arguing with. They are [i]always confident[/i] they're right. They are [i]not going to adopt[/i] something else in their subjective realitry. I wholeheartedly believe [i]that[/i] type of people starts 99% of all the conflicts in the world. You may disagree with it, and you may dispute it. I won't mind anything.

[quote="Arkarian"]I think you're forgetting that this is a forum and that I am allowed to post in any topic I wish, stating my opinions (within the rules, of course).[/quote]
Umm, nope. I didn't forget that. :P It's just that DJGrenola considered my answer to you a bait. Ok, let it be a bait.
However, your sudden showing off made me imagine that you can define and bend the rules any time you can, so that doesn't really matter, does it? ;)

[quote="Arkarian"]a person is always permitted to defend themself.[/quote]
I have nothing to object here. Though one should defend themself wisely.

Edit: Woah... Nice post you wrote up there, Nate.

arkarian:

is in the group Administrator.

registered on 2004-09-01 04:15:32 pm.

Gender: male

Location: ellicott city, md, usa

view all posts by arkarian

arkarian

2006-04-23 07:41:59 pm

mindfulness

fully erect

Quote from moozooh:

[...] your sudden showing off made me imagine that you can define and bend the rules any time you can, so that doesn't really matter, does it? ;)

I don't care to respond to anything else you've said, as there is no winning with you. However, I feel like I should defend myself here.
In what way was I "showing off"? I am a mod. I was simply stating that, as a mod, I am the one who has to decide which posts are flames and which are not. That's not "showing off" by any means. I was clearly stating my powers, as your asking me for my definition of flaming required an explanation of why exactly I am permitted to define it.

Random Zelda Person:

registered on 2004-12-11 10:50:19 am.

Location: Omicron Persei VIII

view all posts by Random Zelda Person

Random Zelda Person

2006-04-23 08:05:15 pm

Quote from moozooh:

That's the one thing that buggers me: you use the emulators, you know it, all of us know it. Yet some of you (MonsterERB in particular) will not fail to express their dislike towards them and all that is associated with them, up to the point of disdain. That alone makes me want to scream "WTF!"

What are you trying to say here? It looks like you mean to say you are confused by the differing beliefs of Red Scarlet and MonsterERB, which makes no sense.

Red Scarlet:

registered on 2004-01-20 01:26:46 pm.

Gender: female

Location: My house

view all posts by Red Scarlet

Red Scarlet

2006-04-23 08:15:15 pm

I('d) like to watch (some MP3 runs)

Quote from moozooh:

That's the one thing that buggers me: you use the emulators, you know it, all of us know it. Yet some of you (MonsterERB in particular) will not fail to express their dislike towards them and all that is associated with them, up to the point of disdain. That alone makes me want to scream "WTF!"

Because using them to find something out and to make video runs with them with the stuff you guys do are very different uses/outcomes. Some people use them as tools of finding things out, from dinky tricks that are easier to figure out if they work or not, hacking the game to achieve a near Zen-like relationship to it (see Kejardon), and some people take it further and produce entire playthroughs. They are different uses of the same things. As such they are regarded in different ways by different people.

I'm not MonsterERB. I've used the rom to find out several tricks that were new in my :55 video. MonsterERB may have not used an emulator in his life. We aren't the same person. As such there are varying degrees of use with emulators between each and every poster here.

Quote from moozooh:

What I didn't get, is why did Arkarian go so sensitive about it. It's like we're moving in a world of some tabooed categories and labels which need to be thought up very thoroughly before one expresses his thought, to avoid hurting someone's purest feelings.

Although I'm speaking seriously, I'm just getting fun. Playing games is fun, watching videos is fun. But when Nesvideos people come here, the athmosphere quickly changes to something less fun even before the actual disputes begin (moreover, that sudden change is the main reason they start!). Why?

My guess is because both this and the site MonsterERB are more used to posting at (samus.co.uk) were similar in their "tricks for console" thing. As both sites were primarily about Metroid Prime, a game not able to be emulated, contributes to those feelings.

Some people genuinely dislike what you guys do, others do not. There is a larger population (at least here) that are fans of console vids, so maybe coming in with "greatest thing since sliced bread" descriptions about videos that they don't think too highly of to begin with sets them off. I don't know.

I don't find "one of Bisqwit's finest" to be offensive, maybe others see it differently. I just think that some people aren't seeing that there are differences in the communities, and one shouldn't expect an open arms reception everywhere they go, especially when posting it in a similar, albeit very different community.

Am I saying "don't say its a good video or one of the finest from Bisqwit's"? No. But don't expect to get the same reception for it as it would get at Bisqwit's, a community based on emuvids when you post it at communities largely built on console videos. There is a clash of interests there, whether or not you see it.

Just like people at Bisqwit's say they don't want to watch console vids anymore, there are people at other places that may not want to see these. Does that mean you can't post an announcement? Of course you can. Just don't expect nearly everybody to go ga-ga and have a 67-1 vote of how awesome it is like at Bisqwit's.

Quote from moozooh:

My analogies' point is not to make a dubious statement, but rather to disprove it. With them, I show the fallacy that leads one into making such a statement. I understand the subjective (I should better say, religious) nature of these disputes, and I try to reveal it, to show how truly ridiculous it is. I always try to look from the other side. And, what's most important, I never complain.

That's why your above statement is not quite right. If you look more closely, you'll see that I rarely make statements and assumptions. And all of them really do have a rational basis that can be disputed on equal terms. Almost nobody try to do that on equal terms, though. The top-10 of the most popular answers to my posts always included "you just don't know", "you just don't understand", "it's all wrong", all kinds of frustration, and all kinds of "cum hoc ergo propter hoc" stuff without a single more or less rational explanation.

I got used to being hated by the majority of the internet forums I visit for that precise reason: my constant use of "what makes you think you are right" type of questions were never tolerated by the vast majority of people I was arguing with. They are always confident they're right. They are not going to adopt something else in their subjective realitry. I wholeheartedly believe that type of people starts 99% of all the conflicts in the world. You may disagree with it, and you may dispute it. I won't mind anything.

Most people here do see them as different. Using in-game save points and pressing a key in the emulator to instantly save are not the same thing. They save, yes. But they function very differently. The amount of saves show that. It uses up time to use a save point, and as such strategic saving plays an important role. Pressing a key to save whenever you want with no penalty makes them different by default. Yes they are both segmented. But they are segmented by different means.

[quote="moozooh"]That's the one thing that buggers me: you use the emulators, you know it, all of us know it. Yet some of you (MonsterERB in particular) will not fail to express their dislike towards them and all that is associated with them, up to the point of disdain. That alone makes me want to scream "WTF!"[/quote]

Because using them to find something out and to make video runs with them with the stuff you guys do are very different uses/outcomes.  Some people use them as tools of finding things out, from dinky tricks that are easier to figure out if they work or not, hacking the game to achieve a near Zen-like relationship to it (see Kejardon), and some people take it further and produce entire playthroughs.  They are different uses of the same things.  As such they are regarded in different ways by different people.

I'm not MonsterERB.  I've used the rom to find out several tricks that were new in my :55 video.  MonsterERB may have not used an emulator in his life.  We aren't the same person.  As such there are varying degrees of use with emulators between each and every poster here.

[quote="moozooh"]What I didn't get, is why did Arkarian go so sensitive about it. It's like we're moving in a world of some tabooed categories and labels which need to be thought up very thoroughly before one expresses his thought, to avoid hurting someone's purest feelings.

Although I'm speaking seriously, I'm just getting fun. Playing games is fun, watching videos is fun. But when Nesvideos people come here, the athmosphere quickly changes to something less fun even before the actual disputes begin (moreover, that sudden change is the main reason they start!). Why?[/quote]

My guess is because both this and the site MonsterERB are more used to posting at (samus.co.uk) were similar in their "tricks for console" thing.  As both sites were primarily about Metroid Prime, a game not able to be emulated, contributes to those feelings.

Some people genuinely dislike what you guys do, others do not.  There is a larger population (at least here) that are fans of console vids, so maybe coming in with "greatest thing since sliced bread" descriptions about videos that they don't think too highly of to begin with sets them off.  I don't know.

I don't find "one of Bisqwit's finest" to be offensive, maybe others see it differently.  I just think that some people aren't seeing that there are differences in the communities, and one shouldn't expect an open arms reception everywhere they go, especially when posting it in a similar, albeit very different community.

Am I saying "don't say its a good video or one of the finest from Bisqwit's"? No.  But don't expect to get the same reception for it as it would get at Bisqwit's, a community [i]based[/i] on emuvids when you post it at communities largely built on console videos.  There is a clash of interests there, whether or not you see it.

Just like people at Bisqwit's say they don't want to watch console vids anymore, there are people at other places that may not want to see these.  Does that mean you can't post an announcement? Of course you can.  Just don't expect nearly everybody to go ga-ga and have a 67-1 vote of how awesome it is like at Bisqwit's.

[quote="moozooh"]My analogies' point is not to make a dubious statement, but rather to disprove it. With them, I show the fallacy that leads one into making such a statement. I understand the subjective (I should better say, [i]religious[/i]) nature of these disputes, and I try to reveal it, to show how truly ridiculous it is. I always try to look from the other side. And, what's most important, I never complain.

That's why your above statement is not quite right. If you look more closely, you'll see that I rarely make statements and assumptions. And all of them really do have a rational basis that can be disputed on equal terms. Almost nobody try to do that on equal terms, though. The top-10 of the most popular answers to my posts always included "you just don't know", "you just don't understand", "it's all wrong", all kinds of frustration, and all kinds of "cum hoc ergo propter hoc" stuff without a single more or less rational explanation.

I got used to being hated by the majority of the internet forums I visit for that precise reason: my constant use of "what makes you think you are right" type of questions were never tolerated by the vast majority of people I was arguing with. They are [i]always confident[/i] they're right. They are [i]not going to adopt[/i] something else in their subjective realitry. I wholeheartedly believe [i]that[/i] type of people starts 99% of all the conflicts in the world. You may disagree with it, and you may dispute it. I won't mind anything.[/quote]

Most people here [i]do[/i] see them as different.  Using in-game save points and pressing a key in the emulator to instantly save are not the same thing.  They save, yes.  But they function very differently.  The amount of saves show that.  It uses up time to use a save point, and as such strategic saving plays an important role.  Pressing a key to save whenever you want with no penalty makes them different by default.  Yes they are both segmented.  But they are segmented by different means.

moozooh:

registered on 2006-01-11 12:51:46 pm.

Gender: male

Location: Moscow

view all posts by moozooh

moozooh

2006-04-23 08:26:23 pm

Quote from Random Zelda Person:

It looks like you mean to say you are confused by the differing beliefs of Red Scarlet and MonsterERB, which makes no sense.

Well, I doubt someone would have expressed their disdain towards emulators to those who don't make TASes. So I think what I am confused about is this... inconsistency of community-related ideals of the senior members of the community itself.

Quote from Arkarian:

I don't care to respond to anything else you've said, as there is no winning with you.

Why? :(

Quote from Arkarian:

In what way was I "showing off"? [...] I was clearly stating my powers, as your asking me for my definition of flaming required an explanation of why exactly I am permitted to define it.

I was asking you to define it, not to write a paragraph describing why and how you have the rights to describe it. I don't care about your powers at all, stating them concerning that matter was absolutely unnecessary.

Back to the point, I still would like you to tell me the indisputable criteria of what is to be considered a flame. It is twice as important to know how do you use your power once you have it.

Edit:

Quote from Red Scarlet:

Most people here do see them as different. Using in-game save points and pressing a key in the emulator to instantly save are not the same thing. They save, yes. But they function very differently. The amount of saves show that. It uses up time to use a save point, and as such strategic saving plays an important role. Pressing a key to save whenever you want with no penalty makes them different by default. Yes they are both segmented. But they are segmented by different means.

While I absolutely agree with this, my point about segmentation and saves was about the definition of "real time" versus "tool-assisted time". SABERinBLUE expressed the same opinion as me earlier (but I didn't notice it immediately, cause it was an edit).

Considering MonsterERB, I wrote an explanation above (though, you've already answered to it, so that topic is closed as well).

Edit 2:

Quote from Red Scarlet:

and one shouldn't expect an open arms reception everywhere they go, especially when posting it in a similar, albeit very different community

One shouldn't expect hostility as well. :)

[quote="Random Zelda Person"]It looks like you mean to say you are confused by the differing beliefs of Red Scarlet and MonsterERB, which makes no sense.[/quote]
Well, I doubt someone would have expressed their disdain towards emulators to those who don't make TASes. So I think what I am confused about is this... inconsistency of community-related ideals of the senior members of the community itself.

[quote="Arkarian"]I don't care to respond to anything else you've said, as there is no winning with you.[/quote]
Why? :(

[quote="Arkarian"]In what way was I "showing off"? [...] I was clearly stating my powers, as your asking me for my definition of flaming required an explanation of why exactly I am permitted to define it.[/quote]
I was asking you to define it, not to write a paragraph describing why and how you have the rights to describe it. I don't care about your powers at all, stating them concerning that matter was [i]absolutely[/i] unnecessary.

Back to the point, I still would like you to tell me the indisputable criteria of what is to be considered a flame. It is twice as important to know how do you use your power once you have it.

Edit:
[quote="Red Scarlet"]Most people here [i]do[/i] see them as different.  Using in-game save points and pressing a key in the emulator to instantly save are not the same thing.  They save, yes.  But they function very differently.  The amount of saves show that.  It uses up time to use a save point, and as such strategic saving plays an important role.  Pressing a key to save whenever you want with no penalty makes them different by default.  Yes they are both segmented.  But they are segmented by different means.[/quote]
While I absolutely agree with this, my point about segmentation and saves was about the definition of "real time" versus "tool-assisted time". SABERinBLUE expressed the same opinion as me earlier (but I didn't notice it immediately, cause it was an edit).

Considering MonsterERB, I wrote an explanation above (though, you've already answered to it, so that topic is closed as well).

Edit 2:
[quote="Red Scarlet"]and one shouldn't expect an open arms reception everywhere they go, especially when posting it in a similar, albeit very different community[/quote]
One shouldn't expect hostility as well. :)