Super Metroid - Reverse Boss Order / Suitless Cyborg Run

2005-12-14 06:39:26 pm

Strategy Guide Writer

Quote from Yoshi348:

Copyright and trademark are totally not the same thing. I wouldn't put any value on your advice if you can't even get that right.

Even though copyrights and trademarks aren't the same thing, they're still very similar. Nintendo doesn't use Samus in a trademark capacity. If they DID, you'd see the trademark symbol after every time it was used (or pretty much every time, and if not, it'd certainly be at the bottom of text or after official artwork that bears the name). You see this with the Metroid name itself in abundance, but not the Samus name itself. That's a legal requirement (as far as I'm aware, certainly in the UK) if you have a legally trademarked name or image.

I don't see ANY indication that the name Samus is Trademarked in my PAL Metroid Prime manual, never mind copyrighted (as you rightly pointed out is a different issue).

And I never said people HAD to put any value on my advice. But I'm one of the very few here that are offering advice (whether or not you personally regard it as valued or not).

[quote="Yoshi348"]Copyright and trademark are totally not the same thing. I wouldn't put any value on your advice if you can't even get that right.[/quote]
Even though copyrights and trademarks aren't the same thing, they're still very similar. Nintendo doesn't use Samus in a trademark capacity. If they DID, you'd see the trademark symbol after every time it was used (or pretty much every time, and if not, it'd certainly be at the bottom of text or after official artwork that bears the name). You see this with the Metroid name itself in abundance, but not the Samus name itself. That's a legal requirement (as far as I'm aware, certainly in the UK) if you have a legally trademarked name or image.

I don't see ANY indication that the name Samus is Trademarked in my PAL Metroid Prime manual, never mind copyrighted (as you rightly pointed out is a different issue).

And I never said people HAD to put any value on my advice. But I'm one of the very few here that are offering advice (whether or not you personally regard it as valued or not).

Radix

2005-12-14 06:40:30 pm

Quote from Andrew Mills:

As ridiculous as it may sound, that's the way it is. Read a bunch of legal notices on various game manuals and such. You may be suprised at how much they CAN have a legal hold of regarding to an issue such as this (i.e. regarding unauthorised broadcasting of copyrighted material).

Game manuals aren't the law.

Nintendo might say you're not authorized to make backups but they are WRONG. You can LEGALLY make backups of software assuming it isn't encrypted under which the fucktard DMCA applies to stop you.

You still ignored the FACT that I have pointed out that the defintitions on copyright.gov do not specify the status of computer program output.

A derivative work of a computer program would be a change to the PROGRAM ITSELF. We are NOT changing the program and redistributing it. We are NOT redistributing the program in ANY fashion. Therefore a video is NOT a derivative work.

Andrew Mills

2005-12-14 06:49:46 pm

Strategy Guide Writer

Quote from Radix:

We are NOT redistributing the program in ANY fashion.
Therefore a video is NOT a derivative work.

No, game manuals AREN'T the law, but do you think the legal department just stick that stuff in there for the sheer fun of it? :|

You may not be redistributing the program itself, but you ARE re-distributing the the copyrighted images and audio created by Nintendo (in the form of a video'd speedrun). It's not just the physical program that's under copyright though.

Why do you think the Chrono Trigger fan game was forced to stop? It was THEIR OWN models, textures and program that built it (so by the definition you use above it wasn't a redistribution of the program in ANY fashion), but due to the fact that it USED the Chrono Trigger name (trademarked) and the likenesses of the characters, Squaresoft had the legal right to request that it be stopped. The same principal applies here in that you're using the name (displayed in the video) and the likenesses (again in the video) without prior authorisation.

Like I said before, if you wish to challenge that, be my guest. I just honestly don't think it'd be a battle you'd win (certainly not without a MASSIVE financial cost).

[quote="Radix"]We are NOT redistributing the program in ANY fashion. 
Therefore a video is NOT a derivative work.[/quote]
No, game manuals AREN'T the law, but do you think the legal department just stick that stuff in there for the sheer fun of it? :|

You may not be redistributing the program itself, but you ARE re-distributing the  the copyrighted images and audio created by Nintendo (in the form of a video'd speedrun). It's not just the physical program that's under copyright though.

Why do you think the Chrono Trigger fan game was forced to stop? It was THEIR OWN models, textures and program that built it (so by the definition you use above it wasn't a redistribution of the program in ANY fashion), but due to the fact that it USED the Chrono Trigger name (trademarked) and the likenesses of the characters, Squaresoft had the legal right to request that it be stopped. The same principal applies here in that you're using the name (displayed in the video) and the likenesses (again in the video) without prior authorisation.

Like I said before, if you wish to challenge that, be my guest. I just honestly don't think it'd be a battle you'd win (certainly not without a MASSIVE financial cost).

nate

2005-12-14 06:54:51 pm

ah, cool, never realized that about "samus". good choice in picking a domain name then ... even though something tells me they could still take it from you with very little real struggle if they wanted. ;P

Radix

2005-12-14 06:58:31 pm

Quote from Andrew Mills:

The same principal applies here in that you're using the name (displayed in the video) and the likenesses (again in the video) without prior authorisation.

Do me a favor then. Go ahead and report me to Nintendo. Go on, I'm not afraid. Hell I'll welcome the damn vacation.

Andrew Mills

2005-12-14 07:02:46 pm

Strategy Guide Writer

Quote from njahnke:

ah, cool, never realized that about "samus". good choice in picking a domain name then ... even though something tells me they could still take it from you with very little real struggle if they wanted. ;P

I would actually make them fight for that. They can request that I take down all content pertaining to Metroid, and I'll do that no problem (although I wouldn't do it without a fight first ;) ), but as far as the domain name is concerned I doubt they would. The name was registered before Samus would be by Nintendo (seeing as it doesn't appear to be copyrighted or Trademarked), so they have no real grounds to stand on.

Just like the time the guy owned the GameCube.com URL. If memory serves me correctly, Nintendo couldn't just come in and take it from him because he registered it BEFORE Nintendo placed in their copyright/trademarks for the Gamecube name, and as such, the owner would have had no prior knowledge of it's existence to go and buy it and sell it to Nintendo later intentionally. Thus Nintendo had no legal stance for trying to forceably take it from him.

I believe (but correct me if I'm wrong), that Nintendo bought it off him after trying to push him off it and failed. I believe the same circumstances are possible here as Nintendo have failed to register a copyright OR trademark on the Samus name.

Quote from Radix:

Quote from Andrew Mills:

The same principal applies here in that you're using the name (displayed in the video) and the likenesses (again in the video) without prior authorisation.

Do me a favor then. Go ahead and report me to Nintendo. Go on, I'm not afraid. Hell I'll welcome the damn vacation.

Put you toys back into your pram will you. As I said before, i'm not FOR all of this nonesense, but it's just the way it (generally) is. None of us would stand a chance if Nintendo DID ask us to stop what we do. It's a legal minefield regardless of what our opinions and beliefs on the matter are.

I'm hardly FOR it, but seeing as it directly affects the running of SCU, I'll abide by whatever is required of me to prevent Nintendo kicking my arse all over the place (otherwise I'd be making a very nice profit off of MIM1 and 2 and SoS, but I don't).

[quote="njahnke"]ah, cool, never realized that about "samus". good choice in picking a domain name then ... even though something tells me they could still take it from you with very little real struggle if they wanted. ;P[/quote]
I would actually make them fight for that. They can request that I take down all content pertaining to Metroid, and I'll do that no problem (although I wouldn't do it without a fight first ;) ), but as far as the domain name is concerned I doubt they would. The name was registered before Samus would be by Nintendo (seeing as it doesn't appear to be copyrighted or Trademarked), so they have no real grounds to stand on.

Just like the time the guy owned the GameCube.com URL. If memory serves me correctly, Nintendo couldn't just come in and take it from him because he registered it BEFORE Nintendo placed in their copyright/trademarks for the Gamecube name, and as such, the owner would have had no prior knowledge of it's existence to go and buy it and sell it to Nintendo later intentionally. Thus Nintendo had no legal stance for trying to forceably take it from him.

I believe (but correct me if I'm wrong), that Nintendo bought it off him after trying to push him off it and failed. I believe the same circumstances are possible here as Nintendo have failed to register a copyright OR trademark on the Samus name.

[quote="Radix"][quote="Andrew Mills"]The same principal applies here in that you're using the name (displayed in the video) and the likenesses (again in the video) without prior authorisation.[/quote]

Do me a favor then. Go ahead and report me to Nintendo. Go on, I'm not afraid. Hell I'll welcome the damn vacation.[/quote]
Put you toys back into your pram will you. As I said before, i'm not FOR all of this nonesense, but it's just the way it (generally) is. None of us would stand a chance if Nintendo DID ask us to stop what we do. It's a legal minefield regardless of what our opinions and beliefs on the matter are.

I'm hardly FOR it, but seeing as it directly affects the running of SCU, I'll abide by whatever is required of me to prevent Nintendo kicking my arse all over the place (otherwise I'd be making a very nice profit off of MIM1 and 2 and SoS, but I don't).

Radix

2005-12-14 07:29:26 pm

Quote from Andrew Mills:

Put you toys back into your pram will you.

What the hell does that mean?

I think it means you're too chicken to do what I asked.

nate

2005-12-14 07:31:10 pm

fight fight fight fight fight

Andrew Mills

2005-12-14 07:32:46 pm

Strategy Guide Writer

Quote from Radix:

Quote from Andrew Mills:

Put you toys back into your pram will you.

What the hell does that mean?

I think it means you're too chicken to do what I asked.

It's quite simple really. It means stop acting like a baby that's upset or can't have it's own way.

And how would going to Nintendo benefit ME exactly? I can't quite grasp why you'd want me to. Serves no real purpose. If you can't handle the fact that Nintendo would more than likely kick all of our arses combined (if they wanted to), that's not my problem. I know what toes not to tread on by knowing what NOT to do. If you don't, again, that's not my problem.

Radix

2005-12-14 07:46:56 pm

Quote from Andrew Mills:

And how would going to Nintendo benefit ME exactly?

Obviously I'm not trying to benefit you.

Ekarderif

2005-12-14 08:02:35 pm

I like random caps IN some of MY sentences.

Saturn

2005-12-14 08:19:57 pm

Quote from Radix:

Quote from Andrew Mills:

Put you toys back into your pram will you.

What the hell does that mean?

I think it means you're too chicken to do what I asked.

Whats going on? Didn't expected big Radix would act like that. I hope this wasn't meant serious by you since we really need such a site like SDA.

Radix

2005-12-14 08:24:33 pm

Why? You've got bisq's.

Chanoire

2005-12-14 08:31:06 pm

Okay, I feel like I've been out of the loop on this even though it's only been twelve hours or so, so let me see if I have the summary right:

Regarding G4: If speedruns are the defendable property of the runners/SDA/etc then G4 is violating copyright in broadcasting them without permission and attribution. If speedruns are NOT the property of the runners then they are instead the property of Nintendo and G4 is (probably) violating copyright in broadcasting them. (Although I would be surprised if there weren't some blanket agreement already in place for them to be able to show game footage at all.)

The big question is whether a speedrun -- a recording of the execution of a program whose output is determined by user input -- is owned by the entity who owns the copyright on the program itself. A related question would be whether it matters if trademarked materials are shown in the recording. (This might be the difference between distributing, say, original work created with [insert name] movie maker featuring footage of their summer vacation and distributing a work involving trademarked characters, such as footage of a videogame.)

Mills is of the opinion that the runs are owned by Nintendo; Radix is asking him to put his money where his mouth is by calling in Nintendo rather than just going on and on about it. (Interpreting freely here.)

Yoshi and Nate are still negotiating.

Is that basically where we are?

Okay, I feel like I've been out of the loop on this even though it's only been twelve hours or so, so let me see if I have the summary right:

Regarding G4: If speedruns are the defendable property of the runners/SDA/etc then G4 is violating copyright in broadcasting them without permission and attribution.  If speedruns are NOT the property of the runners then they are instead the property of Nintendo and G4 is (probably) violating copyright in broadcasting them.  (Although I would be surprised if there weren't some blanket agreement already in place for them to be able to show game footage at all.)

The big question is whether a speedrun -- a recording of the execution of a program whose output is determined by user input -- is owned by the entity who owns the copyright on the program itself.  A related question would be whether it matters if trademarked materials are shown in the recording. (This might be the difference between distributing, say, original work created with [insert name] movie maker featuring footage of their summer vacation and distributing a work involving trademarked characters, such as footage of a videogame.)

Mills is of the opinion that the runs are owned by Nintendo; Radix is asking him to put his money where his mouth is by calling in Nintendo rather than just going on and on about it.  (Interpreting freely here.)

Yoshi and Nate are still negotiating.

Is that basically where we are?

Saturn

2005-12-14 08:34:40 pm

I'm not only on Bisqwits. I like all console game related sites and really enjoyed some of the recent vids on your site.

Red Scarlet

2005-12-14 08:39:36 pm

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

OT: how is your hack going? I was reminded about it last night while browsing bisqwit's forum..

Saturn

2005-12-14 08:47:27 pm

It's delayed until I finish at least this run. I think a superplay run is much more woth to work on than a small hack.

spineshark

2005-12-14 09:07:45 pm

in the name of justice!

the place: AIM
the person: my brother
the time: fiveish minutes ago
(names changed, duh, ss refers to me, dj refers to him)

ss: i have a moderately important question about copyrights
dj: okay
dj: what's the situation?
ss: okay, the situation is
ss: we have a site that hosts movies of video games being
played
ss: a television network comes and takes one of the videos and
plays it on the air without asking the site owner for permission
ss: and without credit, which i believe is the irritating part to said person
ss: does the site owner have any legal ground?
dj: is this a school assignment?
ss: no
dj: which website are we talking about?
ss: it is the "Speed Demos Archive"
ss: http://speeddemosarchive.com
dj: okay
dj: well technically as you can see the speed
demo archive is making money
dj: off of a copyright product themself
dj: so it is possible that a double infringement
has taken place
ss: radix is well aware that nintendo or whomever could come
and probably close the site down
ss: the question has been debated a lot on the metroid forums
ss: which is where this is coming from
dj: well if the tv people committed an
infringement then it is much more roundabout
dj: because tv is just sponsored through
commercial advertising
dj: so you couldn't really say how much if any
financial benefit is coming to the tv network in question
ss: well if that is the case would it make any difference if the
owners of this site aren't recouping hosting costs through dvd sales?
dj: although i suspect that the game vendors
with the copyright could come after the tv network if they
wanted
dj: it really doesn't matter what they use the
money for
dj: they could donate it to charity if they want
ss: okay, that is interesting
dj: i mean you can't make money off copying a
copyrited product
ss: i think it has been established that nintendo could come after
g4 for showing the footage as well
ss: if it hadn't been authorized of course
dj: to me that is the one solid rule in the realm of
piracy
dj: the thing is no one is ever going to authorize
someone to make a direct profit from their product
dj: those DVD sales would not go on if it were
up to the vendors
dj: it could get interesting if you just had people
pay the price of distributing the media
dj: but still gave the speed runs out for free
dj: then again greg, i am a novice
ss: oh i know that
ss: i thought it would be worth asking
ss: well
dj: and i know virtually nothing more than the
average joe about IP law
ss: the discussion eventually turned into a question of whether
video game movies are a "derivative product" of the programming
dj: although my new soon to be room mate
dj: is an IP stud
ss: and i'm wondering if that's some sort of red herring or
whatnot
dj: so she might have some interesting answers
on the topic
dj: haha
dj: red herring?
ss: mom used to say that around me a lot
dj: that's fantastic greg, that is exactly the term
used to talk about an element in a law school hypo that
doesn't affect the outcome
ss: it appears that if it is a "derivative work" that the site owner
really is screwed
ss: that anybody can take his stuff and use it
ss: without mentioning it

conversation editied a bit, but not much (i cut off a useless conclusion). that part near the end leaves me hopeful, i wonder if i can talk to this woman. also, i am not sure i got everything about the situation 100% right but it sounds like his answer wouldn't have been particuarly definitive anyway. indeed, we got kind of sidetracked on the "is sda in trouble from ninty/whomever" thing, which i guess must be really hard for lawyers to get away from...

so basically, the good = no definitive negative, this other person who hopefully knows more about this than my brother or i

the bad = lack of really any new information

the place: AIM
the person: my brother
the time: fiveish minutes ago 
(names changed, duh, ss refers to me, dj refers to him)

ss: i have a moderately important question about copyrights
dj: okay
dj: what's the situation?
ss: okay, the situation is
ss: we have a site that hosts movies of video games being 
played
ss: a television network comes and takes one of the videos and 
plays it on the air without asking the site owner for permission
ss: and without credit, which i believe is the irritating part to said person
ss: does the site owner have any legal ground?
dj: is this a school assignment?
ss: no
dj: which website are we talking about?
ss: it is the "Speed Demos Archive"
ss: http://speeddemosarchive.com
dj: okay
dj: well technically as you can see the speed 
demo archive is making money
dj: off of a copyright product themself
dj: so it is possible that a double infringement 
has taken place
ss: radix is well aware that nintendo or whomever could come 
and probably close the site down
ss: the question has been debated a lot on the metroid forums
ss: which is where this is coming from
dj: well if the tv people committed an 
infringement then it is much more roundabout
dj: because tv is just sponsored through 
commercial advertising
dj: so you couldn't really say how much if any 
financial benefit is coming to the tv network in question
ss: well if that is the case would it make any difference if the 
owners of this site aren't recouping hosting costs through dvd sales?
dj: although i suspect that the game vendors 
with the copyright could come after the tv network if they 
wanted
dj: it really doesn't matter what they use the 
money for
dj: they could donate it to charity if they want
ss: okay, that is interesting
dj: i mean you can't make money off copying a 
copyrited product
ss: i think it has been established that nintendo could come after 
g4 for showing the footage as well
ss: if it hadn't been authorized of course
dj: to me that is the one solid rule in the realm of 
piracy
dj: the thing is no one is ever going to authorize 
someone to make a direct profit from their product
dj: those DVD sales would not go on if it were 
up to the vendors
dj: it could get interesting if you just had people 
pay the price of distributing the media
dj: but still gave the speed runs out for free
dj: then again greg, i am a novice
ss: oh i know that
ss: i thought it would be worth asking
ss: well
dj: and i know virtually nothing more than the 
average joe about IP law
ss: the discussion eventually turned into a question of whether 
video game movies are a "derivative product" of the programming
dj: although my new soon to be room mate
dj: is an IP stud
ss: and i'm wondering if that's some sort of red herring or 
whatnot
dj: so she might have some interesting answers 
on the topic
dj: haha
dj: red herring?
ss: mom used to say that around me a lot
dj: that's fantastic greg, that is exactly the term 
used to talk about an element in a law school hypo that 
doesn't affect the outcome
ss: it appears that if it is a "derivative work" that the site owner 
really is screwed
ss: that anybody can take his stuff and use it
ss: without mentioning it

conversation editied a bit, but not much (i cut off a useless conclusion).  that part near the end leaves me hopeful, i wonder if i can talk to this woman.  also, i am not sure i got everything about the situation 100% right but it sounds like his answer wouldn't have been particuarly definitive anyway.  indeed, we got kind of sidetracked on the "is sda in trouble from ninty/whomever" thing, which i guess must be really hard for lawyers to get away from...

so basically, the good = no definitive negative, this other person who hopefully knows more about this than my brother or i

the bad = lack of really any new information

arkarian

2005-12-14 09:18:20 pm

red chamber dream

*whoever

spineshark

2005-12-14 09:20:02 pm

in the name of justice!

oh yeah, sure, hit me instead of the idiot who made the second worst word in the english language.

let the record show that "quincunx" is the best word in the english language.

by the way, this is what i was hoping would happen...i had hoped he'd know a little more about this stuff (since apparently the first year at law school you have to take courses in like everything) than he actually did but i felt sure that he'd be able to know of somebody who would be able to give a good answer. just need to follow through on this now.

arkarian

2005-12-14 09:22:41 pm

red chamber dream

Quote from Spine Shark:

oh yeah, sure, hit me instead of the idiot who made the second worst word in the english language.

"Whom" is the second worst word in the English langauge?

nate

2005-12-14 09:29:41 pm

yoshi and i have resolved our differences. everything else sounds good, chanoire.

and cool that you may have gotten us a new resource, s.shark. we welcome any help you/she can provide.

spineshark

2005-12-14 09:31:20 pm

in the name of justice!

People love to correct me (and others) on it and honestly it kinda feels to me like "i am smartter then u lololololol" when I read it.

It's not even like "an" as far as I can tell, in that it has a simple rule for usage and sounds better in those cases (except "an historical *" took a long time to come up on me)

transience

2005-12-14 09:33:34 pm

twenty eight fifty

i will start this off by thanking you all for giving me an hour of fascinating material to read while at work.

the first thing that came to my mind when i saw this whole thing was "99% of the people in the world don't care, and even if you explain it to them they're still not going to care." some perspective may be needed - people are getting riled up over the nomenclature of a speed run produced using savestates and slowdown. think about that for a second - does it really matter?

the term "emurape" is supposed to be offensive. it is used by this forum because it is meant to depict violation of a game in ways they were not meant to be. it is also used because they find the video to be highly offensive and wish the degrade it. the term "tool-assisted speedrun" is used by bisqwit because it shows neutrality and because they think it best defines the subject matter. the problem with both approaches is that 99% of the people have no idea what "tool-assisted" or "emurape" means, nor do they care. the term itself does not matter and will not change the opinions of anyone involved.

i have a unique perspective on this whole issue - my zero mission world record was being worked on as boltr's "TAS" was released. i shook my head, downloaded it, watched it and deleted it because it was of no help to me. the day my run was released, a thread was started on sda discussing how my run was inferior to the tool-assisted one. they were, of course, correct.

my response was not one of anger, but rather apathy - my intent was not to compete with the so-called "emurapers" but to compete with myself. my run was more to benefit the community than for "glory" or showing off. i get no satisfaction out of either of those things, and i'm not really sure why anyone else would either.

as you can see in that thread, boltr and i ended up having a rational discussion despite our differing methods and people who tried to turn it into your usual TAS vs. console argument. i even frequented nesvideos's irc server for a couple of days to talk to him about the game. he was trying to work out a new route - it was clear that he had never tried to run zm at all and was simply emulating (on two different meanings of the word) GC04's 29:54 run. that is fine, though - speed running is not his forte, slowdown and savestating are. i am the opposite.

my problem with the "m2k2 stance" - and by this i mean nate's, who is one of my best friends in the world - is that it's incredibly purist and closeminded. i actually like the closemindedness, but the extermination of tool-assisted runs is impossible so i see no reason to fight them. there is a community that enjoys them, so i see no reason to brand them as the axis of evil.

the problem i have with nesvideos is that they're using their skills the wrong way. i never watch their videos because most of their videos are "time attacks" - beating the game as fast as possible. when you have the ability to play the game by your rules, time attacking isn't really interesting to me.

of the videos on their site, my favourite is the gradius one - the player picks up a crapload of speed powerups and just toys with the game at ludicrous speed. this is what i think nesvideos should do more of - random videos for entertainment, like that. ironically, the reverse boss video (of which i have not seen and likely will not watch) that this thread began with is a good use of tools. it should, however, ignore speed and instead flaunt the ways in which you can take advantage of the game. ben (ekarderif) has done this with his "emulated rape" hosted here - no damage, lots of saves/episodes, unique tricks that are not really beneficial speed-wise. if he can do all this without slowdown, imagine what a dork can do with slowdown?

i will reiterate this again - this argument broke out over how to define an emulated speedrun. aren't there better things to write essays and belittle people over? i can think of dozens.

i will start this off by thanking you all for giving me an hour of fascinating material to read while at work.

the first thing that came to my mind when i saw this whole thing was "99% of the people in the world don't care, and even if you explain it to them they're still not going to care." some perspective may be needed - people are getting riled up over the nomenclature of a speed run produced using savestates and slowdown. think about that for a second - does it really matter?

the term "emurape" is [i]supposed[/i] to be offensive. it is used by this forum because it is meant to depict violation of a game in ways they were not meant to be. it is also used because they find the video to be highly offensive and wish the degrade it. the term "tool-assisted speedrun" is used by bisqwit because it shows neutrality and because they think it best defines the subject matter. the problem with both approaches is that 99% of the people have no idea what "tool-assisted" or "emurape" means, nor do they care. the term itself does not matter and will not change the opinions of anyone involved.

i have a unique perspective on this whole issue - my zero mission world record was being worked on as boltr's "TAS" was released. i shook my head, downloaded it, watched it and deleted it because it was of no help to me. the day my run was released, a [url=http://speeddemosarchive.com/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=other_games;action=display;num=1114928159] thread[/url] was started on sda discussing how my run was inferior to the tool-assisted one. they were, of course, correct.

my response was not one of anger, but rather apathy - my intent was not to compete with the so-called "emurapers" but to compete with myself. my run was more to benefit the community than for "glory" or showing off. i get no satisfaction out of either of those things, and i'm not really sure why anyone else would either.

as you can see in that thread, boltr and i ended up having a rational discussion despite our differing methods and people who tried to turn it into your usual TAS vs. console argument. i even frequented nesvideos's irc server for a couple of days to talk to him about the game. he was trying to work out a new route - it was clear that he had never tried to run zm at all and was simply emulating (on two different meanings of the word) GC04's 29:54 run. that is fine, though - speed running is not his forte, slowdown and savestating are. i am the opposite.

my problem with the "m2k2 stance" - and by this i mean nate's, who is one of my best friends in the world - is that it's incredibly purist and closeminded. i actually like the closemindedness, but the extermination of tool-assisted runs is impossible so i see no reason to fight them. there is a community that enjoys them, so i see no reason to brand them as the axis of evil.

the problem i have with nesvideos is that they're using their skills the wrong way. i never watch their videos because most of their videos are "time attacks" - beating the game as fast as possible. when you have the ability to play the game by your rules, time attacking isn't really interesting to me.

of the videos on their site, my favourite is the gradius one - the player picks up a crapload of speed powerups and just toys with the game at ludicrous speed. this is what i think nesvideos should do more of - random videos for entertainment, like that. ironically, the reverse boss video (of which i have not seen and likely will not watch) that this thread began with is a good use of tools. it should, however, ignore speed and instead flaunt the ways in which you can take advantage of the game. ben (ekarderif) has done this with his "emulated rape" hosted here - no damage, lots of saves/episodes, unique tricks that are not really beneficial speed-wise. if he can do all this without slowdown, imagine what a dork can do with slowdown?

i will reiterate this again - this argument broke out over how to define an emulated speedrun. aren't there better things to write essays and belittle people over? i can think of dozens.

SonicandTails218

2005-12-14 09:36:13 pm

Looks like it. Personally, I think that speedruns are the copyright of the runner, or at least they should be. I'm certainly no legal expert, but it's just common sense-not much different from taking, say, Monopoly, and videotaping a game winning strategy in it.

Of course, Monopoly doesn't have a game winning strategy, but whatever, you are just showing off what you can do.