Qaatar
Member
Posts: 385
Registered: 06-09 |
myk said:
As opposed to what, and objective and scientific discussion? But I do see the cause of reiteration in the discussion here. Picking apart bits and pieces of things just lets each speaker establish a parallel opinion without really debating the underlying differences of opinion. I may also have contributed to that even though I was trying to pull my arguments together to support a general idea, not isolated fragments.
Yes, an objective discussion is certainly possible. For instance, we could be discussing how each feature works objectively, and then compare the subjective effects these features have on different players. We can, for example, compare and contrast exactly how much difference a certain feature can provide, and weigh that difference against other features across other players. Scientific? Don't think that's possible, and since we've established that no one here is trying to institute an arbitrary standard, there's no need for empirical data. All I wanted was some in-depth analysis of each feature as well as a general feel of the opinions of each player on said features.
Instead, we're just pontificating, which is fine and enjoyable, but not informative at all in my opinion. For most of these points, I can do a search on these forums, and probably find similarly constructed opinions from you and others.
myk said:
To combat that fragmenting wall in the debate I'll ask a question:
Agreeing that PrBoom+ already provides some differences with vanilla, is it not reasonable to use the features PrBoom+ offers, such as the HUD, smart totals, automap overlay, high resolution and the related application of high DPI mouse sensitivity, more liberal key location arrangement, possible lighting alterations and wide screen support freely and on their own grounds?
For one thing, we already acknowledged that pr+ has differences from vanilla, so that isn't the starting point of this debate. The starting point of this debate is HOW those other features affect other players. Why you cling onto this vanilla vs. pr+ debate, I have no clue.
myk said:
LOL, whatever, another of these "ok, no, but yes" comments. See my observation about fragmentation above for a what I think is really going on.
If I was being disingenuous and wanted to call it bullshit anyways, I would have straight up, without equivocation, said 100% bullshit. Indeed...LOL.
myk said:
From what I see, the overriding factor is the differences between the engines.
Again, we already know there are differences, so no, it's not the overriding factor. Hell, it's not even a factor. See above.
myk said:
I said I don't care much about Boom and that makes me ignorant about your type? I've been paying attention to demos since 1999. One would think I'd have an idea about demo optimization and perfectionism by now. My reduced appreciation for Boom stuff is because it alters the core game functionality and I'm not very interested in that. Hence when I watch a Boom demo it's more for entertainment, just like with any port demo. With vanilla demos, especially true ones, I pay much closer attention to technical and competitive aspects. It's not like high perfectionism is incompatible with a preference for vanilla. See kimo and xepop for good examples.
I don't care about your reduced appreciation, and I'm sure that you don't give a shit about my demo recording motivations. I never said high prefectionism is incompatible with anything, but Boom is a category that has a great many wads, and thus, demo opportunities. Unfortunately, we're stuck with a very nebulous set of rules and regulations regarding source ports in Boom, and what TAS entails within those confines. Therefore, it's important for me to learn about the usage and objective definitions of those confines, the opinions of others towards those confines, and to be as informed and transparent as possible about all of those encompassing details. As a side note, this is not incompatible with the stance on Zdoom, because the actual gameplay differences in terms of skill requirements between Boom and vanilla are practically non-existent. Between Zdoom and Boom/vanilla, it's almost night and day.
myk said:
I think you can do this even more fully, without needing to hold back in some ways, if you consider what I'm arguing.
Just to reiterate again, in my opinion, all of this has nothing directly to do vanilla. This has everything to do with the general perception of certain features in certain source ports, in this case, pr+. If the end result is something that's close to vanilla, then I think that it will be purely incidental.
I've always considered what you argue, but I'm afraid that we're not even on the same page in regards to this debate. Don't get me wrong, of course I would like to use those features and think that they're not TAS. It would cut down on recording time, and most probably, raise my skill level. But this is the problem: I don't want a gross misrepresentation of my skill level. I want to be as transparent as possible, and to make my demos as organic and genuine as possible, within limits, and to be consistent across all types (vanilla and Boom). I think we all use common sense in this regard. Most of us will probably be okay if a certain feature allows someone to enhance their skill level by, say, 1% (for example, maybe screen resolution for Artem...he's obviously just as good of a player with choco). We won't be okay if a certain feature allows that person to record something that wouldn't otherwise be possible (slow-motion, segmentation, or even the monster counter in some instances). However, I wouldn't have known most of this, and I was hoping that this thread would give me more insight into these issues. Why? If I had started recording during the golden age of C-N (say, 8 years ago), I most probably would have trained myself on vanilla. Instead, I started recording this year, when probaby 90+% of players use pr+. Thus, I went with the general majority, and started using pr+. I believe that personal opinions of every player regarding the features of source ports are heavily influenced by the overall general perspective.
By being as transparent as possible in my playing, and by looking at exactly how the general opinion of certain features are, I can feel comfortable and be proud of my demos, knowing that I represented myself well. Selfish, yes, but whose motivations aren't?
|