Mario Kart MB - Print Page

Mario Kart MB
https://www.mariokart64.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl
Mario Kart >> Super Mario Kart >> A call for better video proof
https://www.mariokart64.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1566996648

Message started by Firewaster on 08/28/19 at 04:50:48

Title: A call for better video proof
Post by Firewaster on 08/28/19 at 04:50:48

Hey there fellas

There's something that's been annoying to me lately. The increase of low quality video proof. I don't mean to throw anyone under the bus, but I will mention two recent WRs as examples: Chris Wild's DP2 PAL f-lap and Eric Olden's CI2 NTSC 5-lap.

Why does it annoy me: I am a "visual" learner. I learn more from watching good videos at 0,25x speed than from grinding the track per se.

These two videos I cited are, no doubt, very good times. But by watching the videos I learn NOTHING. They prove no more than an end screen picture to me. And the worst part about it is not even quality: it's the unfixed camera.

So, what I'm asking of everyone playing the game and recording videos: please, PLEASE, do fixed camera videos. There are a lot of ways of doing fixed camera videos, even for 5-lap attempts. Most obvious solution is live recording (Goldeneye has been doing that for ages, to great success), be it with a capture card, VCR, camera-on-a-stand, you name it. I honestly thing we should change the proof standards to have fixed camera as a requisite.

The feeling I have is that we are regressing on a very sensitive topic, in a moment we should be going forward regarding proof and video archive. I don't think I'm asking much. I have a measure stick that if I can do it, anyone can.

TLDR: change the proof requisite to allow only videos with fixed camera

P.s.: I'm not asking to retroactively screw people btw. What's done is done

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by KVD on 08/28/19 at 05:36:32

Completely agree with this. I am not sure how I would feel about enforcing this to a policy (as in, if you don't have fixed camera video, your WR doesn't count), but it's certainly food for thought.

It's extremely easy (and cheap) to live record nowadays, so any excuses aren't really valid in this day and age. Especially for WRs we might want to adhere to more strict quality regulations. I know somebody might bring up the 11"65, but that was in 2006 [smiley=johncleese.gif] (and believe me, I've felt bad about it for a long time).

Anyway, I'd be very interested to see what Sami's stance is on this topic.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Sami de la SMK on 08/28/19 at 06:22:34

406A796E670B0 wrote:

Agreed with Karel and Guiherme on this. We do need to make sure that we are doing quality videos as this is a standard across all games that have record setting or speed running.

With the technology now it is very straightforward to get the setup as Karel said. There are plenty of players on here who can help show others what they need and what to do if they are not sure.

If you absolutely have to record a video that will be on a phone or another device (for example at CDM or another games event, as I know Christian was attempting records at CDM so it would have to be done this way) please do your best to ensure that you can get a quality video or test with another persons recording device so it is not blurred etc.

Otherwise at home do the live recording.only. Karel a lot of the old videos from 10 plus years ago we all had quality problems. My old Non-nbt MC1s were awful with the shadow lines and flickering so there was no way I was doing the 57, 1'00"99 etc with my phone or digital camera again.

So Christian / Eric and anyone else, if you read this would you be able to purchase the equipment? Wel help you with the setup if need.

Thanks.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by ScouB on 08/28/19 at 09:30:47

Fortunately for us, Harvey doesn't drive WRs (yet)... [smiley=johncleese.gif]

On a more serious note even if that's not WRs content, good quality videos are always more appreciated to watch. So I agree with the above, and would extend it to any SMK videos :)

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Antistar on 08/29/19 at 01:49:32

Brazilian SMK player asking for better video proof quality is the best joke I've read on this section for ages.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Sami de la SMK on 08/29/19 at 03:44:04

I've written to Eric if he can read this topic and reply.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Chris on 08/29/19 at 12:46:42

Guys, I have the equipment, and I tried to set it up, but my computer refused to use my grabber as source. I tried a lot of stuff and it just doesn't work with my PAL snes. it works with everything else just fine, with my NTSC SNES, PAL/NTSC N64. with Game Cube Games, just for some reason not with my PAL SNES.. if anyone knows more about that stuff and can give me a guide on how to make my pc recognize it as video source please tell me :p

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Eric Kart-man on 08/29/19 at 13:03:10

My original CI2 WR was absolute shit, I did record a better version though. Im fully on board for using a capture card but im too poor, ;D! In reality I'd been looking into getting a better CPU and streaming. I'd been grinding DP3 and non-fixed camera is beyond annoying.
I do think my CI2 is still learnable, Nori of Japan used my WR video as a learning tool to achieve 1:02.89.
In closing I won't go for WR/new PR without the capture.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Firewaster on 08/29/19 at 15:38:56

Awesome.
Very glad to read those replies from Chris and Eric.
I was afraid you guys might take what I brought up personally. I couldn't be more excited knowing both of you guys are working towards a better video system.

Chris, I heard you already got help from Moll, right?

Eric, let us know if there's anything (and I mean ANYTHING) we can do to help you with your setup.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Joe Reinreb on 08/29/19 at 18:42:56

I, however, will continue to post PR videos that are even worse than once thought was possible. [smiley=johncleese.gif]

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Dan H on 08/29/19 at 20:42:03

I'm thinking of going back to KB1 so I can have those black bars constantly moving up the screen while I record.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Eric Kart-man on 08/29/19 at 20:48:13

GAS I could never be upset with you for wanting history painted on the best possible canvas!
I've watched many of my videos full of regrets there was no camera pan involved, or me losing my shit because I got a surprise flap.
Surprise flap videos with vocal reactions are the best, Sami KB1 ntsc, and Karel choco 1 & 2, truly warm my heart!

I have everything but a decent CPU and should have that no later than October (birthday).

In other news, I found my trump coin and I'll have that in the mail for my Kartel brethren In Gulfport, pm me the mailing address Nick you should get it no later than next Tuesday.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Harvey Kartel on 08/30/19 at 12:14:34

0C2033282E7977410 wrote:

Brazilian SMK player asking for better video proof quality is the best joke I've read on this section for ages.

You have to remember that Brazil actually uses a variant of PAL, so Brazilian TV sets may not be able to display older video games (which are released in Brazil in NTSC format) correctly. For starters, I believe that games will run in black and white when played in Brazil, at least older games played on older sets, as I've seen several SMK videos from Brazil that were in black and white.

My own videos have been in black and white due to this NTSC/PAL mismatch. If I come back to NTSC and drive a PR that I feel is good enough for a video, the video will be in color and will be better quality than the PAL videos that I've made.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Dave Smith on 08/30/19 at 14:19:48

I have found that using OBS software along with a video capture devise works very well to record. Of course my times are nothing close to WR's but I have posted some good vid's recording 150cc races so far.

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Johan on 09/05/19 at 01:50:12

Hi guys!

I carefully followed this topic and I hope you're not talking about making live recording compulsory for video proofs.
We're speaking of a TT competition on a 27-year-old game running on a 27-year-old system, for which players have to play on the original device. Even if this is totally understandable, this is already a rather big obstacle for many people. So please, don't add another obstacle.
Nowadays, nearly everyone has something (smartphone, digital camera, webcam) to "externally" record their screens so it's not a problem to ask for video proof for times that "need" it. But asking for live recording is not the same thing. Be it cheap or not, easy to use or not, a live recording device is something everyone won't have because it has a much narrower use than the other devices I mentioned earlier. Of course, I know it's better (especially for 5-lap videos to avoid the crappy mobile replays) and should be recommended... but in no way compulsory.

However, whatever decision you make towards live recording (recommended or compulsory, which I strongly don't hope), I think it would be good to add a tutorial on the site to explain to people (who're ok to do it) how to proceed.

These were my 2 cents. Cheers everyone! :)

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Master Kek on 09/05/19 at 07:06:42

If Brazil uses PAL then why are their games in NTSC?

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Dave Smith on 09/05/19 at 07:42:35

5B77656273645D535D160 wrote:

If Brazil uses PAL then why are their games in NTSC?

I know Right!?!?

All these dang PAL players playing NTSC. ;D

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Harvey Kartel on 09/05/19 at 12:42:09

Maybe this should help explain...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAL-M

In summary: NTSC games are used in Brazil because it's a 60Hz country, and Brazilian TV sets support 60Hz (but voltages vary from state to state). The pictures in PAL-M are 525 pixel rows high, unlike the 625 of regular PAL, and refresh at 30 frames per second like NTSC, rather than the 25 of other versions of PAL. But because it's still PAL, the color encoding isn't compatiable with NTSC sets, therefore, grainier, black-and-white pictures. Brazil was never a high-priority market for Nintendo anyway, at least not in the SNES era.

PAL-M is basically PAL in name (and colors) only...

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by Firewaster on 09/06/19 at 05:33:32

We had PAL-M and PAL-N on our TVs
Not sure what that meant though

Title: Re: A call for better video proof
Post by ★Chrono★ ★Krysster★ on 09/10/19 at 06:22:57

Well, in 2019 for better video proof the standard should be 4K HDR 60fps (at least) [smiley=lolk.gif]