(Link to video)
Submission Text Full Submission Page
I have been looking for improvements to popular games for a long time. Recently, when I tried to do the flagpole glitch at walking speed, andrewg_ came up with the PAL version and also pointed out an useful glitch that only works on that version. I started working on this run as a fun project to take a break from my other projects, which I'm not very motivated to do.
The trick above never got used since I managed to do the flagpole glitch with Mario stuck in front of it, so there was no need to enter a floor (and no need to use a bullet bill in 8-2 either). Later, I also managed to enter the wall in 1-2 which prevented me from continuing on this project for a while. Chances were good that this run would save much time over the NTSC TAS.
I'm not sure about the attitude of people towards this TAS which uses the PAL version in order to save time. I don't think it would be very well-received, but since there's no harm in submitting a finished TAS, here it is!
Since this was only a fun project, I didn't bother much about the 21-frame rule. There is also a lag frame in 8-1 that I couldn't remove. I think it's still a pretty good run. I wanted to make this run a little different than the published TAS and I used some different ways of doing things. Maybe you will like it.
So I will leave this one here. Maybe it can be linked from the published movie. (I would like TASvideos to change its way of presenting its runs in the future. See here and here for places where I expressed this. This PAL TAS would be a candidate to put onto a page along with other Super Mario Bros TASes)

adelikat: Claiming for judging. The verdict (either way) will potentially set a precedent for future submissions so I want to handle this one. I hope for lots of votes, comments, and pedantic opinions on this one.

adelikat: Author is improving this movie and some of the possible improvement would have a direct impact on a potential verdict so I am setting this to delayed for now.

mugg: I'm setting this to canceled since I'm not trying to improve this anymore. To my knowledge, klmz is planning to make an improvement so there is no need for this to stay on the workbench.

1 2
5 6
TASVideoAgent
They/Them
Moderator
Joined: 8/3/2004
Posts: 14859
Location: 127.0.0.1
This topic is for the purpose of discussing #2753: MUGG's NES Super Mario Bros. "PAL" in 04:56.48
Player (50)
Joined: 1/19/2009
Posts: 100
Could someone encode this run please. I do not have a working smb file to play this with.
Experienced player (699)
Joined: 2/19/2006
Posts: 742
Location: Quincy, MA
I am conflicted. I will not vote. EDIT: I'm voting meh because I think it's suboptimal. I don't know whetherr this should replace ntsc. Also, I feel it's somewhat less entertaining than the ntsc version.
Super Mario Bros. console speedrunner - Andrew Gardikis
sgrunt
He/Him
Emulator Coder, Former player
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
Joined: 3/29/2010
Posts: 5
Eh, I was entertained. Yes vote.
Joined: 7/7/2007
Posts: 161
In before happylee counters with a 12 frame improvement. EDIT: Flag glitch in 8-3 was cool.
Joined: 5/13/2009
Posts: 141
I think I would like this more if you used a PAL-specific glitch, but as it is the published run is a bit more entertaining.
sgrunt
He/Him
Emulator Coder, Former player
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
So, wait. To be clear, there are no PAL-specific glitches in the content of this run? If there aren't, this isn't sufficiently different to be accepted amongst the glut of currently published SMB material.
Active player (277)
Joined: 5/29/2004
Posts: 5712
I thought getting into the floor was the PAL-specific glitch...?
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
adelikat
He/Him
Emulator Coder, Site Developer, Site Owner, Expert player (3584)
Joined: 11/3/2004
Posts: 4738
Location: Tennessee
He definitely uses a PAL specific glitch. Well, more precisely gets a PAL specific opportunity to use a known glitch on every flagpole. The fastest way to deal with a flag pole is to glitch mario to fall of it and run against it, bypassing the walking to the castle. In the U version this is only possible with the help of an enemy (such as a bullet bill, or shell). In the E version, they sped up marios speed per frame to compensate for the less frames per second (a common thing to do for PAL games). With that extra speed, he is able to perform this glitch on any flagpole without help from enemies. So that's the situation here. Is using E rom allows for this glitch and thus being overall faster despite being "slower" (less frames per second). So the debate is should this obsolete the U version, or be published along side, or be rejected. Please discuss.
It's hard to look this good. My TAS projects
MarbleousDave
He/Him
Player (12)
Joined: 9/12/2009
Posts: 1555
It is a 85/100 second improvement over the publication. It's a yes vote from me.
Personman
Other
Joined: 4/20/2008
Posts: 465
After thinking about this for some time, I am quite certain that this run should not obsolete the U version. They are different games, or, more reasonably, this is a kludgy hack of the U version to make it work on different technology than it was developed for. I can go make another hack right now that triples mario's running speed, and a TAS of that hack might be really cool, since now you can do crazier jumps, but it would not obsolete the existing movie. As for what do with this submission, it would be a little sad to see it die. It is, in an annoying technical sense, the very fastest you can beat Super Mario Bros., where that name refers to some cartridge with that title published by Nintendo played on some hardware sold by Nintendo with some officially compatible television. I kind of like Mugg's suggestion in the submission comment that it be linked to from the U version page, if it is made very clear why it is faster. The main concern, I think, should be having new users find the best and most authentic run available first and most easily, and that is the U version.
A warb degombs the brangy. Your gitch zanks and leils the warb.
Active player (277)
Joined: 5/29/2004
Posts: 5712
Good points, but why can't I say the same about official English translations of Japanese games?
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
Personman
Other
Joined: 4/20/2008
Posts: 465
Honestly, in my opinion, you can. I'm pretty much for using the closest to the original game as possible, and for a lot of games that's going to be the J rom. Sadly, not enough of us speak Japanese, so in that particular case I guess I don't see a way around the sacrifice. In many cases, I would be happier with english subtitles/explanation file alongside a TAS of the J rom, but I don't realistically expect that to be a popular opinion. I guess the real difference is that while both choices (English vs. Japanese, NTSC vs. PAL) have the same theoretical answer ("use the one that came first"), in one case there is an issue that would massively undercut the appeal of the site/runs (the language barrier), and in the other case there simply isn't - and when a PAL run happens to have crazy different game breakage in it, I'm all for a separate category, as the rules already indicate. We sadly have to make sacrifices in the first case, but there's no reason to do so in the second as well.
A warb degombs the brangy. Your gitch zanks and leils the warb.
Experienced player (699)
Joined: 2/19/2006
Posts: 742
Location: Quincy, MA
Personman wrote:
They are different games, or, more reasonably, this is a kludgy hack of the U version to make it work on different technology than it was developed for.
I agree with this. This version of the game came out nearly 2 years after the Japanese original release and was modified to literally behave LIKE the ntsc version (hence how a PAL run can be beating an ntsc run). The run is faster because: 1. Mario accelerates quicker, 2. the "instant time starting-flagpole" glitch can be used everywhere. I don't think this run should be published, but I would like to see a link to it on the current ntsc publication. And not the other way around. In a sense, SMB was remade specifically to work for Europe in order to behave as close as possible to the ntsc version. It's quite literally a modified game. They didn't really come out at the same exact time, but years apart. Also , it's too late now I guess... but I'd change my "meh" to "no"
Super Mario Bros. console speedrunner - Andrew Gardikis
mklip2001
He/Him
Editor
Joined: 6/23/2009
Posts: 2224
Location: Georgia, USA
I like both runs. However, I like the (U) run more. First of all, to agree with what Personman's first paragraph said, it feels like the (U) version was the main version and (E) was a suboptimal derivative of it. The clearest indication of this is when 1-2 and 4-2 start, the music is finished long before Mario enters the pipe. The (E) version, for reasons like those, feels "unnaturally fast". Secondly, once you can do the "faster flagpole glitch" (the one that doesn't make Mario walk to the castle) at every opportunity, it cheapens the effect of the glitch. Consider, for example, if the warpless run were done in PAL. A run aiming for fastest time in PAL can probably perform this faster glitch at every level without doing anything too special. In contrast, the current NTSC warpless run needs to take the time to do setup with shells and bullet bills (or even with a cheep cheep in the minus-world run) to make this glitch work. These are also the most interesting and surprising parts of that run. If the PAL run doesn't require the player to be clever to get the best time at the flagpole, then an optimal run in PAL will not take time to do impressive stunts. This, I believe, makes a strong enough argument for why (E) should not obsolete (U). However, when it comes to publishing this alongside (U) or rejecting, I don't think the argument is as clearcut. I lean slightly against separate publication, because I don't feel like the (E) ROM's benefits make for a better-looking run (see my first paragraph). However, I am definitely in favor of linking to this from the (U) run, since players familiar with playing PAL versions of games should especially find this run interesting. All in all, then, I guess my vote is "No". However, I'm quite impressed with this run nonetheless.
Used to be a frequent submissions commenter. My new computer has had some issues running emulators, so I've been here more sporadically. Still haven't gotten around to actually TASing yet... I was going to improve Kid Dracula for GB. It seems I was beaten to it, though, with a recent awesome run by Hetfield90 and StarvinStruthers. (http://tasvideos.org/2928M.html.) Thanks to goofydylan8 for running Gargoyle's Quest 2 because I mentioned the game! (http://tasvideos.org/2001M.html) Thanks to feos and MESHUGGAH for taking up runs of Duck Tales 2 because of my old signature! Thanks also to Samsara for finishing a Treasure Master run. From the submission comments:
Shoutouts and thanks to mklip2001 for arguably being the nicest and most supportive person on the forums.
Active player (277)
Joined: 5/29/2004
Posts: 5712
Yeah, and even the "one that came first" idea is open to debate. Maybe the one that came first is the closest to the developer's original vision and the one everyone's most familiar with. But maybe later releases fixed things to be closer to the original vision than was possible before, and maybe those fixes made the game more fun. The NTSC->PAL thing really isn't about anyone's vision, though; as I understand it, it's about a computer clock speed relying on the AC frequency arbitrarily chosen by certain countries, so changes made for that reason should be disregarded if possible.
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
MarbleousDave
He/Him
Player (12)
Joined: 9/12/2009
Posts: 1555
Since this is a PAL run, it shouldn't obsolete the NTSC run. It would have to be a separate publication if it has been accepted.
Active player (308)
Joined: 8/25/2006
Posts: 287
I agree. I don't think it should obsolete the NTSC run because it should be a different category.
Active player (292)
Joined: 12/16/2008
Posts: 458
Location: Houston
I'm for this run being published but I'm inclined to put it in a different category
sgrunt
He/Him
Emulator Coder, Former player
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
Apart from PAL making it easier to abuse one particular glitch and shaving a fraction of a second off from NTSC, what does this run demonstrate over and above the rest of the SMB content on the site? In my opinion, nothing. This does not showcase sufficiently groundbreaking PAL-specific glitches (such as with Blaster Master) to warrant publication as a new branch. It must either obsolete another run (which I can't necessarily see being warranted) or be rejected altogether. I am voting No.
Joined: 6/5/2005
Posts: 64
This is an odd little situation here. The speed is a tad bit faster, BGM is faster while the SFX is slower. All because the game isn't exactly the same game, just shoe-horned in to making it work with a 50 mHz system rather than a 60 mHz system. While I was entertained because I got to see that flagpole glitch work more efficiently, I don't know if this is worthy of its own category or obseleting. Personally, I don't think it should obselete because it is like putting a normal kid against a kid who's been fed more sugar before a race, and seeing who comes out on top. It doesn't match up properly. Maybe if this run was a bit more optimized and everything squeezed out of it that we can (I do expect HappyLee to come in with that if this gets published, otherwise I do expect one on the way, he likes doing that) then I could confidently vote yes. Instead, I'm just going to have to vote Meh, not because it wasn't a good run, but because I can see a slightly better run coming in the future, unless this manages to disappear. Sorry I couldn't exactly support this (plus other, more active posters said it better before me...)
Phear my uber gimpyness!
snorlax
He/Him
Joined: 5/20/2007
Posts: 174
Location: Wisconsin
After reading the opinions presented so far, I decided to vote no. This run is faster, but it gains its speed by undermining the game's physics that made previous runs so enjoyable. HappyLee is rolling over in his grave at the thought of no more crazy koopa setups in SMB. However, this definitely does deserve to be linked from the published movie, along with an explanation of how and why it's faster. Ultimately, though, I just know that they must be pronouncing "World" and "Time" in pretentious British accents, and I can't stand for that. I want my runs in American English only please.
Banned User
Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 183
sgrunt wrote:
It must either obsolete another run (which I can't necessarily see being warranted) or be rejected altogether.
Let's be careful with our false dichotomies, good sir. Another valid option (among many) is for this excellent run to be published in addition to the NTSC version. How phenomenally interesting it is that the conversion to PAL resulted in easier performance of that flagpole glitch! I would be greatly saddened if this run were suppressed (as it seems so many people unfortunately and irrationally desire.) Information wants to be free, but it requires free minds to reside in. Close your eyes. Breathe deeply. Free your mind. Visualize people from all the world's nations, holding hands and freely sharing runs of the great ROMs they grew up with and grew to love. PAL and NTSC, living together in harmony ... we've done it!
sgrunt
He/Him
Emulator Coder, Former player
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
Pointless Boy wrote:
Another valid option (among many) is for this excellent run to be published in addition to the NTSC version.
I explained earlier why this is not a valid option:
sgrunt wrote:
This does not showcase sufficiently groundbreaking PAL-specific glitches (such as with Blaster Master) to warrant publication as a new branch.
To expand upon this:
Judge Guidelines wrote:
A run for a proposed new branch for a game should offer compelling differences relative to previously published runs of that game.
1 2
5 6