Here is an improvement of 330 frames (5.5 seconds) to the previous run.
ROM version has been switched to PRG0. Reason: More interesting level names during the ending sequence. This run will still sync on ROM version PRG1, but please encode the run with the ROM version PRG0.
adelikat: Like many other TASers, this run is what brought me to TASvideos.org and to the art of TASing. So it means a lot to me that I was able to contribute something to the perfection of it.
Scrolling glitch and speed/entertainment tradeoff stuff
A new method was used in 8-Ship and 8-Tank2 to scroll very far to the right of the screen near the end of the level to enter the pipes about 45 frames faster in each case. This was at the tradeoff of some of the 1-up bouncing in those levels. Please see this alternate run, which is 90 frames slower, but the authors, of course, manage to get 99 lives magnificently™. The warpless run also contains more 1-up bouncing and does not use this glitch. (However, neither of these runs sync on PRG1.)
Level by level
Level
Frames gained
Reason
Frames sacrificed
Reason
Total Gain
1-1
1
Less hammer brother RNG lag
0
-
1
1-2
32
Sliding speed abuse
5
Bad hammer brother luck later forced this loss anyway, so we took a flower card by delaying the level entrance
27
1-3
2
Greater precision
4
Better hammer brother luck
-2
1-Fortress
10
Better running at the beginning, starting flight later
0
-
10
Map
1
-
0
-
1
8-Tanks
4
Reduced lag and better pipe entrance
0
-
4
8-Ship
51
Scroll glitch to the right side of the screen, better time countdown
0
-
51
Pipe
1
Subpixel abuse allowed farther sliding
0
-
1
Map
4
Better luck on the bridge
0
-
4
8-Airship
7
Better pipe entrance and boom-boom fight
0
-
7
Pipe
1
Subpixel abuse allowed farther sliding
0
-
1
8-1
1
Greater precision
0
-
1
8-2
13
Greater precision and sliding speed abuse
0
-
13
8-Fortress
3
Greater precision
0
-
3
Pipe
1
Subpixel abuse allowed farther sliding
0
-
1
8-Tanks2
42
Scroll glitch to the right side of the screen
0
-
42
8-Castle
138
New route
0
-
138
Bowser
22
New strategy
0
-
22
End
5
Better time countdown
0
-
5
Total
339
Thanks for watching!
9
-
330
Bisqwit: Got no adequate words to congratulate and praise :(
We're back where we started, only 40 levels stronger.
In any case, accepting and encoding. :)
It's in the submission text, but it seems some people are missing it, so I'll emphasize it here.
We also did a run which gets 99 lives instead of using the screen scrolling glitch in 8-Ship and 8-Tank2. Click
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Indeed. It's hard to believe there were no possibilities to get them even with using the scroll glitches. At least on the first look it seems that by better analyzing and planning of the multiple rocket jumps during the autoscroller, it should be possible. Sorry if I'm wrong though.
Joined: 6/13/2006
Posts: 3300
Location: Massachussetts, USA
Chamale wrote:
You had your chance. The movie's only 10 minutes long.
Have you ever stopped to consider that a VAST MINORITY of people sit patiently at their computer 24/7 and are always present when a new submissions comes out? Sir VG is right, someone is a little "publish button" trigger happy for absolutely no reason. This reeks of dumbness, way to ruin what was supposed to be cool and epic.
I would have voted yes, but there's no need to since I'm a whole day late and with the RPG0 ROM the music is exactly 1 second behind the action on my computer.
Also, shouldn't the 99 lives line be taken out of the movie description since the authors do not in fact get those 99 lives in the autoscrolling stages in the published .fcm?
Cry cry cry, bitch bitch bitch... thats all you imputent bastards are doing. Suppose we just shouldn't have made the damn thing at all? Would that have made you happier? If not shut the fuck up!
Edit: And to everyone complaining about fast publications, if you don't like how the publishers decide what gets published, why dont you help them by encoding the runs yourself. These people do TAS's and judge and publish these runs because they want to. They dont get paid.
Phil wrote:
Damn, we are doing this for free. We shouldn't have a salary of insults
Get off your high horses and help rather than complain. Otherwise you haven't room to complain.
JXQ wrote:
Insult salad
Cardboard wrote:
Slowbeef
I'm sciencing as fast as I can !
______________________________________
<adelikat> once more balls enter the picture, everything gets a lot more entertraining
<adelikat> mmmmm yummy penises
Joined: 6/11/2006
Posts: 818
Location: Arboga, Sweden
Sir VG wrote:
Posted: 2.16.2008 16:45
Published: 02.16.2008 19:59
3 hours, 14 minutes from posting to publication. SHEESH. GIVE US A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.
What you mean is: "PUBLISH MY RUN ALREADY", I assume. And yes I am very sure that it is the issue.
Also there it is. Look at it all you want.
comicalflop wrote:
Also, shouldn't the 99 lives line be taken out of the movie description since the authors do not in fact get those 99 lives in the autoscrolling stages in the published .fcm?
Movie description wrote:
And of course, a wadload of extra lives are again achieved in the mandatorily slow autoscrolling levels.
Nothing about 99 of them extra chances there.
Warp wrote:
omg lol this is so fake!!!1 the nes cant produce music like this!
3 hours, 14 minutes from posting to publication. SHEESH. GIVE US A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.
WOW, I GUESS WE HAVE ALL BEEN FORGETTING THAT IT IS COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE TO WATCH A SUBMISSION AFTER IT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED. IT IS NOT LIKE YOU CAN STILL DOWNLOAD THE INPUT FILE NORMALLY OR FROM THE NEW MOVIE PAGE, AND YOU CERTAINLY AREN'T ADDITIONALLY ABLE TO DOWNLOAD THE MOVIE IN AVI OR MKV FORMAT ONCE IT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED. SERIOUSLY ONCE THE MOVIE IS PUBLISHED NOBODY CAN WATCH IT EVER AGAIN. AND, IN FACT, THE INPUT FILES MAGICALLY DELETE THEMSELVES FROM THE HARD DRIVES OF PEOPLE WHO MANAGED TO DOWNLOAD THEM BEFORE HAND.
ps: the caps are to indicate sarcasm, because people here seem to have difficulty detecting sarcasm without an additional sign, and I am too poor to afford a fancy orange flag like Fabian has.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
WOW, I GUESS WE HAVE ALL BEEN FORGETTING THAT IT IS COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE TO WATCH A SUBMISSION AFTER IT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED. IT IS NOT LIKE YOU CAN STILL DOWNLOAD THE INPUT FILE NORMALLY OR FROM THE NEW MOVIE PAGE, AND YOU CERTAINLY AREN'T ADDITIONALLY ABLE TO DOWNLOAD THE MOVIE IN AVI OR MKV FORMAT ONCE IT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED. SERIOUSLY ONCE THE MOVIE IS PUBLISHED NOBODY CAN WATCH IT EVER AGAIN. AND, IN FACT, THE INPUT FILES MAGICALLY DELETE THEMSELVES FROM THE HARD DRIVES OF PEOPLE WHO MANAGED TO DOWNLOAD THEM BEFORE HAND.
Joined: 12/25/2007
Posts: 86
Location: Muhos, Finland
.fcm file work'd on non [!] whithout any problems (Super mario bros 3 ( PRG0)).
anyway very Good speedrun :) .
<small>Big signature cleared by admin; read <A>forum rules</a>.</small>
<small>-Me:..and big sig. was just small picure(two row's), It dont even lag my 3660's web browser >_></small>
<Enhasa> ok i don't understand what vg is getting at
<Enhasa> and cf
<Enhasa> does he feel disenfranchised by the tas going up so fast?
<Enhasa> it's so cute
<Enhasa> thinking his voting matters
<VorpalEdge> the sad part is, i would agree with vg in that runs should not be published so quickly if it wasn't a mario game that everybody auto-votes yes on anyways
<Enhasa> well i agree that the publishing being so skewed towards popular games is bad
<Enhasa> but the problem is not that mario is published so fast
<Enhasa> so don't complain about that
<Enhasa> complain about something else being slow
Can anybody think of a better screenshot? The current one needs to be changed, because if nobody noticed, it's a washed-out, blurry shot from the video.
Personally, it's also boring and doesn't show anything of interest, and looks really bad (no color or anything other than red bricks on a black background)
What the hell is up with complaining about fast publications? I seriously am not getting it at all. How is "something cool and epic" ruined by fast publishing? Please elaborate.
Can anybody think of a better screenshot? The current one needs to be changed, because if nobody noticed, it's a washed-out, blurry shot from the video.
It's called "evaluating and checking for potential mistakes."
Look at, say, the recent Castlevania Harmony of Dissonance. Good thing with didn't publish THAT in 5 minutes, now...did we? There were mistakes and about .23 seconds were saved.
If it was published, and then 5 seconds later an improvement was posted...wouldn't that be a bit foolish?
Xkeeper wrote:
JXQ wrote:
Also guys, don't forget how things used to be before adelikat jumped into publishing. It will keep things in perspective.
I've said it before; perhaps instead of "favoritism first", runs should sit in the queue for a minimum of a week and a maximum of two weeks (for runs not getting enough attention in the queue), instead of "Ooh ooh this is an awesome run let's publish it before most people even have a chance to view the submission"
At least this would bring a little bit of a standardized practice into things...
...
And yes, I'm well aware that before, runs used to sit in the queue for months on end. The problem still exists; just now, it's the opposite extreme.
I support this statement. It's no longer about my run, but about basic principles.
(And yes, I do realize I can watch it now. But frankly, it would be nice to have had a chance to evaluate it. No, I couldn't do it yesterday because some of us like...have a life.)
My problem is that it violates almost every screenshot guideline:
Be sure to add png (or jpg) to the filename when filling out the filename field. Such as smb_1023.png
Pick a screenshot that represents the movie or the game well.
It should be pleasant to look at. Avoid ugly and monotonous colours. Choose beautiful and clearly visible poses of the characters.
Beauty in the image should be equally distributed ― not localized in a corner or an edge.
It should give an idea of the genre of the game and the movie to an audience who doesn't know the game.
It should be interesting, preferably with action on the screen.
If the movie is atypical to the game (a highly glitched movie for example), the screenshot should display something atypical happening, but without conflicting with the earlier guidelines.
If the screenshot is a PNG file, it should be optimized.
Use PNG over JPG, unless a PNG file would inevitably be more than 30 kB in size and a JPG would be half of that.
Even if it is decided that the current screenshot is good enough, it needs to be taken from the emulator and not the published AVI.
--
Sir VG wrote:
It's called "evaluating and checking for potential mistakes."
Look at, say, the recent Castlevania Harmony of Dissonance. Good thing with didn't publish THAT in 5 minutes, now...did we? There were mistakes and about .23 seconds were saved.
If it was published, and then 5 seconds later an improvement was posted...wouldn't that be a bit foolish?
I don't want to drag this up, again, but uh, have we forgotten Super Mario World? That one took forever to finally submit (it seems) and within a day or two it was cancelled because of new improvements.
I'm not saying anything about this run, just that he has a point.
Bisqwit knows this game inside out. I'm pretty sure he's a lot better at evaluating and checking for potential mistakes than most people here. If he wants to sacrifice his personal free time to encode this run, I simply can't see why anyone would want to object. If you find a mistake in this movie now, so what? It can be fixed and the run replaced. Nothing is taken away from you.
I don't think an improvement of SMB3 will take 1 day to do. So, as for me, I don't care if i's published now or in 1 week.
I agree with Xkeeper about the screensot. Also, the run being published with a different version of the game also violates another rule. PRG0 when it was PRG1.
Another proof that rules on this site are rarely applied.
I'm just making more guesses. This one isn't too bad... more color, and at least fairly amusing :P
There's not much in this TAS to show, unfortunately.
Edit: Good response on IRC. I changed the movie's screenshot.
For refrence/reversion, the old one (±5 frames):
Bisqwit, thank you for encoding with PRG0!
Phil, I don't understand why you are against ROM changes from one run to the next, but are all for emulator changes from one run to the next, when the two ideas have potentially the same effects on the resulting TAS.
I was also just reminded that Genisto changed the ROM when he did the previous version, from (J) to (U). How is our choice different?
Also, I liked the old screenshot (even though I usually prefer blue colors, I like the red-ness of it), but I like the new one too.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Phil, I don't understand why you are against ROM changes from one run to the next, but are all for emulator changes from one run to the next, when the two ideas have potentially the same effects on the resulting TAS.
That's a good question that I was expecting. You are right about the effects. However, using a recent emulator which usually improves emulation accuracy to look closer to what can be done on the console is a wiser choice.
Switching ROM only affects the gameplay, the differences may lead that one might be faster by a few frames. Fortunately, it's not the case here as I would be against the publication.
I have a question, what's so interesting in ending scene text for PRG0?
Edit: It seems you have edited you post the time I was writing this post while talking with someone.
JXQ wrote:
I was also just reminded that Genisto changed the ROM when he did the previous version, from (J) to (U). How is our choice different?
I already answer this question in the Bionic Commando submission. Anyway, there was a consensus by many guys to switch version before Genisto has submitted his run. However, I never really agreed with that choice. If you want to switch version ask before even working on it. It's 2nd time you are doing that. Don't be surprised if I disagree with that. My opinion is clear on this. If we start switching version just because of some small details such as text, then where are we going?
Also, about emulators, I agree with upgrading an emulator but not downgrading. Ex. Someone would beat that SMB3 with FCEU 0.98.12 or using a completely different inferior emulator such as Famtasia when it is proved to have differences, I would disagree for its publication.
:-D
EDIT: Sorry, forgot my sarcasm flags, I approve of this message as well, although I did not fund it. Paid for by the Democratic party.
I'm just making more guesses. This one isn't too bad... more color, and at least fairly amusing :P
There's not much in this TAS to show, unfortunately.
Edit: Good response on IRC. I changed the movie's screenshot.
For refrence/reversion, the old one (±5 frames):
