Submission Text Full Submission Page
Hello guys it's finally finished, the new 11 exit TAS of Super Mario World!

Game objectives

  • Emulator used: lsnes rr2-β18
  • 11 magnificent exits, what do you want more
  • still 11 exits
  • you can count them if you want, it's really 11!

Comments

You can go ahead and skip YI2 if you want, I mean it's not like there is something important happening right there... Do not think I wrote a code in RAM that allows me to change my position at any time by using the 3rd and 4th controller!!!! I totally wouldn't do that!!!
I know that YI2 and overall every level is not optimized but since this is not TASVideos Pro I thought I'd go with it.

Level comments

No I don't like submission texts because I have to write stuff here. I won't waste my time here on the regular TASVideos. but go check out the detailed explanation on TASVideos Pro.

Nach: Before I get into the judgment for this run, I'd like to go over the route and warp background as exists in Mario games till this point.
In the original Super Mario Bros., the game expects you to complete 32 levels spread across 8 worlds in order to complete the game. However, they added warp zones, which allow one to skip a bunch of levels. They hid the first one in 1-2, by going over the end of the underground ceiling, which allows you to warp to worlds 2, 3, or 4. The only other underground level in the game, 4-2, also has a warp zone at the end if you go over the ceiling, which skips only two levels, taking you to world 5. It was probably a prank from the developers for those who found the first warp, and they made this warp so easy to get to with a tall pipe to stand on reaching the ceiling near the end. They hid a proper warp earlier in the level which can take you to worlds 6, 7, and 8. For TAS videos, we feature the fastest route as can be used with warp zones, as well as a warpless run.
In Super Mario Bros. 2 USA, they dropped selective warp zones, and instead offer sub-con warp pipes. They also littered these throughout the game, and existed everywhere you could find a potion and a pipe in the same location. For TAS videos, we feature the fastest route as can be used with warp pipes, as well as a warpless run, and the fastest run with a suboptimal character.
In Super Mario Bros. 2 Japan, they also littered warp zones throughout the game, but this time around decided to offer backwards warp zones, and put them in every single place someone thought they were being clever by jumping over a flagpole. For TAS videos, we feature the fastest route as can be used with warp zones, as well as a warpless run, albeit with some special circumstances due to multiple ports of the game and multiple players.
Super Mario Bros 3. radically changed the way things work. The game now offers 8 regular worlds, each being a map. The amount of levels in each world is no longer uniform. Levels now may have multiple ways to be completed, and some completion methods may change how the map is affected. You can also get some items to alter or bypass things on the map. Due to the map style, many levels are also completely optional. For larger skips, warping, the game featured warp whistles. A warp whistle would take you to a special 9th warp world:
Which world you used the warp whistle from would determine which of the 3 paths in this world you would begin on:
Worlds 1, 2, 3: First path of 2, 3, 4.
Worlds 4, 5, 6: Second path of, 5, 6, 7.
Worlds 7, 8, 9: Third path of 8.
You could technically go backwards to 2 from 3, 5 from 6, or replay 2, 3, 5, 6, and 8 from themselves. For TAS videos, we feature the fastest route as can be used with warp whistles, a warpless run which doesn't use any world skipping, but does take the fastest possible route through the levels and maps in each world, and a 100% run in is development.
Super Mario World came along and kept the map idea, and multiple level endings, but dropped the item idea, and also shook things up. A lot more emphasis was placed on multiple ways to complete levels, and this served more to alter the map and game progression than items. Since there are no more items, such as warp whistles, special locations hidden with top secret secondary endings off a beaten path were now used to reach the game's 9th world, the warp world, known as Star World. The game also has a secret 10th world, but that's not relevant here.
If one wanted to come up with a warpless Super Mario World run akin to the previous Super Mario Bros. games, one would simply need to TAS the fastest route that avoids Star World. The 96-exit branch is akin to a 100% branch that would exist for Super Mario Bros. 3. However, this is much less natural within SMW, as the multiple exit idea with map changes is now fused with the warp idea, so a clear correct non-shortcut route through the game is no longer obvious without direct comparisons to previous games.
The real fastest run of Super Mario World, warped, akin to the previous games is the fastest route which makes use of Star World, or as it's currently known 11 exits.
Unlike the previous games so far on this non-pro site, no one has submitted a route which can complete the game by warping more than the official warp methods allow for. But with Super Mario World, our beloved Masterjun has found a way to break the game and warp to the ending from the very beginning of the game, featuring a faster than fastest route. This makes naming for the real fastest route difficult. Right now it's 11 exits, even though that's not necessarily the best appellation for it.
Comparing this run and an 11 exit run shows considerable difference between the two, and indicates there is a naming problem. Either this run needs an additional appellation, or the other set of runs need something more appropriate. However, what is up for judgment here is not some logistics issue of naming, but rather whether these two runs are compatible in their goals, and serve as the same route.
This run adds a TSR into the game to allow one to change Mario's position within levels by entering warp codes on the extra controllers. However, one questions why not do the same thing for the map itself? Why specifically these 11 exits? If one wants to really push the boundaries of the notion of 11 exits completed, the 11 exits completed should be anything but the standard ones, as we would for TASing notions elsewhere.
In the thread, I enumerated 6 possible ways to handle this judgment. I will elaborate on each, and my judgment upon them.

Accept as new branch

This would mean we'd call this run 11 exits, TSR or something like that and publish it alongside all our other numerous SMW runs. But why 11 exits? If you have a TSR, why not 10?

Obsolete specified branch

This sort of goes against the spirit of the existing branch. If we look at route name alone, it should technically obsolete it. However once code is being added/modified, why not go all the way? This run is trying to pigeon hole the criteria in drawing the lines between the different ones, without drawing any additional lines between the types of abuse occurring to the game itself. After all, the current 11 exit utilizes built-in abuses for completing levels too quickly, so one questions, why not this too? After careful examination of what the audience wants, from the audience members I determined are representative (meaning the ones that agree with me), there should be a line drawn between any run which adds/modifies code and all other run routes. Meaning this run is now the same branch as the fastest run.

Obsolete a different branch than the one specified

This would mean obsoleting the fastest run, which this is slower than it!

Double-obsoletion

Neither of the two above make sense, and this even less so.

Publish on TASVideos Pro instead

Now I strongly considered this, especially based on feedback from Warp. Fitting username considering the issue at hand.
However, based on an existing precedent where a special branch distinguishing technique can be used for a warped or warpless run and we only publish the warpless, which shows off the technique more, I can't accept this, as we [|already have a 96-exit TSR run up on pro] [EDIT: joke link removed].
Perhaps the rules on pro should be different, but without generous donations from people like Bobo T. King who gave us unlimited access to his credit card before he reported it stolen, we simply can't afford to right now. Therefore we're going to limit pro to the precedents we have on free TASVideos right now.
However the run on pro should probably say more than just 96 exit in order to better differentiate it from the ones here.

Reject this sucker.

Since none of the above seem to apply...


Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
So my bullshit detector is on the fritz, so I'm not sure how much of this thread is serious. Either way, this version of "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse is faster than the published "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse, so go-go gadget publication.
Has never colored a dinosaur.
Patashu
He/Him
Joined: 10/2/2005
Posts: 4042
Twelvepack wrote:
So my bullshit detector is on the fritz, so I'm not sure how much of this thread is serious. Either way, this version of "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse is faster than the published "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse, so go-go gadget publication.
The existence of this TAS as an april fools joke is to do with a bit of tasvideos history. Let me give you the summary: How categories used to be named on TASvideos: Arbitrary code execution, glitches to credits: 'glitched' Forgoes arbitrary code execution, uses orb glitch and everything else, 11 exits: <nothing> or 'any%' Then, a new ruling: "Let's not call categories 'glitched'. If it's the fastest category, we call it any%/<nothing>. Anything slower than that has to explain what goal or restriction makes it slower." How the categories are named afterwards (I may have the steps out of order but it illustrates the problem): Arbitrary code execution, glitches to credits: <nothing> or 'any%' Forgoes arbitrary code execution, uses orb glitch and everything else, 11 exits: something like 'any% no arbitrary code execution' Then it was pointed out by an SMW TASer: "Wait! What about the previous glitched TAS, that spat out a null sprite on a brown platform in Yoshi's Island 3 ('brown platform glitch' and jumped to credits early that way? If the categories are meant to be comprehensive about what the TAS must and must not do, then I could take the old obsoleted glitched TAS, submit it again and it would override 'any% no arbitrary code execution' even though it really shouldn't." So it got renamed something like 'any% no stun sprite glitch, no brown platform glitch' Then it was pointed out: "This is a really awful, verbose category name. It doesn't roll off the tongue, and people not familiar with the game's intricacies in its glitches won't have a clue what this category is actually about. More to the point - If you find another distinct game breaking glitch, then you have to update every other category and make the definition even longer. Eventually it won't even fit in one line." So it got renamed something like 'any% no memory corruption' Then it was pointed out: "Isn't the chuck eat/orb glitch memory corruption? It puts something invalid into a memory address via an invalid process." So it got renamed something like '11 exits' But we all know the problem with that - you're looking at the thread dedicated to it! I suspect next it will be renamed something like 'any% no heavy memory corruption' (How do you define heavy vs light? An intuitive definition can work for a while, but only until a memory corruption glitch that isn't obviously heavy or light comes along.) or we will just give up and relinquish ourself to arbitrariness once more. (Also, what do we do with things like SMW 96 exit/SMW2:YI 100%, where lots of techniques that would make the run faster but more tedious/boring like L+Ring and chuck eating are banned? In an objective/comprehensive categories world it should become part of the category.) (And if I'm missing any key points in this summary lemme know)
My Chiptune music, made in Famitracker: http://soundcloud.com/patashu My twitch. I stream mostly shmups & rhythm games http://twitch.tv/patashu My youtube, again shmups and rhythm games and misc stuff: http://youtube.com/user/patashu
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Twelvepack wrote:
Either way, this version of "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse is faster than the published "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse, so go-go gadget publication.
Yeah, this. It's hardly the first case that a newer run is faster but shows less of the gameplay than an existing run. That generally results in obsoletion of the slower run; I fail to see why this is suddenly a problem here.
Patashu
He/Him
Joined: 10/2/2005
Posts: 4042
Radiant wrote:
Twelvepack wrote:
Either way, this version of "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse is faster than the published "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse, so go-go gadget publication.
Yeah, this. It's hardly the first case that a newer run is faster but shows less of the gameplay than an existing run. That generally results in obsoletion of the slower run; I fail to see why this is suddenly a problem here.
My post above should explain what the problem is (hint: the problem is that it shouldn't have been called '11 exits' in a category-labels-are-comprehensive world)
My Chiptune music, made in Famitracker: http://soundcloud.com/patashu My twitch. I stream mostly shmups & rhythm games http://twitch.tv/patashu My youtube, again shmups and rhythm games and misc stuff: http://youtube.com/user/patashu
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Patashu wrote:
My post above should explain what the problem is (hint: the problem is that it shouldn't have been called '11 exits' in a category-labels-are-comprehensive world)
Well, the point is that the existing run must have a non-arbitrary reason to exist as a separate branch, and if there isn't one, then it should get obsoleted. If (if) the only thing that sets it apart from other runs is that "it uses some glitches but not some other glitches" then that's not enough. Again, I'm not seeing how it's a big deal that finding a new issue caused an existing run to become obsoleted. That happens all the time on this site, even when some people thought the earlier run was prettier.
Patashu
He/Him
Joined: 10/2/2005
Posts: 4042
Radiant wrote:
Patashu wrote:
My post above should explain what the problem is (hint: the problem is that it shouldn't have been called '11 exits' in a category-labels-are-comprehensive world)
Well, the point is that the existing run must have a non-arbitrary reason to exist as a separate branch
And it does. It is the 'not glitched' counterpart to the 'glitched' run. Just that currently it is not well articulated how/why they are different/allowed to be different.
My Chiptune music, made in Famitracker: http://soundcloud.com/patashu My twitch. I stream mostly shmups & rhythm games http://twitch.tv/patashu My youtube, again shmups and rhythm games and misc stuff: http://youtube.com/user/patashu
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Patashu wrote:
And it does. It is the 'not glitched' counterpart to the 'glitched' run. Just that currently it is not well articulated how/why they are different/allowed to be different.
Nope, that doesn't work. The run uses glitches, therefore it's clearly not a "not glitched" run.
Patashu
He/Him
Joined: 10/2/2005
Posts: 4042
Radiant wrote:
Patashu wrote:
And it does. It is the 'not glitched' counterpart to the 'glitched' run. Just that currently it is not well articulated how/why they are different/allowed to be different.
Nope, that doesn't work. The run uses glitches, therefore it's clearly not a "not glitched" run.
OK, let's try this. Let's say next year's April Fools, masterjun submits a "96 exit" TAS that uses arbitrary code execution to do all 96 exits by teleporting to the end. Is this a correct obsoletion of the existing 96 exit TAS? Why or why not?
My Chiptune music, made in Famitracker: http://soundcloud.com/patashu My twitch. I stream mostly shmups & rhythm games http://twitch.tv/patashu My youtube, again shmups and rhythm games and misc stuff: http://youtube.com/user/patashu
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Patashu wrote:
OK, let's try this. Let's say next year's April Fools, masterjun submits a "96 exit" TAS that uses arbitrary code execution to do all 96 exits by teleporting to the end. Is this a correct obsoletion of the existing 96 exit TAS? Why or why not?
Well, that's a leading question. You clearly want the answer to be "no", and I suspect numerous other fans of the game do as well. And on the other hand, I suppose you'd want the 96-exit to still remain open to being obsoleted by smaller improvements. The question is, is there a clear and objective line that can be drawn between those two examples, so that the latter can count as obsolescence and the former as a distinct branch? And no, the word "glitched" is neither clear nor objectively defined, so that doesn't help. On the other hand, "no memory corruption" could work as a separate branch.
Player (80)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
I would like to weigh in clearly in favor of rejection. What bothers me is that the TAS opens up arbitrary code execution and yet it's only used to alter the player's x- and y-positions. That means it's suboptimal as an "arbitrary code execution" run, which could instead jump straight to the credits (I assume). On the other hand, it's presented as an 11 exit run, but that's problematic for the exact reasons Patashu gives. Basically, this run goes just far enough into glitchy territory to annihilate all records in the existing branch (and annihilating any entertainment value along with it), but not so far into glitchiness that it needs to be evaluated against similar branches. I try to evaluate TASes and not TASers, but I think Masterjun wants to have it both ways. This TAS isn't nearly as good as the other arbitrary code execution TAS, but it would obsolete the 11 exit TAS without any of the skills demonstrated there. Although we've obsoleted long runs before (I'm specifically thinking of runs like Chrono Trigger and Super Mario 64), that was through months or years of hard work, looking at the game's code, and hundreds or thousands of re-attempts optimizing a single task. It wasn't one runner sitting down and deciding he just wanted to use existing tricks from other runs to snatch up all the records for himself. And for the record, I was entertained by the movie and I (along with just about everyone here) am a big fan of Masterjun's work. I even have a certain admiration for this run because it's close to what I was trying to do with my Carmen Sandiego and Beetle Mania runs: try to hit a sweet spot where the run becomes very difficult to evaluate under the current judging standards. But my answer is still no.
Patashu
He/Him
Joined: 10/2/2005
Posts: 4042
I would add that 'once you have arbitrary code execution, you have arbitrary goal execution'. With a sufficiently fast enough ACE (and this game's is very fast), any goal that does not ban ACE will use ACE to just barely satisfy the requirements of the goal without satisfying the spirit of what said goal requires (for instance, no one would be impressed by a super metroid ACE TAS that gets 100% by editing all the items in!)
My Chiptune music, made in Famitracker: http://soundcloud.com/patashu My twitch. I stream mostly shmups & rhythm games http://twitch.tv/patashu My youtube, again shmups and rhythm games and misc stuff: http://youtube.com/user/patashu
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Precisely. So the other goals (branches) for this game should either ban ACE directly, or ban the glitch required to obtain ACE. That solves the issue. What would also solve the issue is if this run doesn't get enough votes to get to moon tier, since it already doesn't qualify for vault tier. Either way, nothing the site rules can't already handle.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Patashu wrote:
no one would be impressed by a super metroid ACE TAS that gets 100% by editing all the items in!
Actually, we just published that. It's a very impressive movie.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Player (80)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
Nach wrote:
Patashu wrote:
no one would be impressed by a super metroid ACE TAS that gets 100% by editing all the items in!
Actually, we just published that. It's a very impressive movie.
You published that... ... on a different branch. I think the Metroid run stands on its own merits. This run does not.
Skilled player (1093)
Joined: 9/15/2013
Posts: 116
Nach wrote:
Patashu wrote:
no one would be impressed by a super metroid ACE TAS that gets 100% by editing all the items in!
Actually, we just published that. It's a very impressive movie.
Pardon me, but that TAS gets 999%, not 100%. Therefore, this TAS is only ~1/90 times as good as the Super Metroid TAS and this should be grounds for instant rejection. The logic is foolproof.
Site Admin, Skilled player (1250)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11473
Location: Lake Char­gogg­a­gogg­man­chaugg­a­gogg­chau­bun­a­gung­a­maugg
Radiant wrote:
Twelvepack wrote:
Either way, this version of "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse is faster than the published "11 exits" with heavy glitch abuse, so go-go gadget publication.
Yeah, this. It's hardly the first case that a newer run is faster but shows less of the gameplay than an existing run. That generally results in obsoletion of the slower run; I fail to see why this is suddenly a problem here.
The trick this run uses (arbitrary code) is not pulled out to its maximum (as it is in the any% run). So this needs to be entertaining enough to obsolete the existing '11 exit' branch. This sumission got some Moon-ish votes, and decent feedback, but how many people honestly think that this run is more entertaining than the existing "11 exits" one? If it loses to the latter by entertainment, it can't obsolete it. And it's not a vaultable category either.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Bobo the King wrote:
Nach wrote:
Actually, we just published that. It's a very impressive movie.
You published that...
Actually, Mothrayas and Ilari published that.
Bobo the King wrote:
... on a different branch.
On the primary Metroid branch. However, the 100% Metroid branch still exists on its own, and for good reason.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Warepire
He/Him
Editor
Joined: 3/2/2010
Posts: 2178
Location: A little to the left of nowhere (Sweden)
I should point out that my yes vote was in the spirit of April Fools, so it shall not count.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Warepire wrote:
I should point out that my yes vote was in the spirit of April Fools, so it shall not count.
Thank you for your candor, retraction, and clarification.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Noxxa
They/Them
Moderator, Expert player (4108)
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4089
Location: The Netherlands
Yeah, I similarly didn't put down a serious vote for the run. I actually think there's a whole lot of people who weren't serious in voting. I wouldn't trust any of the voting results. (Hopefully people could tell that my vote/post was too sarcastic to be a proper vote).
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa <dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects. <Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits <adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Mothrayas wrote:
I wouldn't trust any of the voting results.
I wouldn't either.
Mothrayas wrote:
Hopefully people could tell that my vote/post was too sarcastic to be a proper vote.
I could tell, but plenty of people can't. Once I bizarrely handle this one (hopefully in a way nobody was expecting), you know someone is going to come here complaining about how it goes against whatever the vote says at the time, or certain comments for or against. So it's good to see people saying not to trust anything. This allows me to ignore whatever is said, and use my own bias to determine. So yeah, if I move this run to pro only or something like that, don't come crying back. Edit: The Nach control panel should currently be something like: User Votes: [12%] Accept as new branch. [23%] Obsolete specified branch. [03%] Obsolete a different branch than the one specified. [19%] Double-obsoletion. [16%] Reject this sucker. [27%] Publish on TASVideos Pro instead. In the case of double-obsoletion, it would have to obsolete [1944] SNES Super Mario World "warps" by bahamete, kaizoman666, Mister & PangaeaPanga in 09:57.82 and [2513] SNES Super Mario World "arbitrary code execution" by Masterjun in 02:25.19. Edit 2: I was advised to use this run to obsolete the run(s) on SDA. I'll consider it. Thank you.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Site Admin, Skilled player (1250)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11473
Location: Lake Char­gogg­a­gogg­man­chaugg­a­gogg­chau­bun­a­gung­a­maugg
"Obsolete specified branch." is ok, now let it count how many users think this one is more entertaining than that one.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
"Obsolete specified branch." is ok, now let it count how many users think this one is more entertaining than that one.
23% of 125 weighted users, using a COCOMO model calculating how the representation group would feel about options they didn't realize they weren't offered. Which in my math is 28.75 users.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Site Admin, Skilled player (1250)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11473
Location: Lake Char­gogg­a­gogg­man­chaugg­a­gogg­chau­bun­a­gung­a­maugg
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Editor, Active player (297)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 7469
Location: Arzareth
I still hold that the defining attribute of this movie is "arbitrary code execution" / "total control". Attempts to make "11 exits" the category is misdirection. And as a "total control" TAS, this does not beat the one that was featured in AGDQ.