This topic is for the purpose of discussing #436: Phil's NES Super Mario Bros. "warps" in 05:00.22

Gah! Too bad that it was still above five minutes. 38 frames seems to be a lot to improve by :/ Well, not sure how the rounding goes so it might be less. I'm at school now, so I can't see it now. I wonder how 4-1 was improved though.

I, for one, was able to screw up this run by pressing left at the end. What you did was end the movie early, using Mario's trajectory to finish it. I recognize your improvements, but just make sure your movie is thoroughly, irrevocably done next time.

Particularly, I disliked how the 1-1 underground pipe entry was slower than in Mana.'s movie and how the author chose the easier path in 8-1 instead of trying to jump under the coins that hover over the pits. Also, I wonder why Genisto didn't jump backwards towards the hovering pipe in 8-4. I recall Michael Fried saying it would be faster. However, I must raise a hat for the excellent total time and creativity.

I wonder why Genisto didn't jump backwards towards the hovering pipe in 8-4. I recall Michael Fried saying it would be faster.

I admits my error, I had not tested this possibility at this place. I will start again this part and will stop the movies at the time where Mario grab the hammer.

Why is that really? I had no problem watching the run at all. Hands off keyboard when watching anyways! :D I think the movie should end where the user no longer inputs commands anymore.

I thought it was pretty creative to stop the movie in mid jump. The recent Monopoly entry showed the benefits of early stopping and that's basically standard, right? As for the minor errors, for time being, this should be regarded as the best movie to date for one reason - it's the fastest. If a movie with the exact same number of frames is submitted but collects 2 more coins, that should take precedence, but for now, IMO, a 5:04 or a 5:01 movie shouldn't be looked at as better than this one. Besides, with the 3 different authors all looking to make the best video, they will in the natural course of time all achieve the same time - then these little details should be looked at. However, we should all look at the strong possibility that this will be beaten shortly.

I thought it was pretty creative to stop the movie in mid jump.

The problem with this is that it's cheating. Because dashing (B button) is stopped, it may actually result in slower completion than if that trick wasn't used.

I suppose the only real way to know if this is faster than Mana's is to stop Mana's movie at the same spot and compare frames. A search of the rules turned up nothing opposed to this method, but I could be not looking in the right places, but I did find a pretty good quote from the SMB2j discussion:

The only requirement I've had is that the movie must contain a sequence that leads to the ending without user input required. I'd also prefer if the movie is ended so that when the "Movie end" text is displayed, the user who watches the movie can't control the game so that the end isn't reached. I'm not certain whether this is true in my video (can you kill Mario by pressing LEFT when the movie ends?), but there are already some published movies (such as Phil's Castlevania 3 movie) where this is not true.

I mentioned the Monopoly, but there is no possible way to input anything after the movie is stopped, so that wouldn't be the same thing. Is this a rule already or just a preference? Perhaps "Stop your movie when the last possible user input is required" should read "Stop your movie when you no longer can affect the outcome of the game." Nevertheless, I'm guessing there's a point above the axe before hitting it where nobody could affect the outcome. Might save a couple of frames there.

I enjoyed the Sonic 1 style initial jumps. I've never time attacked SMB (or any game other than Sonic 1) but I have to wonder how that hadn't been tried before, since it's the first thing you try in any game. I agree with Bisqwit about the pipe entrance in 1-1 ... very sloppy. I think a more attractive way to slow down in 8-2 should be found, perhaps similar to Michael Fried's or Mana's old 8-3 strats. Lastly, how many people heard Michael Fried's "Do'h!" and head slap after seeing Phil's level starting strategy?

If I say the pipe entrance in 1-1 is sloppy or not is equal!? In fact it is equal. Maybe I should explain how this game is programmed. Before, people thought that winning 1 firework is slower than waiting the counter to be 0 but that's not true. It's equal and even better because you can collect some free points. Here's how the game is programmed: Timeunits are stable and each of them last 24 frames. But the game in itself works with multiple of 21. At first, I thought it was related to timeunits but then judged it was not since 1 timeunit = 24 frames. But now, it's confirmed it IS related. To be clear, if you finish the stage at 240 and some other guy got 240 also but you know you were 3 frames faster. In fact, you are equal. The thing here is in your video, the castle, if you take a flag to finish the level, or the stats screen, if you use a warp zone to finish the stage will be showed 3 frames longer. So it's equal. So here's a "table" that indicates how this thing works. The first line start when the timeunits has just been changed. Since there's 24 frames in one timeunit, there will 24 possibilities. y = In theory, it's when there's no waiting for the casle to disappear or the stats screen. I don't know what's the real total of frames. Anyway, it doesn't matter. 1 frame: y+21 2nd frame: y+20 3: y+19 4: y+18 5: y+17 6: y+16 7: y+15 8: y+14 9: y+13 10: y+12 11: y+11 12: y+10 13: y+9 14: y+8 15: y+7 16: y+6 17: y+5 18: y+4 19: y+3 20: y+2 21: y+1 22: y 23: y-1 24: y-2 Well, I'm not sure if frame 23 and 24 are true. Maybe it's y+44 and y+43. I don't know since I haven't tested those frames. In conclusion, should it be sloppy or not, it's equal. I have already done a non-sloppy run at stage 1-1 and finished with less points and coins than this one.

In short, the wait time before the level is not a constant number of frames, but rounded towards the next frame number multiple of 21. If you complete the level 3 frames faster, the wait will be 3 frames longer unless you also broke the next 21-frame boundary. However, this doesn't change the fact that bumping against the pipe like that looks stupid.

In short, the wait time before the level is not a constant number of frames, but rounded towards the next frame number multiple of 21. If you complete the level 3 frames faster, the wait will be 3 frames longer unless you also broke the next 21-frame boundary. However, this doesn't change the fact that bumping against the pipe like that looks stupid.

But less stupid if the goal was earning more points.

FLAMEWAR

MEOW

WOOF ;)

Who wants to be the small and fiery one?

I thought people will prefer an high score run when we know it's not faster an "unsloppy" run.

In this case, I'd say that entertainment conflicts with a mathematical goal.

Now that this run is official, what was the big secret? =) I couldn't spot any major differences from Mana's run except those backward jumps which looked really cool. I will vote yes to this because it's great that this old game can still surprise. Hope you'll fix the pipe issue though. Nice job!

Should be a reasonable man thing, right? I mean, it's not like the goal of the run is to collect coins or score points, so first, time should be judged, then style. I don't think "I collected 2 more coins" should be an issue when dealing with this movie unless the goal is to collect the most coins. I voted yes because it's 1 second faster than the published movie.

Well, I'm all for faster speed and such... but I dunno.. this movie has me undecided. I must agree with Bisqwit on the 1-1 pipe entry... it does look very sloppy, especially when all entries prior to this one enter the pipe in the bonus room SMOOTHLY. But that's not why I'm undecided. I'd like to know what the heck is up with the backwards jmping from the start of a level.. 1-1, 4-1, 4-2 warp area, 8-1... etc. Does it save frames, or is it just trying to be different? Nice to realize getting a firework doesn't affect timing though.. I always wondered. And 8-3 being completed a time unit faster was a shock. But if there was a way to manipulate luck and have the Hammer. Bros both stay on the bottom during the first parts of the level where they have those ledges, would it be faster by even a few frames to be able to zoom on the middle pathway unharmed both times as opposed to sticking it to the bottom? The other thing leaving me undecided has also been brought up in regards to the lack of the backwards jump in 8-4 to fly up to the higher pipe. If that's supposed to be faster.... COOL Backwards swimming though, I have to give props for that one. Once info is posted about the start the level with a backwards hop, I think I know how to vote then. Mr. Kelly R. Flewin

As for the pipe issue: The thing is that "1 coin more" doesn't say anything. Nobody cares if you get 40 or 70 coins in the completion of that game. They only care for what looks cool and what's difficult to accomplish. That bumping against a pipe doesn't look cool. The only number the audience will compare is the time, so ignore all the other numeric goals and concentrate on creating a beautiful movie. As for the ending thing: The point is that when you end it early, the actual ending might be a little *slower* because you stop moving faster. When you end the movie early like that, you're encouraging that kind of bastardising of the rules. When it comes to fast completion of the game, I don't think the length of user input is the decisive factor (it should not be!!). It should be the actual completion time (a commonly agreed goal) that matters. In Super Mario Bros's case, it is the moment you hit the hammer. It is the common goal. This is just common sense. You are competing in the time needed to complete the game, not in the time needed to control the game. I'm not a politician. I'm just trying to make it so that people don't shoot each others in leg. I hate having to make rules, actually...

very sloppy? Are you sure what you are writing? because to me, the word very indicates that its ALOT sloppy and I strongly disagree so be plz choose your words with great consideration. If its faster than the current movie then it should be published (my opinion, as with the new submission of SM). I wonder what M.Fried will come up with :)