This topic is for the purpose of discussing #6377: TiKevin83's GB Pokémon: Blue Version in 1:29:53.19

Great run! Hilarious to see how powerful NidoKing is in this setting. I think my favorite part was the three rock pokemon all using self destruct and missing. That made me lol. Also found the bot use to be interesting as well.

As I said in the userfile comments, we'll just set the accurate movie time in the database for this submission (and publication if it happens). It will have to be verified of course.

I can provide my lua script if needed for independent verification - it outputs emu.totalexecutedcycles() for each movie.getinput(), we usually use this to transform GBI timestamps for console verification but I stripped out the GBI transform to get the raw cycle count at last input: 2A225FA40 (11,310,332,480 GBC m-cycles in decimal) Now this number needs some elaboration. The game boy has roughly 4mhz T-cycles, but is effectively memory bound to operate every 4 cycles (1 M-cycle, roughly 1mhz). The GBC has a double speed mode, so to capture every possible GBC m-cycle Gambatte operates at 2mhz internally. We'll want to compare instead using the canonical ~4mhz GB T-cycle count, so we double to 22,620,664,960 GB t-cycles. Divided by the GB t-cycle clock rate of the Game Boy observed by Gekkio of 4.194304Mhz (t-cycles/second) http://gbdev.gg8.se/wiki/articles/Game_Boy_Technical_Data We get a final time of 5,393.187 seconds (1:29:53.187), which corresponds quite nicely to the time observed during console verification.

It's cool to see how robust console verification has become for pokemon games now. Do you guys plan to push this in any new directions with other games or other pokemon gens TiKevin83?

Hey Alyosha, I have some tests to run this weekend to see whether Crystal's RTC is even deterministic enough for a Crystal Glitchless TAS to be feasible. Regardless of that outcome, we will probably look at that for TASing, possibly to obsolete the existing Gold TAS as I have been told by many sources that it is severely outdated and the Gen 2 TASes would see more repeat content if both optimized thoroughly.

Now where did I place it. Ah there it is. Shotgun to the Pubs. Great movie TiKevin. Just unfortunate that it's not sub 1:30 yet. :^)

Should activating glitched instant text boxes be valid in a Glitchless run? I know the RTA mods decided this was cool with them but I'd like to see what TASVideos thinks.

Should activating glitched instant text boxes be valid in a Glitchless run? I know the RTA mods decided this was cool with them but I'd like to see what TASVideos thinks.

I'm not "TASVideos", I'm not even a Senior, but I think that the instant text should be allowed for this branch, as it's not exactly a glitch: it's just how the game works. We may debate that it's an unintended game mechanic, but the game is still using it, and it doesn't require any kind of precise timing or complex action to achieve, as you simply need to talk to the bike shopkeeper in order to trigger this behaviour. It's kind of similar to the Poké Doll usage to Marowak's ghost or the 1/256 Gen I misses. So in my opinion it would be much more arbitrary to forbid these. Also, these game mechanics add more diversity and challenge to the route planning, so I think that it would be a loss to exclude these, on both the entertaining and the technical side.

ThunderAxe31, when judging this movie, please verify the cyclecount and suggested movie time that originates from it. Also there's another movie that needs to be verified on the same subject, I think it'd be handy to do check both at once.

I've got an uncommentated encode of this available now in 4k60! The other console Pokemon TASes are in the works as well. https://youtu.be/xHE41xxppKo

Just a heads up, the Yellow Glitchless TAS that is console verifiable (submission 6023) is 1:36:34.31 by the more accurate timing method.

Great Gen 1 TAS once again, TiKevin, I loved it! Suggested screenshot: The moment when the Graveler in rock tunnel uses Selfdestruct

To lend some credibility to the whole timing discussion, I took TiKevin83's Yellow glitchless run and converted it to using equal frame lengths. The result is exactly as long as TiKevin83 claims, and plays back perfectly on BizHawk 2.3. Just to be super clear, this is not an improvement to TiKevin83's run, this is TiKevin83's run, the CPU executes exactly the same operations in the same order, it's just BizHawk that changes when a frame starts and ends, ending up with a lower count. I'd love to also present such a version for this submission, but it's literally impossible due to BizHawk's limitations of only allowing one input per frame. My magic conversion tool tells me that on frame 32344 (EFL timing) this submission would require multiple inputs (a neutral and an A input), which is not representable in BizHawk's input format. A real console has no problems with this of course. I guess you could try to convert it to lsnes which doesn't have this restriction, but it's probably not worth the effort.

Much appreciated Wint! I'd love to do more with botting for this run if you ever want to look at it together. There are a few insane RNG sequences missing due to hand-TASing the battles (such as 6 gen 1 miss rock tunnel hiker with Leer fails, more gen 1 misses at Misty especially if using IT, etc). Also there's an obvious 3 seconds available with 2 gen 1 misses on Koga's Weezing to avoid 2 turns on the earlier Koffing.

I'd love to also present such a version for this submission, but it's literally impossible due to BizHawk's limitations of only allowing one input per frame. My magic conversion tool tells me that on frame 32344 (EFL timing) this submission would require multiple inputs (a neutral and an A input), which is not representable in BizHawk's input format. A real console has no problems with this of course. I guess you could try to convert it to lsnes which doesn't have this restriction, but it's probably not worth the effort.

Eventually I'll make a SubGBHawk variant like I did for NES which will accept sub frame inputs. It just needs a little more thought given all the debouncing stuff and possibility to have button press interrupts.

I know that there are many people that wish for this submission to be accepted as a new branch, instead of obsoleting the current Yellow publication. The author gave good arguments at the bottom of his submission text, however I want to see more people telling their thoughts and feelings about these two TASes and, more importantly, giving opinions that are more about the visual differences between the two movies, and less about the technical differences that are too much hard to notice for people that are not into high level speedrunning.

I think Pokémon Red/Blue and Yellow are clearly different games. Even if the approach to beat it as fast as possible in these constraints is similar for both (with both runs primarily using Nidoking), it still presents a slightly different storyline with different challenges and opponents. On that basis, I think these runs should not obsolete each other.

My question was specifically about movie contents. However, I have to acknowledge that difference about the games themselves should also be discussed, so here you go. I'll premise that last year I've gone through a period during which I myself also used to be in favor of having separate branches between Blue/Red and Yellow TASes, as I expressed in these posts. However, I was aware that my opinion was partially biased, which is the reason why I decided to not judge TiKevin's first Yellow "game end glitch" submission (AKA NSC). And in light of that audience reception and Memory's overview, I couldn't disagree with the decision of obsoleting the previous Blue "warp glitch" publication. Now, getting back to this submission. You say that Blue/Red and Yellow presents a slightly different storyline with different challenges and opponents, but I'm not sure how much you mean with the term "slightly". For me there needs to be heavy and obvious differences scattered through most of the run, in order to warrant a separate branch, like it can be seen between Ruby/Sapphire and Emerald. So let's take a look at Pokémon Yellow and see what did it introduce compared to its predecessors, along with my remarks:

• Instead of choosing a starter, you get a Pikachu, while your rival gets an Eevee. Seeing this game difference displayed on the cover of the game, some people could feel that it's major, but if we look at a typical full run, it's actually not, may it be a speedrun or a casual play. The player is not forced to use Pikachu for progressing through the fights. Actually, the game is pretty much forcing you to pick a different Pokémon soon, otherwise the Brock fight is almost impossible. And on the other hand, you're soon going to get all the traditional starters you want, so it really doesn't affect the game challenge much in the end.
• Some mandatory battles are different, including: rival fights, 6 gym leaders, and some Team Rocket. Even if some Pokémon used by these trainers are different, the Parties end up being overall similar to the ones featured in Blue/Red, so from the perspective of casual gaming, the challenge and the gaming experience is almost the same. The only exception are the last 4 gym leaders, that feature clearly higher levels. Still, the Elite Four parties are the very same. The final fight with the rival features different Pokémon, but these are still covering all the major types, and the overall levels are still there.
• Minor differences in game behaviors. As I said, we can't consider few minor game mechanics as worthy of a separate branch. In fact, we don't allow separate branches for each revision or localization of each game. We still have to consider each on a case-by-case basis.

For the sake of argument, let's have a look to an example for which I instead consider separate branches to be good: Pokémon Ruby/Sapphire and Emerald. I took my time watching the current glitchless TASes of Ruby and Emerald respectively, and I easily noticed many game differences through the whole of each movie:

• In Emerald there are some different and some additional mandatory events and battles, most notably around the awakening of Groudon and Kyogre, which is the main reason why the relative TAS is about 40% longer.
• Many trainers and gym leaders used different Pokémon through the whole run.
• There are many differences in routing, more than the route differences between Blue/Red and Yellow.
• Emerald re-implemented a phone functionality that allows to have rematches with many trainers, including all gym leaders. This also introduced some new mandatory dialogues.
• The game interface and features of Emerald are updated with the looks and functionalities of Pokémon FireRed/LeafGreen, which makes it feel a bit more modern.

Now, getting back to Yellow, let's take a look at how many things are the same as Blue/Red:

• Almost all fights with common trainers are unchanged.
• All events are unchanged. (except getting your starter/s)
• Doesn't introduce any difference in maps. (except for Cerulean Cave, which was also different for Japan Green/Red; in any case, it's not visited in glitchless run)
• Doesn't introduce any new or different game feature. (except talking to Pikachu and the Pikachu Surf minigame)

Also note that it doesn't help that Nidoking was used for both movies. But more than that, it doesn't help that the current Yellow labelless publication has an average rating of just 6.6, while there are 2 other active branches with higher ratings for Yellow alone; 4 branches if we also count Blue and Red, for a grand total of 5. Accepting this submission as a separate branch would mean to end up with 6 separate branches for Gen I in total, which would be way too much in my opinion, even if the ratings were better. And I'm not even counting the Blue & Red coop diploma. Lastly, as a side node, I want to add that Yellow is not that much original as a game. Some people may think that it's inspired to the Pokémon anime, but if you look at that anime closer, you will see that Yellow is just faintly hinting to it. You get a Pikachu as a starter and you can walk and talk to it, and that's it. The rest isn't even that accurate to the anime. Oak doesn't catch Pikachu in front of Ash. Gary doesn't steal Eevee before Ash could grab it. And the traditional starters Bulbasaur, Charmander, and Squirtle, are just given away to you without showing much plot behind it at all. Then you fight Jessy and James just 4 times through the whole game (3 if you use Poké Doll on Marowak's ghost), while instead in the anime they appear every single day, often fighting with unlikely giant robots, making it a ripoff of Yatterman. There is really nothing else that makes Yellow's plot unique. Just for making an example: the anime featured more than 60 original characters just for the Kanto saga, and guess how many of these were included in Yellow? Zero.

I'll start by addressing your point about more obvious visual differences: The initial rival fight in Yellow - the choice to lose causes Vaporeon in later battles, which should be visually distinctive both compared to winning in Blue and the resulting rival pokes The Pidgeotto and Pikachu battles in the forest. This one is interesting because while they accomplish similar technical goals (experience, red bar, 1% forest encounter) they look completely different to a casual viewer. The Brock fight is completely different. Different Pokemon use different moves against a geodude and onix. Mt Moon - The Jessie and James battle replaces a trainer Cerulean - Instant Text Rock Tunnel - less PP for Bubblebeam leads to the hiker gen 1 miss selfdestruct strat in Blue Lavender Tower - Gastly Thrash for red bar in Blue is a massive visual change from Yellow, which is done in part because of the 3 trainers fought on top of the tower. Koga - first Juggler 2 is completely different because of the different Lavender Tower strategies, then the optimal Koga fights look completely different, with Yellow using the standard Horn Drills and Blue needing to stall somewhere to save a Horn Drill. Blaine, Erika, and Sabrina are all quite different, but Sabrina most visually so because of the Thrash which helps setup an insane red bar play which is not possible in Yellow due to the different gym order. Yellow's Vaporeon play from the initial rival fight sets up the ability to use NineTales for red bar management between Silph and Viridian Rival. I will write separately to address what I think are the critical technical distinctions, but I'd like to also note that I'm working on improvements to Yellow which would cause even more visual distinctions, including the use of animations ON for the first rival fight because Tackle is faster with animations on. What would be the place for those improvements if Blue is deemed to "obsolete" Yellow? Would Yellow Glitchless become Vault status? Or would there be no place for such routing?

What would be the place for those improvements if Blue is deemed to "obsolete" Yellow?

I don't think it's games getting obsolete once and for all, it's movies of those games competing if games are not too different. Whichever movie is considered better, it can obsolete another game's movie, and it can go back and forth depending on those movies' qualities.

Thanks for the insight, TiKevin. It's always intriguing for me to look at the aspects that feature Pokémon TASing. The problem is that I can't say for sure that it's the same for the community as a whole, hence the reason why I'm asking for more feedback, opinions, and feelings from the people. As there seem to be many people that hold dear this matter, I'm willing to try my best to not force my opinions into the judging process, so I'll try to make sure that everyone agrees or at least understands the reasons why I'm considering obsoletion. All I'm doing is just trying to adhere to the Movie Rules, Judge Guidelines, and the purpose of the site to the best of my abilities. So if there are any doubts or objections from anyone, I'm willing to hear and discuss about all of them. For the moment I've not much to add to the arguments I've already brought, but I'll make sure to discuss as many aspects as possible. I'll also add a better response to TiKevin's last post, later.

TD;DR: If anyone there is not interested about the details, please at least read the bottom of this post.

---

All right, regarding your other post... You pretty much listed all the major movie differences that can be noticed the most. These are indeed objective points. My issue is that, on the other hand, there are too many similarities; however this is instead debatable, and that's why I insist that there is need for more response from the audience. Actually, if I start considering to accept as a new branch, it becomes even harder for me to come up with a verdict without first having a clearer opinion from the community. Let's start with exaplaining why I'm trying so hard to test against a new branch. The main purpose of the site is to showcase what tool-assisted play can do. For this reason, there is interest in giving priority to quality, entertainment, and diversity. There is also space for record-keeping and competition, but these are less prominent; in fact, there are limitations in Vault for the game choice and the goal choice; competition is encouraged if it's constructive and friendly, but we also encourage collaboration and sharing game knowledge. The main purpose of the site is why we have rules and guidelines for regulating the amount of branches:

Arbitrary goal choices need to offer new TAS material to be accepted. Choices which have no goal other than to create a new game branch are rejected.

Please note that we do not accept an indefinite number of variants for any given game. Any more than 3 for a game is very uncommon. Most games have only one movie, simply going as fast as possible with any means. A handful of games also have a movie which shows more of the game, such as no warps, or 100% items, or without a glitch that takes you straight to the end.

Keep the number of different branches per game minimal. A run for a proposed new branch for a game should offer compelling differences relative to previously published runs of that game.

We could argue that the issue we're discussing here it's not about difference between branches, but difference between games. However, there is no rigid rule saying that if we deem two games to be different, then they should deserve separate branches for all goals, otherwise that would mean that Pokémon Blue/Red and Yellow should have each one their independent branch for the "save glitch" goal, which would be ridiculous, as the movie contents are basically the same. So the most meaningful thing to do is to consider separate branching not just on the overall game differences in general, but in relation of the game differences that end up being showcased for that specific movie goal. In fact, game differences between different versions of a game don't necessarily result in having all possible branches available for each of these versions. Most of the time it's just one extra branch that showcases a glitch unique of a specific game revision or regional localization. This does actually lead me more towards the idea of accepting for a new branch, as the glitchless constraint allows for showcasing the most differences available between Blue/Red and Yellow. Which also means that the decision of obsoleting Blue "warp glitch" with Yellow "game end glitch" can't be considered as a relevant precedent for this discussion anymore. Quoting in full the rule that you mentioned in your last post:

If there are significant in-game differences between different versions of a game, movies which take advantage of such differences can be published side by side. This can include things like different weapons or routes available to the player, different levels being present, or different bosses fought. If a particular version introduces a mechanic which can alter how the game is played, such as where players re-spawn when they die, and this mechanic can significantly alter how the game is played, movies which utilize these changes can be published side by side.

And from the way I can see it, the examples mentioned there can be applied to this case. Different starters ("weapons"), different major fights ("bosses"), Instant Text and Red Bar ("mechanic which can alter how the game is played"). Still, this doesn't mean that I'm convinced. Even if the situation seems to reflect what is usually allowed for separate branching, I still consider this as a very nasty case of borderline situation. In particular, there are some aspects that, in my opinion, can't be overcomed:

• Much of the contents in the two movies is still similar (more or less half of the movie, though it's debatable)
• Average entertaining ratings for the current Yellow publication are just 6.6, which is relatively low
• We currently have 6 active Gen I publications already (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), which is a lot.

---

Too long, didn't read. At this point making a decision is really impossible for me, unless I get more inputs and reception. I just need as many people as possible to answer to just these two questions:

1. Did you find this submission entertaining? Why?
2. Did you find this submission different than this Yellow publication? Why?

And Please, base your response just on what you feel from just watching the TAS.

1. I did find this movie entertaining. Do I really need to explain this for a Pokemon glitchless run? :P 2. I think this movie is different from the Yellow publication. The fact that R/B is on Gameboy while international Yellow releases are on Gameboy Color makes these two movies visually different. Then there are the gameplay differences explained earlier by others.