Monty on the Run (C64)

(This is an update to a previously canceled submission. Details on changes below.)
Monty on the Run is a platformer released for a number of systems and is the 3rd release in the Monty Mole series. It is commonly known as having one of the best music tracks of the C64 era.
The series:
Wanted: Monty Mole (1984)- Monty travels around a coal mine collecting pieces of coal and other miscellaneous objects. The game was created in response to the British miners' strikes and saw the lead character collecting coal in order to keep his family warm.
Monty is Innocent (1985) - Monty has been sentenced to five years in Scudmore Prison for stealing a bucket of coal. Monty's best friend, the mysterious masked weasel, Sam Stoat, is determined to set Monty free.
Monty on the Run (1985) - This game
Auf Wiedersehen Monty (1987) - Monty travels around Europe collecting money in order to buy a Greek island - Montos, where he can safely retire. Moley Christmas (1987) - Monty has been given the task of getting the code for his latest game from the programmers to the cover of Your Sinclair magazine.
Impossamole (1990) - Remake of Monty as a cape-clad superhero who is recruited by aliens to retrieve their sacred scrolls.

Story

On the run from the authorities after his escape from Scudmore Prison, Monty the Mole must escape from his house through the criminal underground and head toward the English Channel and freedom in Europe.

TAS Notes

  • Goal - Beat game as quickly as possible
  • Dies to save time.
  • Forgoes item collection to save time. A 100% run would collect all coins/items.
  • Manipulates RNG for favorable teleportation outcomes.
This game included a major frustration during TASing. Based on the current rules for C64 games, I started this TAS in NTSC mode. Everything seemed to work perfectly until the very end of the game. Upon Monty hitting the endpoint trigger in NTSC mode, the game glitches and does not play the end-game sequence. This is the only glitch that occurs when playing with NTSC region settings.
That version of the the TAS can be viewed below with the glitch plainly visible at the end. (Side Note: This run is not completely optimal as-is, I found improvements after conversion to PAL).
Due to this glitch, I had to redo the run in PAL mode simply to get the end scene to play. Thankfully the two regions were almost frame equal as far as input/movement, so re-syncing movements wasn't terribly difficult. The major frustration/problem in converting to PAL surfaced in regards to RNG. There are only two major components of the game that are RNG dependent: the crusher pistons and the teleportation beams.
  • Crusher Pistons have a random time in between crushes.
  • Teleportation beams seem to be random in the order of which colors they change.
The change in region altered the RNG resulting in different values for these two mechanics between runs.
Unfortunately, I have been unable to determine the reason for the difference in RNG. I was also unable (as yet) to find a way of manipulating the RNG. Because of this, the game-play portion of the PAL version of the TAS ended up being quite a bit longer than the NTSC version due to added waits at some crushers/teleportation beams. I bounced Monty around at these to kill time.
Though I plan to continue studying this particular RNG situation, I still felt the PAL run was satisfactorily optimized for submission. If I am able to find a way to manipulate the RNG I will update this submission (or submit a new run to obsolete this one if it is already published by the time I figure it out).

NEW STUFF

  • Huge thanks to Memory for figuring out a way to manipulate RNG (via a method I, frankly, should have been able to figure out myself, but didn't).
    • With this new level of control over the RNG dependent environmental features, I was able to manipulate almost all the teleportation beams (with the exception of the final one). This allowed me to select color for all the teleportation beams that needed passed through and guaranteed teleportation on the few in which that was necessary. The only exception to this was the very last beam: passing through would yield a faster path than teleporting if it could be manipulated to be the correct color, but I was unfortunately unable to make this happen.
    • I also manipulated a few crushers.
  • This submission is 1584 frames faster than the previous, for a savings of about 31.68 seconds.
  • This submission uses BizHawk 2.3.2 instead of version 2.3.1 which was used on the original...as such, rerecord count is severely inaccurate.

Potential Improvements

If I or someone else can effectively find a way to manipulate RNG, this run could be drastically reduced by manipulating any crushers/teleportation beams to eliminate/minimize wait time. This would also allow for slightly different routing in a couple areas.
If someone is able to manipulate RNG to yield a pass-through color (white) on the last teleportation beam without losing time anywhere else, this would open a new path to the end likely making the run a screen or two faster.

Other Stuff

  • This is one of only two C64 games to have been run at a GDQ event (by DANACRYSALIS at SGDQ 2014)
    • He also holds the current RTA world record which can be viewed here.
    • This submission was (originally) done concurrently with 6448S as homage to DANACRYSALIS GDQ runs.
  • The last input to beat the game is where this submission ends. If accepted, a publisher can use this .bk2 which includes the necessary additional inputs to enter the high score after the end sequence and then watch the credits.

slamo: As always, the optimization looks good. Using the tape release is perfectly fine here, as there was insufficient evidence for a disk release and we don't really factor loading times into judging the optimization anyway.
Feedback was quite positive. I felt like the run had a good amount of action and variety, and it helps that the music is good as well. Accepting to Moons.
fsvgm777: Processing.

TASVideoAgent
They/Them
Moderator
Joined: 8/3/2004
Posts: 14873
Location: 127.0.0.1
This topic is for the purpose of discussing #6511: DrD2k9's C64 Monty on the Run in 12:03.84
nymx
He/Him
Editor, Judge, Skilled player (1638)
Joined: 11/14/2014
Posts: 810
Location: South Pole, True Land Down Under
Wow...I can see the difference. There is a lot let waiting in this new revised version. Great job! :) Yes vote.
I recently discovered that if you haven't reached a level of frustration with TASing any game, then you haven't done your due diligence. ---- SOYZA: Are you playing a game? NYMX: I'm not playing a game, I'm TASing. SOYZA: Oh...so its not a game...Its for real? ---- Anybody got a Quantum computer I can borrow for 20 minutes? Nevermind...eien's 64 core machine will do. :) ---- BOTing will be the end of all games. --NYMX
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Radiant wrote:
Nice one! This reminds me of (and actually predates) the old Dizzy series. Yes vote!
This comment still stands.
Memory
She/Her
Site Admin, Skilled player (1523)
Joined: 3/20/2014
Posts: 1762
Location: Dumpster
Now that there isn't a billion years of waiting at teleporters... Yes vote, the rare C64 TAS I really enjoyed. It's nothing too complex but honestly the pacing was good and the car segment was quick and the music is amazing.
[16:36:31] <Mothrayas> I have to say this argument about robot drug usage is a lot more fun than whatever else we have been doing in the past two+ hours
[16:08:10] <BenLubar> a TAS is just the limit of a segmented speedrun as the segment length approaches zero
Editor, Skilled player (1938)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3246
It's good that you don't have to wait at the teleporters now (not that I know how RNG works in this game). Only downside is now you hear 31.68s less of gameplay music.
DrD2k9
He/Him
Editor, Judge, Expert player (2057)
Joined: 8/21/2016
Posts: 1011
Location: US
FractalFusion wrote:
It's good that you don't have to wait at the teleporters now (not that I know how RNG works in this game).
I never did figure out how RNG is initially seeded, but it appears that the RNG seed value used for random calculations is only changed when a random event occurs. In other words: to manipulate RNG, you have to allow/force a random event to occur. There are 3 ways to do this that I (with a bit of help from Memory) found running this game: two are passively controlled, one is actively controlled.
    1) Passively wait extra frame(s) on a screen with a teleportation beam before moving to the next screen. Basically every frame on these screens the RNG value changes. 2) Passively wait for a crusher to drop and raise, resetting the random timer between crushes. RNG only changes when the timer is reset. I saw timer ranges anywhere from like 30ish to 70+ frames, so making this method beneficial was rare. 3) The only active manipulation has to do with the jet-pack sequence. Pressing UP to use the jet-pack causes RNG change every 2 frames. I believe the flame coming out of the jet-pack is randomized. As there are some opportunities to push UP with the jet-pack that don't hinder progress toward the goal point, it's possible to actively alter RNG at will while wearing the jet-pack.
Regarding the final teleportation beam. EDIT:The only opportunity to alter it occurs at the jet-pack sequence. The best opportunity to alter it occurs at the jet-pack sequence. There is a crusher the screen before the beam, but it doesn't make for efficient RNG manipulation. This beam can be manipulated to be white for the first time it's passed through fairly easily, but I was unable to find an RNG sequence that yielded it white for the second pass-through. This is perhaps where someone could find improvement in the run. If they can find a good RNG sequence that allows white for both pass throughs it would save about a screen's worth of movement. The problem is that the RNG sequence for this beam remains in-sequence with nothing to alter it on the screen where Monty picks up the key on the ship. Therefore the sequence of RNG values doesn't change regardless of how long Monty might wait on the beam screen before going to get the key. This is the one instance where waiting on the beam screen can't affect RNG in a way to be beneficial. For example, if after Monty goes to get the key and comes back, the beam changes to a particular color on frame 30000, it will always change to that color on that frame regardless of how long Monty waits before going to get the key in the first place. In shorter words: to manipulate any particular teleportation beam, you need any random event other than that particular beam to call the RNG value. Otherwise the RNG sequence will be the same as if you never left the screen with the teleportation beam in question. I hope that all made sense.
Post subject: Movie published
TASVideoAgent
They/Them
Moderator
Joined: 8/3/2004
Posts: 14873
Location: 127.0.0.1
This movie has been published. The posts before this message apply to the submission, and posts after this message apply to the published movie. ---- [4051] C64 Monty on the Run by DrD2k9 in 12:03.84
Joined: 9/27/2011
Posts: 207
Location: Finland
Hmm... totally disagree on the moons tier here: I mean the game has nice music but the run has absolutely minimal tricks AFAICS. Even the luck manipulation is far from flashy stuff.
Joined: 1/13/2007
Posts: 335
Anyone who's actually played this know the PAIN of the random crushers, many of which can only be passed with a bit of luck. thisis impressive, and worthy of moons. even without the music.
Joined: 9/27/2011
Posts: 207
Location: Finland
Well, that's just it: if only people vote who did play the game (i.e. if playing the game is required to appreciate the TAS), it becomes a useless distinction to make. This is EXACTLY the same situation when that recent GTA TAS came out: it had one significant trick (which is one more trick than I noticed here) and tons and tons of luck manipulation. I mean... at best this is double standards*. It's pretty clear that these threads attract those who played or at least know lots about the game in question, and they'll have information the average viewer doesn't, and also all that nostalgy. This skews the votes based on a personal slant that's simply not useful for the other viewers... well, at least you can expect a lot of them also to be familiar with the game then I guess, but on the other hand those people would probably watch it regardless of tiers. And thus I really don't see the point of this voting if it does not reflect on qualities of the TAS that are more immediately apparent than luck manipulation (of course luck manipulation can also be immediately apparent, but that would definitely not be the case here). This is why a separate "technical score" exists. Is hoping for good counter-arguments naive? * I noticed that the GTA TAS actually got given Moons. Again, it had one impressive/unexpected trick which this one, AFAICS, did not. In what sense does this TAS fill the entertainment criteria given in the moons tier description?
The dominant criterion here is entertainment value to the users. This will be assessed via votes, comments, and views.
Well it certainly got good votes.
These movies must be impressive, attempt to entertain the audience even when it does not save time.
There is nothing like this in this TAS but maybe this is ignored if it doesn't seem like the game allows for much schenanigans? "Impressive" here is surely to be understood as visually impressive, not from a technical point of view since that's a separate criterion.
Speed/entertainment trade-offs are acceptable.
Again, where is any of this then? This TAS SCREAMS vault tier to me: it's a basic fastest-possible type of playthrough. I really think the judges have to attempt to treat TASes impartially.
EZGames69
He/They
Publisher, Reviewer, Expert player (3967)
Joined: 5/29/2017
Posts: 2707
Location: Michigan
I have not played this game before and I thought it was good enough for moons.
[14:15] <feos> WinDOES what DOSn't 12:33:44 PM <Mothrayas> "I got an oof with my game!" Mothrayas Today at 12:22: <Colin> thank you for supporting noble causes such as my feet MemoryTAS Today at 11:55 AM: you wouldn't know beauty if it slapped you in the face with a giant fish [Today at 4:51 PM] Mothrayas: although if you like your own tweets that's the online equivalent of sniffing your own farts and probably tells a lot about you as a person MemoryTAS Today at 7:01 PM: But I exert big staff energy honestly lol Samsara Today at 1:20 PM: wouldn't ACE in a real life TAS just stand for Actually Cease Existing
Memory
She/Her
Site Admin, Skilled player (1523)
Joined: 3/20/2014
Posts: 1762
Location: Dumpster
I do agree that the game isn't particularly flashy but a run doesn't have to be especially flashy to be Moons. I felt that the game's pace was good and it felt smooth and pleasing to watch. The game felt on par with a good amount of NES games, which is something I can't say for most C64 titles. GTA was easily Moons, it was Stars that was debatable.
[16:36:31] <Mothrayas> I have to say this argument about robot drug usage is a lot more fun than whatever else we have been doing in the past two+ hours
[16:08:10] <BenLubar> a TAS is just the limit of a segmented speedrun as the segment length approaches zero
Joined: 9/27/2011
Posts: 207
Location: Finland
I won't post on this topic again since I don't hang around here enough, but if everyone thinks this is good enough (entertainment-wise) for the middle tier, then I'll recalibrate my own expectations. Still, I don't see how you can justify it based on the description given of what the tier shuold be about... I edited the previous post.
Memory
She/Her
Site Admin, Skilled player (1523)
Joined: 3/20/2014
Posts: 1762
Location: Dumpster
Svimmer wrote:
I won't post on this topic again since I don't hang around here enough, but if everyone thinks this is good enough (entertainment-wise) for the middle tier, then I'll recalibrate my own expectations. Still, I don't see how you can justify it based on the description given of what the tier shuold be about...
Entertainment is ultimately subjective. The description gives suggestions as to what kind of movies should be in the tier but if people find it entertaining enough for reasons that aren't listed, it can still be placed there.
[16:36:31] <Mothrayas> I have to say this argument about robot drug usage is a lot more fun than whatever else we have been doing in the past two+ hours
[16:08:10] <BenLubar> a TAS is just the limit of a segmented speedrun as the segment length approaches zero
EZGames69
He/They
Publisher, Reviewer, Expert player (3967)
Joined: 5/29/2017
Posts: 2707
Location: Michigan
If people think that it shouldn’t be placed in moons, the publication’s rating should reflect that. (Not the voting in this submission thread. The actual rating here: http://tasvideos.org/rating.exe/4051/details)
[14:15] <feos> WinDOES what DOSn't 12:33:44 PM <Mothrayas> "I got an oof with my game!" Mothrayas Today at 12:22: <Colin> thank you for supporting noble causes such as my feet MemoryTAS Today at 11:55 AM: you wouldn't know beauty if it slapped you in the face with a giant fish [Today at 4:51 PM] Mothrayas: although if you like your own tweets that's the online equivalent of sniffing your own farts and probably tells a lot about you as a person MemoryTAS Today at 7:01 PM: But I exert big staff energy honestly lol Samsara Today at 1:20 PM: wouldn't ACE in a real life TAS just stand for Actually Cease Existing
Experienced player (994)
Joined: 1/9/2011
Posts: 227
Svimmer wrote:
...then I'll recalibrate my own expectations. Still, I don't see how you can justify it based on the description given of what the tier should be about...
The ability to TAS a lot of these older systems has only recently come about. As such, the Tier descriptions might be a little outmoded. This is a fine quality game for C64. Even the Stars tier requires a variety of systems to be represented. It seems logical that the same should happen with Moons.
Player (26)
Joined: 8/29/2011
Posts: 1206
Location: Amsterdam
Svimmer wrote:
The dominant criterion here is entertainment value to the users. This will be assessed via votes, comments, and views.
Well it certainly got good votes.
Precisely. This shows that people are entertained. I get the impression that you're judging a 1985 game by 1999 (or 2019) standards. And, well, that would be a double standard :)
DrD2k9
He/Him
Editor, Judge, Expert player (2057)
Joined: 8/21/2016
Posts: 1011
Location: US
Svimmer wrote:
Hmm... totally disagree on the moons tier here: I mean the game has nice music but the run has absolutely minimal tricks AFAICS. Even the luck manipulation is far from flashy stuff.
Svimmer wrote:
This is EXACTLY the same situation when that recent GTA TAS came out: it had one significant trick (which is one more trick than I noticed here) and tons and tons of luck manipulation. I mean... at best this is double standards*.
You seem to be suggesting that a game played without abusing some glitch/gimmick or containing some special flashy visual 'trick' can't be entertaining. Have you never considered that entertainment can be gleaned by some people through simply watching a game beaten as fast as possible even when it only uses methods of play exactly as the developers intended?
Joined: 9/27/2011
Posts: 207
Location: Finland
Radiant wrote:
Svimmer wrote:
The dominant criterion here is entertainment value to the users. This will be assessed via votes, comments, and views.
Well it certainly got good votes.
Precisely. This shows that people are entertained. Are you seriously thinking there can't be any amount of nostalgy factor or knowing-the-game factor in the voting? That could easily make the voting unfair for less known games. Monty Mole was of course famous in its time. If it's a game you were familiar with, your personal entertainment value goes up regardless of which tier it's in, which is precisely why I don't think it makes sense to vote based on that. I don't think entertainment is THAT subjective. I get the impression that you're judging a 1985 game by 1999 (or 2019) standards. And, well, that would be a double standard :)
While it's not a rule, I think some 1985 games absolutely have SOME type of visible tricks to them, or at least you can execute everything at a superhuman speed. Just look at Super Mario Bros and tell me the amount of interesting stuff going on doesn't far outweigh what's present here. Also, if you first get to define whether or not the age of the game should be thought of as an inherent part of the entertainment calculation (which I don't immediately agree that it should), then yes, doing so selectively becomes a double standard. Now, again, I don't hang around here enough, so if the platform in question is supposed to be factored into the entertainment (sounds weird and unnecessarily complicated to me...) and/or into the stars and moons candidating, then fine, it's just not what I would perceive as the logical approach to it. You're pretending like games haven't gotten significantly more varied and complex, and thus ripe for more and more complex and unexpected/entertaining manipulation, over the course of time. Of course there are even counter-examples to this: total execution takeover videos and anything else that's enabled by shoddy programming that you wouldn't run into today. So does that mean if it's from 1985 AND it has that type of method used, it should go into the megastar tier? Compared to if someone makes a game in 2019 that can be done something similar with, which then doesn't belong in the same tier? You're all pretending like this is somehow an open and shut, super-clear-cut case...
EZGames69
He/They
Publisher, Reviewer, Expert player (3967)
Joined: 5/29/2017
Posts: 2707
Location: Michigan
Svimmer wrote:
You're all pretending like this is somehow an open and shut, super-clear-cut case...
Svimmer wrote:
This TAS SCREAMS vault tier to me
[14:15] <feos> WinDOES what DOSn't 12:33:44 PM <Mothrayas> "I got an oof with my game!" Mothrayas Today at 12:22: <Colin> thank you for supporting noble causes such as my feet MemoryTAS Today at 11:55 AM: you wouldn't know beauty if it slapped you in the face with a giant fish [Today at 4:51 PM] Mothrayas: although if you like your own tweets that's the online equivalent of sniffing your own farts and probably tells a lot about you as a person MemoryTAS Today at 7:01 PM: But I exert big staff energy honestly lol Samsara Today at 1:20 PM: wouldn't ACE in a real life TAS just stand for Actually Cease Existing
DrD2k9
He/Him
Editor, Judge, Expert player (2057)
Joined: 8/21/2016
Posts: 1011
Location: US
Svimmer wrote:
Just look at Super Mario Bros and tell me the amount of interesting stuff going on doesn't far outweigh what's present here.
Firstly, SMB is a MUCH more well known and well studied game than this submission. Secondly, just because it's possible to do all the special stuff you see in SMB doesn't mean it's possible to do similar special things in Monty on the Run (or any other game for that matter). Thirdly, much of the special stuff in SMB has been developed and found over many years worth of time since it was first published on this site. This submission is the first accepted and published run of this particular game. Future versions (if anyone is even willing to try) may find new tricks to show off. But considering the vast difference in how many man-hours have been put into dissecting/TASing these two games, to expect an equivalent level of 'tricks' or game mastery to be visible on-screen between these two games is absurd. Fourth, you could make this same argument about SMB having much more going on than numerous other games in moon tier. If you don't feel the game should be in moon tier, go rate the move as EZGames69 mentioned above. While tier evaluation of runs is based initially on entertainment feedback received pre-publication, the ultimate determination of tier tends to rely more heavily on post-publication rating. If enough people agree with you that the run is unentertaining and rate it as such so that the overall entertainment rating becomes significantly low, it will likely be moved out of moons and over to vault tier (as it is an eligible submission for that tier).
Memory
She/Her
Site Admin, Skilled player (1523)
Joined: 3/20/2014
Posts: 1762
Location: Dumpster
Svimmer wrote:
Are you seriously thinking there can't be any amount of nostalgy factor or knowing-the-game factor in the voting? That could easily make the voting unfair for less known games. Monty Mole was of course famous in its time. If it's a game you were familiar with, your personal entertainment value goes up regardless of which tier it's in, which is precisely why I don't think it makes sense to vote based on that. I don't think entertainment is THAT subjective.
I voted yes and have 0 personal experience with this game or the C64. It's very possible to enjoy this without any prior experience with the game. Voting IS inherently unfair for lesser known games. It doesn't mean there is no sense of objectivity but game popularity is for better or worse a part of entertainment. This fact is acknowledged in a couple places on the site. In my eyes it is unfortunate, but inevitable.
While it's not a rule, I think some 1985 games absolutely have SOME type of visible tricks to them, or at least you can execute everything at a superhuman speed. Just look at Super Mario Bros and tell me the amount of interesting stuff going on doesn't far outweigh what's present here. Also, if you first get to define whether or not the age of the game should be thought of as an inherent part of the entertainment calculation (which I don't immediately agree that it should), then yes, doing so selectively becomes a double standard.
Super Mario Bros. tends to rate on the higher end of moons runs. This run is definitely on the lower end, but not so low to be obviously in the wrong tier. Additionally what is viewed as entertaining might not even necessarily be how the TAS plays the game but the game itself is considered entertaining to watch. Sure, TAS might not do anything especially new with this game, but I felt I was entertained by the game itself. I was impressed by the game and felt it looked on par with a lot of NES games and was entertained by the obstacles and level design. It's not the same kind of experience as an incredibly trick heavy run but I felt it was enjoyable regardless.
Now, again, I don't hang around here enough, so if the platform in question is supposed to be factored into the entertainment (sounds weird and unnecessarily complicated to me...) and/or into the stars and moons candidating, then fine, it's just not what I would perceive as the logical approach to it.
Nothing is SUPPOSED to be factored into entertainment. People can factor whatever they want into entertainment and there's not anything any of us can do to stop it. Either people are entertained or they aren't. Now because the voters on this site are a fairly small sample size, we take reasons into consideration for tiering as well, but any other "objective method" of ascertaining the entertainment value of a movie will ultimately play into one's own preferences and ignore the preferences of others. A good judgment takes into consideration reasons and viewer response and I see no evidence that wasn't the case here.
[16:36:31] <Mothrayas> I have to say this argument about robot drug usage is a lot more fun than whatever else we have been doing in the past two+ hours
[16:08:10] <BenLubar> a TAS is just the limit of a segmented speedrun as the segment length approaches zero