My first submission of 2014 is a Total Control TAS. I would suggest watching the movie before reading this submission text. Since this run was (just) streamed at AGDQ 2014, you can say that this was console verified :D. As you might notice, this TAS doesn't aim for speed and the reason why it doesn't end on last input is because I wanted the last picture as a suggested picture.
How did you do this?
If you really want to know then I suggest reading the submission text of the glitched SMW TAS, as the first around 100 seconds (until the game-breaking glitch) are the same.
In short: I manipulate where the moving objects (sprites) are located or where they despawn, then I swap the item in Yoshi's mouth with a flying ?-block (thus the yellow glitched shell) and using a glitch (stunning) to spawn a sprite which isn't used by SMW and since it tries to jump to the sprite routine location, it indexes everything wrong and jumps to a place I manipulated earlier with the sprites (OAM) and because of the P-Switch it jumps to controller registers and from there the arbitrary code execution is started.
Even shorter: Magic.
This run and the TASBot
So this TAS was designed to sync on the TASBot by true and dwangoAC. For example, I was limited by using only 3 multitap frames while I'm able to do 30. Though the bot can use all 8 controllers (2 multitaps) and since every controller has 16 buttons, that means 16 bits or 2 bytes for each controller, which are 2*8=16 bytes per multitap frame and 16*3=48 bytes per frame.
feos: This TAS is definitely TEH GREATEST MOVIE EVAH. Which somehow didn't prevent flamewars about it. First, I'll say about the similarities of this and the current any% run.
They use the same input to setup total control. It is known to be optimal, the fastest. Which means there is no copyright on it - in some cases only certain combination of button presses can be used to achieve the best result, and no matter how you alter it, it's basically the same.
None of these movies is a playaround within that setup time, so artistic choices would not matter. The way it is done is, again, the fastest. And therefore it was directly picked to be used in this submission (by the same author).
So what is the actual difference, after total control is gained? The any% run completes the game as fast as possible. It jumps right to the ending sequence. It is a world record in SMW. This submission does not complete the game. It does not jump to real ending. And it does not aim for speed (shortest input). Its goal is to demonstrate a concept: what can be done within SMW when total control is gained.
Second, due to heavy time pressure (AGDQ 2014), what we see here is what Masterjun came up with overall. It may be not perfect for everybody, so there is a room for obsoletion - if better stuff is programmed within total control. But for now it is the best payload existing. And posts and votes on this submission prove that.
Since this movie's goal is in no way speed, it can not be obsoleted by reaching the total control point faster, or by making input during total control shorter. Only by providing a better payload. Which will be judged by the audience response. If people like the new movie more (as happened with Pokemon total control), this one will be obsoleted by it.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11478
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Hmm, looks like the audience doesn't share the feeling that it should have been done better, like, at all! Which is going to end up as a decision like this: "Accepting as "Executes arbitrary code" category. In order to obsolete this movie one would need to program something better." Or whatever requirement will it meet for the possible demo tier.
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.
Don't forget to accept my sextuple run! Sextuple or sixtuple?
Given that "sexy prime" is an actual term related to the number 6 (in this case a pair of primes that differ from each other by six), I see no problem in calling it a "sexy run".
Nach, you’re being retarded. will you stop shoving your own opinion of entertainment down everyone else’s throat? we don’t give a shit about TASing the payload, the payload is perfect as is– I loved the fact that Masterjun took the trouble of dying a few times to display that the payload was coded correctly, and the game restarted when you died. jesus christ, seriously, fucking stop
Hi!
I know this is my first post, but let me offer an idea anyway.
Now this idea is only viable if Executes Arbitrary Codes TASes become more frequent. But let's for a second assume they do.
Wouldn't it be a good idea to have a "level" system for different EAC TASes? What I mean by this, in the example of this TAS, it could be submitted and filed on the same "level" as the existing fastest TAS. I.e., the completion time is counted from power on to the frame at which arbitrary code transmission becomes possible. So videos using the same stump would be the same time and wouldn't obsolete one another. The same voting system can be used for approval or rejection.
Now if a TAS with a faster stump comes up, it can obsolete the others with identical stumps.
I dunno, it's just an idea, but maybe some new mechanic or rule is required to handle these kind of things sanely in the future.
Just my 5 cents!
Not at all related to the publication of this particular movie but not sure where else to put it. I'd like to see a compo done with a total control TAS that uses controller data to enter the payload. The authors of the exploit provide the input file up to the point where the payload should be input, and then let the community see who can come up with the best demo/homebrew within the limitations and constraints of the game/cartridge/method of pwn0rship.
Also, if the TAS is judged on the play of the payload result, then the Pi movie would technically be improvable by crashing it as fast as possible. But that would remove the whole point of coding these 'games' in the first place, wouldn't it?
It'd be improvable speed wise. But that was clearly entertainment based, part of which was ensuring the run was exactly 3:14.15 seconds long, and getting many Pi related things onto the screen.
Here on the other hand, the payload is also entertainment based, but doesn't necessarily ensure the highest levels of entertainment possible.
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.
Is anyone even talking about it? Are you suggesting it?
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.
Is anyone even talking about it? Are you suggesting it?
I thought this point was obvious. Have you watched the two side by side? Having both would be rather redundant.
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.
Is anyone even talking about it? Are you suggesting it?
I thought this point was obvious. Have you watched the two side by side? Having both would be rather redundant.
Obsoleting "fastest ending" branch by "showcase total control", that's redundant. And in Moons and higher it works like this: "Are 2 runs considered similar by the audience, one of them being better?" I don't see a single post considering they are so similar one needs to be obsoleted. Guess why? Because they are different enough.
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.
Is anyone even talking about it? Are you suggesting it?
I thought this point was obvious. Have you watched the two side by side? Having both would be rather redundant.
Obsoleting "fastest ending" branch by "showcase total control", that's redundant.
I have a hard time understanding your usage of the word redundant here.
feos wrote:
And in Moons and higher it works like this: "Are 2 runs considered similar by the audience, one of them being better?" I don't see a single post considering they are so similar one needs to be obsoleted. Guess why? Because they are different enough.
How are they different enough? The first 97 seconds or so are identical, with the that other movie being only ~99 seconds long. The only difference between them is the payload. That other movie enters the pointer to the ending and then jumps to the ending sequence, this movie enters some new code, enters a pointer to it, and jumps to that, and then demonstrates the two new games added before the new ultra brief Masterjun'd final ending screen.
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.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11478
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Nach wrote:
I have a hard time understanding your usage of the word redundant here.
Read the thread. Your suggestion on this movie's fate is redundant. As the previous one you made here appeared to be.
Nach wrote:
How are they different enough?
I don't know how they are different enough for all these people, but they feel they are.
Something tells me obsoletion obsession is a disease that strikes every year or so. "Obsolete something just because we always used to!" There is a Moons tier. Movies that people consider different enough get published alongside. Movies that are considered similar obsolete one another.
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.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
How are they different enough?
I don't know how they are different enough for all these people, but they feel they are.
Since no one seems to have commented on the differences between them, I don't know why you're saying "all these people" *feel* they are.
feos wrote:
Something tells me obsoletion obsession is a disease that strikes every year or so. "Obsolete something just because we always used to!" There is a Moons tier. Movies that people consider different enough get published alongside. Movies that are considered similar obsolete one another.
Since it was already mentioned a few posts back that the only thing we should be considering is the movie till the point of the payload, how are these not similar? Or better yet, downright identical?
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.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11478
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Nach wrote:
Since no one seems to have commented on the differences between them, I don't know why you're saying "all these people" *feel* they are.
Oh God. When a movie is submitted and no one comes up with improvements, does it mean we should consider it optimal? By your logic, no. By your logic, we must have every one who posted tell us how optimal it is to have a right to accept it.
By my logic, if no one of the 115 voters noticed the similarity to the any% run, it kind of means that there is enough difference.
Nach wrote:
the only thing we should be considering is the movie till the point of the payload
Where does it come from?
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.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11478
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Mitjitsu wrote:
If someone was to do an Arbitrary Code Execution TAS on this game in the future. What would count as obsoleting this TAS?
Better programming of the payload.
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.
I have a technical question about this (very impressive) run. In the first EAC TAS which jumps to the ending, I got the impression from the submission text that there was just enough time to add the instructions to jump to the ending before the game would have otherwise crashed:
I managed to somewhat bring a routine into that garbage shifting. I have 3 bytes at the start, then I execute a WAI, after that I execute another WAI so it has enough time to update, then I branch back to the first 3 bytes, which also have new input.
However this is very unstable, I couldn't even do that routine one more time, the shifting was completely different suddenly and everything was failing, so I had luck that it worked.
Am I understanding this correctly? I doubt it.. but if so, what was done differently to allow the input to continue for much longer / indefinitely?
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
Joined: 4/21/2004
Posts: 3517
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
ALAKTORN wrote:
Nach, you’re being retarded. will you stop shoving your own opinion of entertainment down everyone else’s throat? we don’t give a shit about TASing the payload, the payload is perfect as is– I loved the fact that Masterjun took the trouble of dying a few times to display that the payload was coded correctly, and the game restarted when you died. jesus christ, seriously, fucking stop
No need for that my man. I understand you were a bit upset writing that but chill. Personal insults will lead you nowhere and this is coming from me lol :)
JonJonBoy wrote:
You've never kissed a girl before, have you?
You could've begun your first post more constructive. Explain why you think he is wrong. Btw, we are in the same boat, I have expressed my opinion against him.
Karma people!
Nitrogenesis wrote:
Guys I come from the DidyKnogRacist communite, and you are all wrong, tihs is the run of the mileniun and everyone who says otherwise dosnt know any bater! I found this run vary ease to masturbate too!!!! Don't fuck with me, I know this game so that mean I'm always right!StupedfackincommunityTASVideoz!!!!!!
Arc wrote:
I enjoyed this movie in which hands firmly gripping a shaft lead to balls deep in multiple holes.
natt wrote:
I don't want to get involved in this discussion, but as a point of fact C# is literally the first goddamn thing on that fucking page you linked did you even fucking read it
Cooljay wrote:
Mayor Haggar and Cody are such nice people for the community. Metro City's hospitals reached an all time new record of incoming patients due to their great efforts :P
I have a technical question about this (very impressive) run. In the first EAC TAS which jumps to the ending, I got the impression from the submission text that there was just enough time to add the instructions to jump to the ending before the game would have otherwise crashed:
I managed to somewhat bring a routine into that garbage shifting. I have 3 bytes at the start, then I execute a WAI, after that I execute another WAI so it has enough time to update, then I branch back to the first 3 bytes, which also have new input.
However this is very unstable, I couldn't even do that routine one more time, the shifting was completely different suddenly and everything was failing, so I had luck that it worked.
Am I understanding this correctly? I doubt it.. but if so, what was done differently to allow the input to continue for much longer / indefinitely?
The "garbage shifting" is an emulation error! On real SNES, it works differently.
Later methods were developed that allow overwriting arbitrary number of memory addresses in LowRAM (first 8kB of WRAM). And also, those are much much cleaner than the mess in that submission and work on real console.
And in Moons and higher it works like this: "Are 2 runs considered similar by the audience, one of them being better?" I don't see a single post considering they are so similar one needs to be obsoleted. Guess why? Because they are different enough.
How are they different enough? The first 97 seconds or so are identical, with the that other movie being only ~99 seconds long. The only difference between them is the payload. That other movie enters the pointer to the ending and then jumps to the ending sequence, this movie enters some new code, enters a pointer to it, and jumps to that, and then demonstrates the two new games added before the new ultra brief Masterjun'd final ending screen.
I agree with Nach that both movies are very similar. The only difference is the arbitrary code executed and the result afterwards.
However, I don't see that as a problem to have both movies published side-by-side, because they have different entertainment values for me. One is an any% record, the other a fastest payload record combined with a piece of art. The fact that both movies uses the same route and the same payload is completely irrelevant to me.
In addition, obsoletion would be a major problem because we would no longer have an any% record without constraints!! A compromise to consider though would be to downgrade the any% publication to the Vault tier, if a fair amount of people feel that the entertainment value of the any% run is fully included in this submission.
For the long term though, I think the tier system I suggested would be a better solution to avoid problems like that in the future.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
Since no one seems to have commented on the differences between them, I don't know why you're saying "all these people" *feel* they are.
Oh God. When a movie is submitted and no one comes up with improvements, does it mean we should consider it optimal? By your logic, no. By your logic, we must have every one who posted tell us how optimal it is to have a right to accept it.
By my logic, if no one of the 115 voters noticed the similarity to the any% run, it kind of means that there is enough difference.
Besides me, others have brought this up:
Fishaman P wrote:
Honestly? Since I had already seen the SMW Glitched TAS, this TAS didn't really provide anything new for me. Sorry, but I was honestly bored.
Cyber_Kun wrote:
While I agree that this is a massively important run for the TAS community, the run itself does not bring or show much new.
Cyber_Kun wrote:
This is on top of this run being the same run as before. While the memory corruption run was quite impressive, just seeing it again with a different ending is not.
Cyber_Kun wrote:
The run is important, but I don't think it should considered better than it is because it is important.
Furthermore, your 115 votes is whether this run is entertaining. This run is indeed entertaining.
As the judge for this movie, you're responsible for determining whether to accept this movie at all (the votes help for that), and if so, how to accept this movie. Whether the current publication already obsoletes this run, or this run obsoletes the other is part of your responsibility.
If you want more feedback from people other than a fellow judge, ask for it, don't close your eyes claiming 115 votes allow you to shirk responsibility or not consider whether two movies are indeed identical or not, or ignore several posts which claim this is the same just because the payload is awesome.
feos wrote:
Nach wrote:
the only thing we should be considering is the movie till the point of the payload
Where does it come from?
Tub wrote:
The goal of the run was met when the payload took over; if anything needs to be timed for obsoletion purposes, that's the point. Everything else is just showing off the outro, so to speak.
SmashManiac wrote:
- Obsoletion by faster payload? Yes.
Let's also keep reading what Tub had to say:
Tub wrote:
When the whole difference between two runs is a choice to end input slightly earlier, or to keep input running to show off something weird in the credits, or even just to press a button to speed up the credits, then I cannot remember those differences ever having mattered wrt obsoletion.
So by this criteria, these are the same movie. It makes no sense to publish the same movie twice, nor twice in two separate tiers.
Edit:
This movie could even be merged with the existing publication, as alternate ending taking more advantage of the glitch.
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.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11478
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
I didn't claim that no similarity was noticed by the audience. I said that it was not enough for obsoletion. Because when it is, you have MOST of the posters mention it (as they do when a submission is not entertaining at all, or obviously suboptimal). 3 out of 116 is just nothing at all.
Nach wrote:
As the judge for this movie, you're responsible for determining whether to accept this movie at all (the votes help for that), and if so, how to accept this movie. Whether the current publication already obsoletes this run, or this run obsoletes the other is part of your responsibility.
If you want more feedback from people other than a fellow judge, ask for it, don't close your eyes claiming 115 votes allow you to shirk responsibility or not consider whether two movies are indeed identical or not, or ignore several posts which claim this is the same just because the payload is awesome.
Are you saying that I as a judge am unable to determine the solution without constantly imposing factors no one thought of? Did you miss the part where I use to post my possible solution before applying it? Do you indeed think that:
we must have every one who posted tell us how optimal it is to have a right to accept it.
? Am I shirking the open discussion? No. We here are figuring out the solution together. It's not Vault where it either is the fastest or isn't.
Now it looks like you are seriously insisting on this run obsoleting any%. Are you? That "don't close your eyes claiming 115 votes allow you to shirk responsibility" part looked like you won't stop before any victims doing it.
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.
