(Link to video)
Submission Text Full Submission Page
This run is definitely not with the intention of obsoleting the published SMB any% TAS! This movie aims to present what the fastest and the best SMB PAL TAS would look like. It improves MUGG's submission for 66 frames, and tubby's TAS for 46 frames.
Download 1024x960 HD encode (MKV, 8.95 MB)
The Europe version of SMB is an official game run in PAL mode. The physics are almost identical, but the speed values are set differently, causing more potential glitches. TASes on this version are only faster due to a different version of flagpole glitch, which allows Mario to skip the castles without the help of other enemies or entering the ground.

New Trick: Falling into the Ground

It's probably no secret that Mario can sometimes fall into the ground after stomping on an enemy in SMB Europe version, but to do this without the help of anything but a lift is something new. The lift is still required for manipulating Y position before jumping. This trick is used in 1-2, saving 18 frames (a frame rule).

Time Saver: Faster Acceleration

It's faster to accelerate on the floor in this version. This simple new way of acceleration saves 18 frames in 8-3, and 10 frames in 8-4 (along with other arrangements).
This run also differs from the normal SMB any% TAS on details. For example, only in this TAS is Mario able to kick some shells in 8-1, and to show the 1-UP mushroom in 8-2, to walljump on the higher floor and to swim through the ceiling in 8-4.
I'm submitting it here mostly to show people what the best SMB PAL TAS would look like, regardless of whether it has reached TASVideos' standard for publication.
Nach: Let me start off by saying that judging this was one of the most difficult to judge TASs. The verdict I'm presenting here is based off of the current rules and knowledge I have regarding this run. It is subject to be revisited if anything significant changes. It should also be noted that no matter what the decision here is, a large chunk of people will not be happy with it. I will however lay out some additional info not discussed in the thread which factored into my decision.
Before I dive in, let me also iterate that this was an entertaining run, and there is little to dispute that, certainly by the audience at large.

NTSC vs. PAL theory

In terms of PAL games in general, different platforms, different companies, and different games all exhibit varying levels of quality. Obviously if a PAL game is the original then it can be easily considered the main version of a game. For some platforms, there are also no difference game-wise if something is running in NTSC or PAL mode. However, for platforms designed to be timed and framed into old television sets, there are important differences between the two modes.
Once there is a difference between the two, games designed for NTSC which are not modified for PAL generally exhibit some very weird behavior. As one example, I've seen fighting games where the key combos to execute various moves barely work when playing in PAL mode, the timing is altered enough that the game doesn't recognize the key presses the same way. As many PAL ports are like this in some fashion, it's ample reason to reject them, Just play the original which works normally.

Game variants on TASVideos

When we look at PAL ports, we must understand that these games are adaptions or variants of the original. Although there are many kinds of variants. Some variants are ports to a later platform. One kind of variant such as those seen in Mario Bros. has completely different levels (even though all the levels are repetitive). Some variants like those in the Street Fighter 2 series are the same game but with changes with varying levels of importance. Castlevania II: Belmont's Revenge exists in two variants where the entire game is the same, except one has a boomerang as a secondary weapon, and the other has a throw-able ax. The Pokémon series has game variants at each generation, generally limited to monster selection, where a dozen out of 150+ are different (which may not differ at all with certain glitches exploited), but barely has any affect on how a well planned run plays. Other differences are ports from the NES to SNES to Gameboy Advance and so on. The deciding factor in how these are dealt with on the site always boils down to how identical are the engines, and how unique and interesting is the gameplay that each variant offers over others.
Taking SMB2 as an example, the SNES variant adds on a save game feature which can be abused which can change the warped route considerably. Same for the Gameboy Advance variant, which further has other game changes. Due to these considerable changes in what one would see in a TAS for them, we have accepted them all.
In the case of Pokémon, since the engine/quality of the game between say Blue and Red is identical, and the observable changes in a TAS are insignificant, any new record with one will always obsolete the other.
In the case of various Street Fighter games, there is a large similarity to the TASs being produced. The audience at large doesn't notice much other than some Street Fighter characters are more or less beating up the same set of Street Fighter characters, using many of the same moves. In these kinds of cases, we have the best version of the game obsolete the others. Best version often is based on figuring out which has the broadest set of move possibilities, most fluid version of the fighting engine, and so on.
We haven't had multiple variants of Castlevania II: Belmont's Revenge submitted yet, but if someone submits a boomerang heavy run with sizable differences from the existing ax run, I can see accepting them side by side. It's sort of like accepting various X and Zero runs side by side for the later Megaman X PSX games (note: I rejected some MMX5 runs for being too similar to others).
In terms of Mario Bros. since a full variety run of levels while similar is quite different, we have accepted both.

NTSC vs. PAL in practice

If a PAL port offered the exact same engine/quality as the original, it could make sense to have it obsolete the original (and this could make sense to occur in games that are not meant for old television sets). If a PAL port offers a somewhat different engine, the question becomes whether it deserves to be added to the list of accepted variants alongside the original. The answer to that hinges on do the engine differences necessitate very different ways to play the game, and do those differences register with the audience at large. In most cases, PAL runs should be rejected, but based on the various aforementioned criteria, there are cases where PAL runs will definitely be accepted.
Nintendo unlike other companies has always aimed to do a decent job porting NTSC games to PAL. Nintendo is often one of the only companies where you will see the PAL game having various timings corrected to ensure that the game-play closely matches that of the NTSC version. Nintendo is often one of the only companies that adjusts the resolution of the displayed game to match the different resolution PAL televisions are capable of. Nintendo often also does some localization, converting currency, weight, and measurements to be those used locally. The attention to detail by Nintendo in PAL porting started with early NES games, and improved as Nintendo ported more and more and with newer platforms.

This game in particular

For its time in history and in comparison to a bunch of other early NES PAL games, Super Mario Bros. PAL is actually a relatively decent port (although maintains several noticeable differences from the NTSC original in terms of movement and other factors). Since the game is non-original but a decent port (relatively during its debut), it definitely qualifies for consideration as to whether it should be published alongside the original as another game variant.
This game happens to also be a game I'm quite familiar with. I played many of its variants on NES (since the 80s!), SNES, and Gameboy Color. I also dabbled in its programming and made various hacks on NES and SNES versions. In my opinion, I find this game qualifies for having many branches made of it. I can also see the SNES variant qualifies for certain branches as an acceptable TAS to show off a run without as many glitches being possible, and the Gameboy Color variant for some of its challenges that earlier versions do not offer. The question of course is, is there value in this PAL variant that we have lacking from all our other variants and branches thereof?
The first thing I want to shoot down is the idea that SMB PAL is faster than SMB NTSC. There are quite a few parts of the game that are non-playable. These include score countdown, castle animations, pipe transitions, 1-2, 2-2, 4-2, and 7-2 initial cut screens, level banners, vine climbing, and Bowser drowning to our princess is in another castle. When comparing across versions we need to take all this into account and figure out actual game-play time. NES SMB processes the non-playable segments of the games in multiples of 21 frames and 18 frames for NTSC and PAL respectively. Nintendo altered the number from 21 to 18 because 21/60 and 18/50 is 0.35 and 0.36, which should provide a close gaming experience on the port. In actuality, using more precise numbers, NTSC has frames which are ~0.0166 seconds long, and PAL ~0.0199 seconds. This means the non-playable parts are processed in multiples of ~0.3494 seconds and ~0.3599 seconds. Since these non-playable segments run on boundaries that are multiples of these, it means that the NTSC version allows slightly more time to get in activity before the game will round upwards. Conversely, if you just went a bit over a multiple, the PAL version will proceed to the next multiple sooner.
In order to get a better handle on this, I went to time the actual playable segments between the fastest NTSC and this PAL run (note, there may be rounding errors, and it's possible I was a frame off either way for some calculations):
LevelNTSCPAL
1-112.230512.083
1-221.58321.15
4-123.98323.967
4-217.949517.567
8-140.082540.233
8-224.865523.383
8-322.698522.767
8-432.527532.601
Total195.92193.751
Based on this NTSC is slower by ~2.169 seconds (about 130 frames in NTSC). However, there is a flaw with this logic. These runs aim for overall fastest real time, and thereby performs some actions which are slightly slower in the playable segments in order to abuse how the non-playable part is played as well as avoid 3 or 6 castle fireworks animations. However, the NTSC run goes significantly out of its way in 8-2 to abuse this trade off, by ~2.379 seconds in my calculation. If the run would discount non-playable segments to achieve the fastest possible any-variant time, we'd instead be looking at:
LevelNTSCPAL
8-222.486523.383
Total193.541193.751
In this case, the NTSC version is faster by 0.21 seconds (about a dozen frames)!
NTSC improves further if we decide that the mid-level non-playable segments must be included in 1-1, because unlike other levels, going through that here is a decision that can be avoided. In that case the 1-1 times become:
LevelNTSCPAL
1-118.165518.433
Gaining the NTSC run an additional 0.415 seconds (about 25 frames). All in all, PAL being necessarily faster in terms of game-play is doubtful.

Judgment

Armed with all the aforementioned information, how do we look at this? I decided to ask other judges for their opinions for the different possibilities, raised a few counterpoints with them, then assessed how they changed their opinion. I will not list their names because I should be the sole person receiving any fallout for the judgment on this run. What follows is how I characterize the opinions they conveyed to me.
Before I mentioned (counter)points:
JudgeObsoleteNew VariantReject
AAbsurdYes!No
BAbsurdYesMaybe
CYesNo way!Maybe
DAbsurdYes!No
After:
JudgeObsoleteNew VariantReject
BAbsurdNo way!Yes!
CMaybeNo way!Yes
DAbsurdMaybeYes
EAbsurdNoYes!
(One judge was unique in each group)
When I initially saw this run, knowing the differences right off the bat between variants and our aims, it seemed clear to me that obsoletion was lunacy. However my knee-jerk reaction was that I love this run, the engine is a bit different, let's just accept this as another variant. However, those are not good reasons to accept something, we have rules.
Thinking about how this run actually differs from the NTSC when viewing, it's not by much. More than that, there's nothing that really necessitates a difference. Just because one run decided to randomly jump at some point does not make it different from a run which does not. It has to be different as a branch in a significant manner, not just how it was played back in a particular run or mere moments of it. The new glitch, while new, does not look so different going through the wall than going through the wall otherwise. Also, I'm not convinced every run of this PAL branch would require this glitch being abused. So looking at changes across the run, they seem minor, and 4/5 judges I spoke to are now in favor of rejecting.
After assessing everything yesterday for one last time, I was conflicted on what to do. After sleeping on it, seeing no new convincing posts one way or the other, and considering the different factors listed above further, one side in my mind now slightly outweighs the other. In conclusion, while some PAL games are acceptable, and other branches for SMB PAL may be acceptable, this TAS does not seem to be acceptable with what we know right now and how we handle these sorts of things. Rejecting.
Nach: Since some people had a hard time following the above points, I put together a decision tree.
Nach: The last judge (Judge A) has since wrote back to me that in light of additional data/(counter)points, they now also favor rejection.

Summary

Nach: When we accept improvements across game versions, we only do so when there are actual improvements in the game-play by the player(s). The quality of the existing published NTSC run and this submission are practically the same. This submission did not improve upon the existing NTSC publication in any meaningful way. All time-related improvements are due to subtle version differences that the player has no control over. Since there is no improvement upon the existing publication once the version differences are factored out, this submission is not considered an improvement.
The game-play in this submission is similar to existing publications, and there does not seem to be substantial differences to warrant this submission to be published alongside them. After speaking to five judges regarding the similarities, they are all in favor of rejection. Rejecting.
Samsara: Disregard that, let's test Playground!
Samsara: Disregard that test, let's test it properly this time without accidentally using senior level permissions! ._.

Show more

Hide
1 2 3 4 5
12 13
Posted: 7/31/2017 3:21 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
Habreno
Joined: 5/23/2014
Posts: 162
Hypothetical: If this were any generic game, would we have this much of a debate over it?
Posted: 7/31/2017 4:43 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
feos
Site Admin, Skilled player (1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11268
Location: RU
NES TAS of 2011
Radiant wrote:
Dude, seriously? You're counting the people in support and not even bothering to count how many people oppose? Ever heard of "due diligence"? :D
Dude seriously? You're reading the first part of the sentence and stopping there? Ever heard of reading the reason?
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.
Posted: 7/31/2017 7:24 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
arandomgameTASer
He/Him
Editor, Expert player (2012)
Joined: 8/25/2013
Posts: 1199
SNES TASer of 2023 SNES TAS of 2023 Atari TAS of 2023 DS TASer of 2015
I just don't see the reasoning behind rejecting this run though. It's a well done run that was done on an official port by Nintendo. Bear in mind that things such as [2802] NES Donkey Kong: Original Edition "all items" by adelikat in 01:33.83 have been published, in what is essentially a romhack version of the NES game. If we're talking a mild to severe degrade in entertainment due to obsoleting a better run, this has happened before with [2047] SNES Chrono Trigger "save glitch" by turska & inichi in 03:28.06. Still, if obsoleting the ntsc any% run is absolutely, 100%, not an option, then making this its own branch would make the most sense.
effort on the first draft means less effort on any draft thereafter - some loser
Posted: 7/31/2017 7:33 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
andypanther
Any
Former player
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 1093
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
BrunoVisnadi wrote:
andypanther wrote:
Rejecting a TAS that is so well made and has received so much positive feedback would simply be unfair towards the author.
Well, obsoleting a perfect TAS that nobody could improve for 8 years just because the game works faster and with one extra glitch on the Europe version is also unfair with the author, which happens to be the same person. And he said he doesn't want this to obsolete NTSC.
I never said that I wanted this to obsolete the NTSC TAS, I'm in favor of this being a separate publication.
Current project: Gex 3 any% Paused: Gex 64 any% There are no N64 emulators. Just SM64 emulators with hacky support for all the other games.
Posted: 7/31/2017 7:55 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
MUGG
Editor, Expert player (2313)
Joined: 5/15/2007
Posts: 3855
Location: Germany
Gameboy TASer of 2015 NES TAS of 2013 Gameboy TASer of 2011 Gameboy TASer of 2010
This shouldn't obsolete the NTSC run otherwise there isn't anything stopping PAL from taking over the other categories too. This should merely be a tech demo type of run. I haven't been able to enter the ground in 4-2, I think it's not possible.
Youtube • Livestream • Progress 11th TASer of the Decade 2010-2019 !
Posted: 7/31/2017 8:08 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
Invariel
He/Him
Editor, Site Developer, Player (169)
Joined: 8/11/2011
Posts: 539
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Arcade TAS of 2023
MUGG, if you take the vine instead of the pipe shortcut, can you enter the ground that way? As for the debate at hand, it's clear that the version differences are significant enough that the gameplay of PAL cannot be recreated on NTSC (see: 1-2), which makes it a significantly different version of the game. I do not think that this version should obsolete [1715] NES Super Mario Bros. "warps" by HappyLee in 04:57.31 because of that, and think that if this movie is published (it has my yes vote) it should be published alongside the other branches of the game.
I am still the wizard that did it. "On my business card, I am a corporate president. In my mind, I am a game developer. But in my heart, I am a gamer." -- Satoru Iwata <scrimpy> at least I now know where every map, energy and save room in this game is
Posted: 7/31/2017 8:40 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
Warp
Banned User, Former player
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Habreno wrote:
Hypothetical: If this were any generic game, would we have this much of a debate over it?
No. But this is Super Mario Bros. One of the dozen or so quintessential TASable video games in existence. A game so famous that many non-gamers who know absolutely nothing about video games recognize, or at least have heard of. I think special treatment is warranted. I don't think it's "unfair" or anything of the sort. Think of it as something similar to how some games have like two dozens of speedrunning categories at speedrun.com, while others have only a couple. Some games simply are more popular than others, and there's nothing wrong with that. As for my opinion, I think the NTSC and the PAL version can perfectly well co-exist as separate categories (perhaps even separate games).
Posted: 7/31/2017 9:00 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
Kung_Knut
He/Him
Joined: 8/10/2016
Posts: 85
Location: Sweden
Hypothetical: If this were any generic game, would we have this much of a debate over it?
Most of the "any generic games" don't change physics in the PAL port, but just run slower, so another game that does what SMB does for the PAL port could certainly get this debate as well. That the game in this case is one of the most popular games ever made is not creating the debate, just making it louder.
Posted: 7/31/2017 9:21 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
andypanther
Any
Former player
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 1093
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Kung Knut wrote:
Hypothetical: If this were any generic game, would we have this much of a debate over it?
Most of the "any generic games" don't change physics in the PAL port, but just run slower, so another game that does what SMB does for the PAL port could certainly get this debate as well. That the game in this case is one of the most popular games ever made is not creating the debate, just making it louder.
It's definitely not the case that a PAL TAS could suddenly become a viable new category for all games. An example I'm very familiar with is Diddy Kong Racing: All PAL versions are literally the same game as their NTSC-U counterparts, just with a lower framerate. But if we take something like Luigi's Mansion, where the developers deliberately made the PAL version more difficult for the NG+ mode, then we can talk about a separate category.
Current project: Gex 3 any% Paused: Gex 64 any% There are no N64 emulators. Just SM64 emulators with hacky support for all the other games.
Posted: 7/31/2017 4:28 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
BrunoVisnadi
Editor, Skilled player (1410)
Joined: 12/28/2013
Posts: 396
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
SNES TAS of 2020 TAS of 2015 SNES TAS of 2015
andypanther wrote:
BrunoVisnadi wrote:
andypanther wrote:
Rejecting a TAS that is so well made and has received so much positive feedback would simply be unfair towards the author.
Well, obsoleting a perfect TAS that nobody could improve for 8 years just because the game works faster and with one extra glitch on the Europe version is also unfair with the author, which happens to be the same person. And he said he doesn't want this to obsolete NTSC.
I never said that I wanted this to obsolete the NTSC TAS, I'm in favor of this being a separate publication.
I see, I'm sorry for assuming your position. Still, I think the chances this will be accepted as a new branch are slim, due to the reasons brought by Radiant. If it is between rejection and obsoletion, I oppose to obsoletion. But if this can be accepted as a new branch, I'm happy with it.
My YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVoUfT49xN9TU-gDMHv57sw Projects: SMW 96 exit. SDW any%, with Amaraticando. SMA2 SMW small only Kaizo Mario World 3
Posted: 7/31/2017 4:31 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
feos
Site Admin, Skilled player (1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11268
Location: RU
NES TAS of 2011
BrunoVisnadi wrote:
reasons brought by Radiant
What are these reasons again?
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.
Posted: 7/31/2017 4:39 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
BrunoVisnadi
Editor, Skilled player (1410)
Joined: 12/28/2013
Posts: 396
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
SNES TAS of 2020 TAS of 2015 SNES TAS of 2015
feos wrote:
to co-exist as separate branches they have to: 1) be significantly entertaining, 2) have significantly different content with little overlap, 3) have the majority of the vocal audience support the separation, 4) have some definable aspects that could prove that there's really enough difference.
Radiant wrote:
This game pretty obviously fails point two, three, and four on your list.
That's just true. Looking at the site's rules, this couldn't be accepted as a new branch.
My YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVoUfT49xN9TU-gDMHv57sw Projects: SMW 96 exit. SDW any%, with Amaraticando. SMA2 SMW small only Kaizo Mario World 3
Posted: 7/31/2017 4:41 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
feos
Site Admin, Skilled player (1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11268
Location: RU
NES TAS of 2011
These are not reasons, these are statements. I see no reasons behind them. I'm working on a comparison encode btw.
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.
Posted: 7/31/2017 4:44 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
BrunoVisnadi
Editor, Skilled player (1410)
Joined: 12/28/2013
Posts: 396
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
SNES TAS of 2020 TAS of 2015 SNES TAS of 2015
feos wrote:
These are not reasons, these are statements. I see no reasons behind them. I'm working on a comparison encode btw.
It's easy to understand that I meant that the reason this might not be accepted is the fact it doesn't follow the site's rules. BTW, I'm not saying I agree with this rules, or that I don't want this movie to be published. I'm just saying I find it's unlikely this movie will be accepted as a new branch, and I would hate to see NTSC SMB obsoleted.
My YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVoUfT49xN9TU-gDMHv57sw Projects: SMW 96 exit. SDW any%, with Amaraticando. SMA2 SMW small only Kaizo Mario World 3
Posted: 7/31/2017 6:10 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
electricslide
Joined: 1/27/2014
Posts: 181
Well, obsoleting a perfect TAS that nobody could improve for 8 years just because the game works faster and with one extra glitch on the Europe version is also unfair with the author, which happens to be the same person. And he said he doesn't want this to obsolete NTSC.
The problem for me is that most obsoletions happen because of one glitch. It's the same game. I'd be more inclined to agree with you if it wasn't the same author who did both. If you want to argue that the PAL version is inferior then that's an argument not to publish this movie. The fact that it's faster than the NTSC version is an argument for it obsoleting the NTSC version. It has nothing to do with 'rejecting because of the quality of the work', etc. If we're going to have different branches, then I don't see why there would be rejections of Japanese vs North American versions of the same game. And it's common done that the North American version is preferred for entertainment purposes. I don't see why it couldn't be argued that this should not replace NTSC on the grounds that PAL is of lower quality. Either way, I don't think the two are sufficiently different to merit a different branch.
Posted: 7/31/2017 6:12 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
feos
Site Admin, Skilled player (1236)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11268
Location: RU
NES TAS of 2011
Downloadable comparison encode https://yadi.sk/d/qI0zroGe3Lb8my Link to video 
Language: avisynth
factor = 1

ntsc = AviSource("ntsc.avi") \
	.PointResize(256*factor, 240*factor) \
	.Subtitle("NTSC Super Mario Bros. TAS by HappyLee", size=12*factor, text_color=color_white, align=8) \
	.ShowFramenumber(x=24*factor, y=44*factor, size=14*factor, text_color=color_white)
	
pal = AviSource("pal.avi") \
	.PointResize(256*factor, 240*factor) \
	.Subtitle("PAL Super Mario Bros. TAS by HappyLee", size=12*factor, text_color=color_white, align=8) \
	.ShowFramenumber(x=24*factor, y=44*factor, size=14*factor, text_color=color_white)\
	.ChangeFPS(ntsc.FrameRateNumerator, ntsc.FrameRateDenominator)

pal  = Remove( pal,   195,   206)
pal  = Remove( pal,   637,   639)
ntsc = Remove(ntsc,  2447,  2468)
ntsc = Remove(ntsc,  3940,  3957)
ntsc = Remove(ntsc,  6496,  6526)
ntsc = Remove(ntsc,  7162,  7174)
pal  = Remove( pal,  7848,  7859)
ntsc = Remove(ntsc, 10834, 10893)
ntsc = Remove(ntsc, 14969, 15077)
pal  = Remove( pal, 16365, 16403)
pal  = Remove( pal, 17239, 17279)

StackHorizontal(ntsc, pal)
KillAudio
audio = MonoToStereo(GetChannel(ntsc, 1), GetChannel(pal, 1))
AudioDub(audio, last)
Trim(0, 18700)
AddBorders(2*factor,0,0,0)
ConvertToYV24(chromaresample="point", matrix="Rec709")
#ConvertToYV12(chromaresample="point", matrix="Rec709")

function Remove(clip c, int start, int end) {
	c
	Trim(0, -start) + Trim(end+1, 0)
}
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.
Posted: 7/31/2017 6:23 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
Bobo_the_King
Player (79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
I have almost nothing to contribute to this discussion so you can... uh... ignore this post if you want. Primarily, I want to say that I'm enjoying reading the discussion. This run practically exists to create controversy and I know a thing or two about that. To me, the choice to publish a movie always boils down to one basic question: Will this run make the site better or worse? Publishing this movie alongside the NTSC branch would clutter the site with a mostly redundant run and potentially set a bad precedent. Obsoleting the NTSC branch would nullify the version of the game that most of this site's users first played. And rejecting this run would disregard the effort that went into it and the nontrivial new tricks that are included. The controversy is compounded by the run's enthusiastic response from viewers and the author's own viewpoint on what should be done here, as well as his status as the author of the NTSC run. So really what I'm saying is that regardless of what ends up happening, I don't for one second envy this run's judge, but I'm eating plenty of popcorn watching the discussion roll out.
Posted: 7/31/2017 7:03 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
Ready_Steady_Yeti
He/Him
Editor, Player (120)
Joined: 8/3/2014
Posts: 204
Location: USA
They are two separate programs. They need to therefore be separate publications.
* http://tasvideos.org/ReadySteadyYeti.html - my user page on the TASVideos site * https://www.youtube.com/ReadySteadyYeti - my YouTube channel * My Discord username is "RSY#3799".
Posted: 7/31/2017 8:06 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
andypanther
Any
Former player
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 1093
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Bobo the King wrote:
To me, the choice to publish a movie always boils down to one basic question: Will this run make the site better or worse? Publishing this movie alongside the NTSC branch would clutter the site with a mostly redundant run and potentially set a bad precedent. Obsoleting the NTSC branch would nullify the version of the game that most of this site's users first played. And rejecting this run would disregard the effort that went into it and the nontrivial new tricks that are included. The controversy is compounded by the run's enthusiastic response from viewers and the author's own viewpoint on what should be done here, as well as his status as the author of the NTSC run.
The PAL publications of Blaster Master, Rygar and Mario Bros. certainly didn't make the site worse. What is the difference in this case?
Current project: Gex 3 any% Paused: Gex 64 any% There are no N64 emulators. Just SM64 emulators with hacky support for all the other games.
Posted: 7/31/2017 8:53 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
Bobo_the_King
Player (79)
Joined: 8/5/2007
Posts: 865
andypanther wrote:
The PAL publications of Blaster Master, Rygar and Mario Bros. certainly didn't make the site worse. What is the difference in this case?
Glancing over those publications, we have Blaster Master runs at 4 minutes, 25 minutes, and 43 minutes; three categories of Rygar runs (the difference in system appears to be secondary); and Nach said regarding publication of the NTSC Mario Bros. run:
Nach wrote:
Compared to its counter part, there's some engine differences, a tiny enemy difference, and more importantly, a different set of enemy waves. Contrasting to other games where the differences between regional ports consist of a miniscule percentage of their play, seeing as how little this game offers, I find the differences here significant enough to differentiate between the regional ports and give each their own TAS.
and on top of that, there was plenty of discussion there suggesting that the NTSC version should obsolete the PAL version. Furthermore, I never asserted that publication of this run would make the site worse, I merely offered my own perspective on the question. And above all else, I just find the whole damn discussion entertaining. I have no horse in this race.
Posted: 7/31/2017 8:57 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
ThunderAxe31
Any
Judge, Skilled player (1288)
Joined: 9/12/2016
Posts: 1645
Location: Italy
Arcade TAS of 2023 Homebrew TAS of 2023 PSX TASer of 2022 Gameboy TASer of 2017
Bobo the King wrote:
And rejecting this run would disregard the effort that went into it and the nontrivial new tricks that are included.
It's not just that. More importantly, it would also go aganist the site's goal of being a TAS records site. That's why I also agree with Warp: the historical importance of the game itself makes it more important to accept this run as a separate branch, despite the fact that the regional differences are less noticeable than what some people consider enough to warrant a separate branch.
my personal page - my YouTube channel - my GitHub - my Discord: thunderaxe31 <Masterjun> if you look at the "NES" in a weird angle, it actually clearly says "GBA"
Posted: 7/31/2017 9:04 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
Chanoyu
Joined: 1/14/2016
Posts: 98
Publishing this movie alongside the NTSC branch would clutter the site with a mostly redundant run and potentially set a bad precedent. Obsoleting the NTSC branch would nullify the version of the game that most of this site's users first played.
I'd like to expand on this a little. As a European, I played PAL versions of games, Super Mario Bros. included. I think that if the significance of SMB's status as a classic is in any way important, and obviously it is, this classic status applies as much to the NTSC version as the PAL version. I think it'd be a bit of a shame that, if the version of a game I played was different, that difference would be a reason to make a TAS of it unpublishable on the primier TAS videos site. In other words, as long as "my" and "your" games are the same, the version doesn't matter, but when they're not, I'd like to see "my" version too.
Posted: 7/31/2017 9:08 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
natt
Editor, Emulator Coder, Site Developer
Joined: 5/11/2011
Posts: 1108
Location: Murka
Evil_3D wrote:
The run is not very different/entertaining than NTSC version, it looks visually horrible and lag.
Could you elaborate on that? Having played both versions on emulators, and watched videos of both, nothing obvious sticks out. The visuals are identical and neither has any significant controller latency.
Posted: 7/31/2017 11:25 PM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
Archanfel
Skilled player (1436)
Joined: 11/26/2011
Posts: 655
Location: RU
Sega TAS of 2018 Sega TASer of 2015 Sega TAS of 2015
I also have nothing to contribute to this discussion. But i hope that will not be invened special decision for this run just because it is Mario. Themis is blind. So it should be judged like all other runs for other games.
I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes. Current projects: NES: Tetris "fastest 999999" (improvement, with r57shell) Genesis: Adventures of Batman & Robin (with Truncated); Pocahontas; Comix Zone (improvement); Mickey Mania (improvement); RoboCop versus The Terminator (improvement); Gargoyles (with feos)
Posted: 8/1/2017 12:01 AM
(Edited: 4/13/2022 11:03 PM)
Quote
The8bitbeast
He/Him
Expert player (2524)
Joined: 11/26/2015
Posts: 183
Location: Australia
Sega TASer of 2022 Exotic platforms TAS of 2020 Exotic platforms TAS of 2020 Sega TASer of 2019 Glitchy TAS of 2019 PSX TASer of 2017 Sega TASer of 2017 Sega TASer of 2016
I’m personally on the side of obsoleting the NTSC U TAS with this, BUT I think the correct decision should be to have separate publications. Here’s why To the people who want obseletion: I agree with you, but it’s important to remember that even if obseletion was decided by a judge, Happylee could still cancel the submission and we’d have no PAL TAS at all. I mean, if you put that much time into the NTSC U TAS and specifically said you didn’t want it obsoleted it would be conceivable that you might pull out the PAL submission. I’m not sure if Happylee would do this or not, but either way we should respect the opinions of the author of both TASes. To the people who want rejection of PAL: It makes sense that some people might notice the pitch of the music and other differences, but if it’s explained well enough in the publication it should be fine. Also, only about half of people who played this game had the US version, there are still 8 million people who had the PAL version and find it valid. Anyway, if this run was rejected it would reflect terribly on TASvideos. I remember finding a PAL TAS of SMB on youtube some time ago which was faster than the TASvideos publication. To the average viewer this looks really bad and makes TASvideos look like it has unoptimized TASes and it looks like TASvideos isn’t a very reputable TAS site. So the fastest time of SMB should definitely be published in some way. About the separate publication: This is probably the way to keep most people happy. Most people will just click the fastest time anyway, which is good for those who want PAL but if they think something’s a bit off, they will probably realize that it’s because they watched the PAL run (as long as the publication is very descriptive about PAL vs NTSC) Really from the start, the SMB TAS should have been done on PAL. Many communities play the faster version even if it’s not on NTSC U. In my opinion, the “TASvideos rule” for NTSC U is useful for people who can’t figure out which version is fastest, so they’re just safe to TAS on NTSC U. The rules should be taken as a guideline to make sure we don’t publish crap, but each game should be treated separately. The main entertainment for SMB comes from the extreme optimization and we shouldn’t pass up that opportunity just because people had different versions. But it doesn’t make sense to get rid of years of progress on NTSC U and most importantly, since the spread of opinions is fairly even, we should just go with what the author wants.
1 2 3 4 5
12 13