This is an improvement to my previous atempt at fastest ingame time, it is by the games clock 19.37 seconds or 1162 frames faster so the clock is finally down to 00:23 :)
Much of the improvement comes from better ammo/energy management (I think 5-6 seconds) and more Continuous wall jumps which can be implemented at many more places than I originally thought, several seconds came from that as well. The rest is just better room strategies and better general optimization.
Thanks to various persons (in no particular order):
Hero of the day, Tonski, Saturn, Kriole, Taco, moozooh, JXQ, evilchen, Terimakashi, Michael Flatly, Frenom, gocha And the creators of Snes9x and it's improvements whom I don't know by name. You should know why you are mentioned and if you want to have me write something specifically say so.
Bisqwit: I realize this is another pandora's box, but producing entertaining movies is one of the major goals of this site, and this movie seems to have been deemed entertaining by the audience. As this category of movie has popped in from time to time, I will therefore proceed to accept this movie for publication alongside the aims-for-realtime movie. Bisqwit: Processing.
Collecting the boots would require 2 extra door transitions (4 technically, but obtaining the e-tank here would eliminate the need to collect ridley's e-tank). That right there is 5 seconds, plus the item fanfare is another 7. Additional time is lost on the actual travel towards the boots, maybe 3-4 seconds. The boots do increase vertical climbing, but no where near 15 seconds is saved. I would estimate that in my run, the boots would save 5 seconds max.
Picking up the Hi-jump boots costs about 2500 frames. It saves about 2000 frames.
Joined: 11/14/2005
Posts: 1057
Location: United States
How did you come to the conclusion that collecting the high jump boots saves 33 seconds? I don't wanna sound rude, but you cannot know that figure unless you TASed the entire game with and without the high jump boots. The biggest spot that time would be saved is in the gigantic acid rising room in LN, as seen in Saturn's RBO teaser. All other stuff is minimal beyond belief. Just getting the boots early (to use in LN) would require a pretty massive detour*
*I speak solely based on my route... the in-game route can collect the boots without a detour.
I can see why everyone is debating about the realtime/ingame time issue, but if you look at the key factors of what makes Super Metroid entertaining (powerups, action, speed) then its obvious which run is more entertaining.
Cpadolf's run collects more powerups, has more style, and is just more tight altogether.
Maybe its just because i'm a speed runner, but I liked this run much more. I also prefer Cpadolf's stylistic choices (especially when waiting) over the WAY overused bomb jump.
I can see why everyone is debating about the realtime/ingame time issue, but if you look at the key factors of what makes Super Metroid entertaining (powerups, action, speed) then its obvious which run is more entertaining.
Cpadolf's run collects more powerups, has more style, and is just more tight altogether.
Fair points, but I believe that entertainment-by-amount-of-items-collected should be reserved for the 100% run, not the fastest run. I don't think it's really a question of which run collects more.
It's not a matter of quantity, it's a matter of application. 100% run is great on its own, but it has its pace noticeably broken by the amount of detours and semi-useless item collection.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
ICheatAtGolf wrote:
I can see why everyone is debating about the realtime/ingame time issue, but if you look at the key factors of what makes Super Metroid entertaining (powerups, action, speed) then its obvious which run is more entertaining.
The problem is speed. There is a significant real time difference.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
I was just pointing out that he listed powerups, action and speed. The first this run has more of, the second is a matter of opinion, and the third the other run is better for.
I wanted to mention that neither run has a monopoly on all of those categories.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
39:32.8 < 41:02.4
Any doubts?
They complete the same task, and one does it 89 seconds faster.
emphasis on the faster.
Powerups and speed should not be equated. They are apples and oranges.
Joined: 10/27/2004
Posts: 1977
Location: Making an escape
Maybe he's talking about pacing? I know I enjoyed the longer Rygar more than the glitched out run because the pacing was far better. Sure, it was longer, but it felt faster, a case of speed vs. length.
Not like I'd know about the pacing of either of these runs, as I haven't watched either of them.
A hundred years from now, they will gaze upon my work and marvel at my skills but never know my name. And that will be good enough for me.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
That could be.
I really do like both of these runs, but I don't see why 2 different people now have implied that it is the faster of the two runs when they might have meant that it merely feels faster.
Honestly, it just comes down to what goals people appreciate more, the actual entertainment value difference of this run compared to the other is insignificant next to their difference in goals.
I really do like both of these runs, but I don't see why 2 different people now have implied that it is the faster of the two runs when they might have meant that it merely feels faster.
An example from real life: navigate a busy city on a good car. It will feel faster, but in the end, you'll likely lose to puny subway that doesn't have to stop on crossroads.
Speed is subjective; this is a point I've been advocating for over two years.
And I prefer to think about this site as about one that aims to serve speedy TASes, not lower numbers. It's just that in case with Super Metroid, I stopped caring about it since it's never going to be this way, anyway.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
And I prefer to think about this site as about one that aims to serve speedy TASes, not lower numbers.
OTOH "feels faster" is a hard thing to measure. "Uses less frames" (or in some cases maybe even "uses less seconds by the game's own clock") is a much easier thing to measure.
At least to me it wouldn't sound very good to write "yes, the previous published run was 1 minute faster than this one, but this one feels faster".
OTOH "feels faster" is a hard thing to measure. "Uses less frames" (or in some cases maybe even "uses less seconds by the game's own clock") is a much easier thing to measure.
I agree that the issue of difficulty takes place here, but it doesn't mean the easy way is the best way, and it is a recognized problem. And there are precedents when using less frames wasn't the deciding factor in judgement of some movies, but I'm already tired of digging them all up for nth time, so do your own research if you want.
Warp wrote:
At least to me it wouldn't sound very good to write "yes, the previous published run was 1 minute faster than this one, but this one feels faster".
It doesn't sound good mainly because you're measuring speed in time units here. "Takes less time to do" != "faster" — this is the point. And if you want to argue the actual gameplay speed, take a look at the speed addresses, and you'll get your movement speed in the units the game measures it in.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
It's not really "hence", although it does contribute to it. The content management solution we discussed with Warp about half a year ago would take care of the issue, but I'm afraid it's going to take years until it comes (and it may not, after all).
[EDIT]: Heh, only three months ago, actually.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
*sigh*
Seems everything about SM is fought about these days, who the credit belongs with timesavers, who finds something entertaining, etc. I think it'd be easier for everyone if none of the runs would be accepted.
<Deign> .dice 1d1999191023443691
<BisqBot> Deign rolls a blackhole and destroys the planet.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
moozooh wrote:
"Takes less time to do" != "faster"
speed is a measure of distance traveled over a measure of time. Two runs complete the same game, and one does it in less time. Which is faster?
Lets think of it another way-- what if the goal was to finish the indy 500. One car did it 90 seconds faster then another one, but the other one made many interesting pit stops, and at times had a higher rate of speed.
The first one still did it faster.
The two simple ends to the argument (in-game time category, or in-game going to concept demos) haven't been accepted, so apparently, the solution is to bicker about it every time it comes up. If nobody is willing to appease, this will just continue ad nauseum, complete with personal attacks on taste and character. Requesting divine intervention, please?
