Introduction

After my ACE TAS I was looking for something more straight-forward as a change of pace, more optimizing and saving frames rather than storyboarding and assembly programming. I settled on Super Mario Bros. because it was an entirely different problem, different platform, different genre, and different kinds of optimizations where every frame's input is important (compared to games like Pokémon which are about overall routing and luck manipulation but individual inputs are not precise). It is also known to be very well optimized already, so it's a good benchmark for how well you're doing in your optimizations.
The run I ended up saving 45 frames compared to the current one, saving 21 frames in World 1 using a better power-up route, another 21 frames in 4-4 by optimizing the wall clip and making an earlier frame rule, and 3 frames in 6-4 which the current movie lost to lag frames. There are many more small optimizations in this run, but none of them ended up saving anything due to the frame rule.

Tools

The first thing I noticed was that my optimization methods used for previous submissions (i.e. running several parallel game states at each point to ensure some of them always have favorable RNG) just won't work here, movement optimizations in SMB are too variable and have a large fanout. So I needed to devise a new set of tools, specifically for this game: Instead of running the game in an emulator, I analyzed the code (using Doppelganger's disassembly) and extracted a simplified model of Mario's movement. It only tracks relevant values for Mario's movement in relation to the static elements of the level (all enemies are ignored), and allows for a simplified but way faster emulation. With this simplified model, you can do an exhaustive search over all possible movements to determine how to get to a desired goal state optimally. E.g. it can determine what the optimal sequence of inputs is to get up to speed from a standing position, how to clip into a wall optimally or how to perform the flagpole glitch. It can't just solve entire levels start-to-finish though, the search space is just too large, plus enemies might get in your way. TAS game play of SMB naturally consists of small sections of precise movements, with large sections of cruising along at running speed in-between, and the tool is good for optimizing these precise movements individually.
Memory consumption really is the biggest limiting factor with this approach, even with each state only taking up ~10 bytes, it's hard to fit more than a billion states into the memory of your standard home computer. Of course you could upgrade your memory or buy cloud computing resources, but that only gets you so far as the number of states tends to grow exponentially. A way more effective strategy is to put more smarts into the software instead, only considering relevant states in the first place using heuristics. Using some precomputation go create fairly accurate heuristics, I managed to fit most optimization problems into memory.
You can find the source on GitHub. Usual caveats apply, I wrote it purely for myself to use and it may be rough around the edges.

Optimizations

The second thing I soon realized was just how well optimized SMB really is already. In the majority of cases, the optimal movement I computed was only slightly faster than the movement in the current TAS, or exactly the same. On the one hand this was useful, it helped validate the model I used for Mario's movement and I discovered some bugs by comparing my results to it as a reference. On the other hand, it meant that there will be not much of an improvement possible, especially since SMB's 21 frame rule will nullify virtually all individual frames saved through better movement. The reason this submission is a warpless run and not any% is that as far as I could see, there is nowhere to save even a single frame compared to the current any% run. Does this mean the current any% TAS is perfect and will never be beaten? No, it's always possible to discover new strats which nobody has found so far; it only means that you can't improve it by pure optimization without coming up with something new. So big props to HappyLee for achieving incredible levels of optimization with what I presume is manual inputs and deep knowledge of the game mechanics.

A note to HappyLee

Creating this run has led me to really appreciate the amazing job you've done in the current SMB TASes. I only learned about that you're also working on a warpless TAS a few weeks ago in the comments of the recent "all items" movie, when I was almost done with this run. I was not planning to preempt you with this in any way, and the fact that this run contains improvements also hinted at in the "all items" TAS is a case of multiple discovery. In fact I'm happy to hear that you have more improvements up your sleeve, and I'm looking forward to seeing your submission and specifically the improvement in 8-4 you were hinting at. At least I'm fairly confident the improvement in 4-4 is new to you (considering it's not in the "all items" TAS), and I'm glad this submission will contribute to even faster runs in this way if nothing else.

Detailed Game Mechanics

During the creation of this run, I learned a lot about the inner workings of SMB, which I couldn't really find explained anywhere, so here are some notes for posterity.

General Movement

SMB uses an acceleration-based movement model, where the player inputs control the direction of the acceleration acting on Mario, which in turn changes his velocity. The magnitude of acceleration has three possible values, mostly depending on how fast Mario is already moving. Additionally, acceleration is doubled when Mario is not looking in the direction he is moving. This is likely done to allow faster deceleration, but can be abused for acceleration as well. Mario has a max speed with applies to moving both left and right, for running (2.5 pixels/frame),walking/swimming (1.5 pixels/frame) and walking underwater (1 pixel/frame). Acceleration, velocity and position all have fractional amounts ("subpixels") to make Mario's movement appear smoother and allow for finer control.

Interval Timers and Frame Rules

The 21 frame rule is one of the most infamous features of SMB when it comes to speedrunning, but only few people know why it exists (I for one didn't before looking into it). It is born from the solution SMB chose for how to do timers. Timers are fairly simple, you set a timer, it ticks down by one every frame, and you check when it reaches zero to perform a timed action. The problem is that the NES is an 8-bit system, so your timer can only count 255 frames (~4.25 seconds) before overflowing, but you want to be able to have delays longer than that. The solution SMB chose are interval timers: the timer only ticks down every 21 frames (this is controlled using an ordinary timer), which allows to measure far longer durations. The number 21 itself is arbitrary and was likely tweaked during development to achieve the desired pacing of the game. Interval timers are used in many places throughout the game:
  • Time until an enemy does certain actions (like a Koopa shell coming back to life)
  • Time until a multi-coin brick runs out of coins (it's not actually a fixed amount, you get more if you hit it quicker)
  • The amount of time Mario is invincible after being hit
  • The amount of time Mario has star invincibility
  • The amount of time a level intro or game over screen is shown for
  • Time until the title screen demo starts playing
  • The amount of time after the level ending cutscene until transition to the next level starts
Most of these are irrelevant for a speedrun, except the last one. The next level starts based on the interval timer, which means that depending on when the next tick of the interval timer is when you finish the stage, you may need to wait for a longer or shorter amount of time. This is commonly known as the "frame rule" of SMB: time can only be lost or gained in multiples of 21 frames in each level. Improvements only make a difference if you manage to reach an earlier interval timer tick, otherwise you end up just waiting longer at the end and begin the next level at the exact same time. Some events don't follow the frame rule though, notably:
  • Collecting powerups or taking damage stops all timers from ticking for the duration of the animation
  • The timers don't run during lag frames, so they are not affected by the frame rule; any lag frame costs a frame no matter where it occurs
  • Since the movie ends before the interval timer comes into play for the very last level, 8-4 is the only level where individual frames matter

Screen Scrolling and Loading

The screen generally scrolls as Mario moves right trying to keep Mario in the center of the screen, but it can be manipulated using certain actions. In SMB, the screen can never scroll left, only ever right. When a level starts, the entire level is not loaded into memory at once, instead only the first part is loaded, and new parts are loaded as the screen scrolls right. The screen position also determines when level objects (like enemies or event triggers) spawn, so manipulating the screen position can be used to spawn objects sooner or later. Some common ways to manipulate the screen position are:
  • Colliding with a block: in addition to nullifying your speed, it also disables screen scrolling for 16 frames, allowing you to adjust your relative position for a brief moment.
  • Being pushed out by blocks directly changes Mario's position, effectively changing the relative screen position. This is what happens during wall clips.
  • Moving left will not scroll the screen left, therefore changing the relative screen position.
New chunks of level are loaded every 32 pixels of screen scroll, loading 2 columns of blocks at a time. The load itself happens in 8 phases, spread out over 8 frames to avoid lag spikes while loading. The loading of enemies and events is largely independent from loading the blocks of the level, but they can influence each other's timing slightly. One of the phases of loading level blocks (phase 7) is special, as it stops objects from being processed, so it can delay object spawns for an extra frame when aligned so that new columns are loaded the frame before the enemies would load. Additionally, collecting coins stops the processing for a frame, can be used to extend phase 7 for an extra frame and delay enemy spawns even more.

The Flagpole Glitch

The flagpole glitch is a well-known time saving trick in SMB during the end-of-level cutscene. At the end of each (non-bowser) level, a cutscene plays which has multiple stages, in this order:
  1. Mario slides down the flagpole
  2. Mario enters the castle
  3. The remaining time counts down and adds points to your score
  4. the flag is raised (even for large castles where you usually can't see it)
  5. fireworks go off
  6. the next level begins
Each of these phases has conditions when to switch to the next phase, and the flagpole glitch abuses these to trigger faster by setting up Mario's position when hitting the flag. One of the end conditions for the flagpole slide is (that is never used in normal gameplay) is that if Mario's Y position is at least 0xa2, the phase ends immediately. My assumption is that this exists because the flagpole slide was supposed to look differently initially, where the flag is only raised while Mario is sliding down, so it may end up in different places depending on where Mario hit the pole, but they either changed their minds later or messed up the implementation. The Y position 0xa2 is partially inside the base block and therefore hard to get to (for non-TAS runs), but it skips the flag lowering animation altogether and saves significant time.
For even more time savings, the second phase where Mario walks into the castle can be cut short as well. The end trigger for that phase is very simple, it ends as soon as Mario collides with something on the right. One of the blocks of the castle is actually solid, and that is what Mario usually collides with when entering the castle. However, by hitting the flagpole at a height of at least 0xa5, Mario collides with the base block instead, ending both the first and second phase immediately and saving even more time. This is also sometimes called the "full" flagpole glitch (as opposed to the "half" flagpole glitch where only the first phase is skipped). However, due to how jump heights happen to align, it's not actually possible to hit the flagpole at the right height when just standing in front of it, it needs additional help or trickery. These tricks that can make the full flagpole glitch work come in three main varieties:
  • Using an enemy to bounce off of to hit the right height
  • Clipping into the ground and therefore jumping from a lower-than-normally-possible position
  • Scrolling the screen far enough to the left to cause Mario to screen wrap and collide with a block on the left side of the screen instead
All these options can only be used effectively in specific situations, and setting these situations up is one of the main aspects of an SMB TAS.

Level Comments

1-1

The first level is special in that it is the only level where going through a sub-world actually saves time.
It is also infamous for antagonizing TASers by being exactly 1 frame off a faster frame rule, with no hope in sight for ever getting it.

1-2

The current run movie collects a power-up at the start of 1-2, but it turns out collecting it later is actually faster and saves 21 frames over the course of World 1.
During the underground section, I intentionally slowed down twice for entertainment purposes, so the section is 2 frames slower than it could by just holding right.
Fun fact: When stomping on two Goombas on the same frame, you'd expect to get 100 ad 200 points, but you actually get 100 and 400 points. The reason is that in addition to the counter that awards progressively more points, there's also a timer that awards even more points if you hit them in quick succession. However, that timer is only ever increased by one frame for each bounce, so unless you hit multiple enemies at the same time you'll not see it. I suspect it's a remnant from an earlier design of how stomp chains work which they ultimately replaced by the simple counter method.
Whether you bounce on or get hit by an enemy only depends on your vertical speed (in most cases, I'll get to that later): if you go downwards (with at least 1 px/frame), you bounce. It doesn't matter how your hitboxes intersect. This allows bouncing on enemies from seemingly impossible positions like the Koopa at the end of 1-2, and is used to do floor clips in future stages.
Fun trivia: The end of this level (and all other underground or water levels) is literally the end of 1-1, as in it actually loads 1-1's level data. If you're wondering where the piranha plant comes from since that's not part of 1-1, it actually is, all pipes have piranhas in them, only that 1-1 specially prevents any from spawning.

1-3

You collide with moving platforms from the bottom only when you hit the bottom of their hitbox, if you align your jump right and skip this window, you can just go right through them.
The power-up is conveniently located to collect it without slowing down much by grabbing it through the block from below.
It's important to not collide during the power-up collection, as it would change the screen position and make the Koopa for the floor clip spawn later.
Bouncing on Koopa Paratroopas is different from most enemies, in that for one you can bounce off of them while moving upwards as long as you hit it at the top (this is not possible with normal Koopas and most other enemies), and bouncing on them doesn't increase your bounce counter, so subsequent bounces won't give you any more points.
The Koopa floor clip is surprisingly precise: you need to be low enough to not land on top of the floor, but at the same time high enough to have wiggle room to do a successful wall clip into the floor. There are only exactly 2 jump heights that allow the clip: pressing A for 15 or 22 frames from a standing position.
In this specific case, the floor clip actually ends up a frame slower than just running to the end and doing the half flag pole glitch. Which one is faster depends on alignment and parity rules and is hard to predict in the general case, but it looks nice and doesn't cost a frame rule.

1-4

Again, the power-up here is more conveniently located than the one in 1-2 and faster to collect. However, collecting it in a way that allows to clear the lava pit while maintaining running speed is fairly precise. It abuses the fact that after collecting a power-up, Mario is actually considered to be on the ground for a frame, allowing to jump mid-air and gain more height and distance than a normal jump could. It was concurrently discovered and shown off in the "all items" TAS as well.
Fun fact: the lava in the pits does nothing, it's just a texture on top of an ordinary pit.
Fun fact: all the protruding blocks along the way are supposed to have firebars attached, but they're only active in 6-4 which uses the same map as 1-4.
Bowser's flames have surprisingly small hitboxes. That, combined with the fact that the game only checks for player-to-enemy collisions every second frame, means Mario can appear to just jump right through them without taking any damage.
The reason to collect power-ups and get Fire Mario is solely to fight Bowser. When hitting the axe without defeating Bowser first, an animation plays where the bridge retracts and Bowser falls into the lava, costing multiple seconds. The time spent collecting the power-ups is easily regained skipping these animations.
The ending cutscene after Bowser fights depends on the screen scroll position, the length can differ by up to 2 frames depending on the alignment. It can actually be faster to slow down before Bowser for a better alignment.
Fun fact: the axe can only be activated when colliding with Mario's feet, and is surprisingly solid when approached from the side.

2-1

A clip through the pipe is used to scroll the screen far enough to the right to delay the spawn of the Koopa Paratroopa later. Additionally, by aligning the screen position with when new sections of the level are loaded, the spawn is delayed by 2 additional frames.
I'm using a different pipe to clip through than the current run, which is better for optimization, saving 2 frames in the end.
When a Paratroopa spawns, its vertical speed is not reset, so it keeps whatever speed the last enemy in its slot had when it despawned. By manipulating the last enemy, the vertical speed is set to 0. This exploits another quirk with Paratroopas, where floor collisions are only checked when it is moving downwards with at least 1px/frame. That means that for the first few frames, the Koopa slowly sinks into the ground until it hits the floor from the side and turns around, making it move to the right, in an ideal position to clip into the ground.

2-2

You can swim while ducking just like duck-jumping, which doesn't change Mario's sprite but does change his hitbox. This is shown off on the initial Blooper, Mario appears to be both inside the Blooper and the wall.
The whirlpools directly change Mario's horizontal position every second frame, to the right in the first half and to the left in the second half. By slowing down to align when this switch happens, you can actually gain some distance compared to just holding right. It is not enough to gain a frame though.

2-3

SMB's RNG is entirely frame-based, random events only depend on the number of (non-lag) frames that passed so far. The Cheep-Cheep frenzy starts and ends based on an invisible element that is loaded in at specific parts of the level. When Cheep-Cheeps spawn and their initial horizontal speed and relative position is random, but there are only 4 different combinations of speed and relative position possible while in motion. Additionally, new Cheep-Cheeps can only spawn on frames divisible by 8 relative to the start of the frenzy, so the ideal fish for the clip can't be controlled precisely. The fish used in this run is the latest you can spawn one before the frenzy ends, and a fish spawned 8 frames earlier wouldn't quite make it to a position to bounce off of. Some fish are left alive, to manipulate the RNG (whether or not a fish spawns depends on how many still live, and this can influence future fish), to get the fish for the floor clip.

3-1

Again a pipe clip is used to scroll the screen and delay enemy spawns, this time for a shell at the end of the level. Some intentional slow-down is necessary at the end to avoid fireworks, bleeding off 6 frames.

3-2

This stage follows a similar scheme as 1-3: The Koopa is spawned as soon as possible, and with a precise bounce Mario clips into the ground. Unlike 1-3, even though the Koopa needs to walk the same distance, this clip is actually significantly faster than just running through. This is because here you can do the clip with running speed instead of from a standing position.

3-3

The platforms that fall at the end can be used to once more clip into the ground. The vertical subpixel position of where the platform spawns is important, and can be manipulated using the previous enemy that occupied the same enemy slot. It needs to be between 0x75 and 0xb6 to align the vertical position when jumping off correctly for the floor clip. That last enemy turns out to be the flying Koopa Paratroopa, when shooting it right when it leaves the screen, it happens to end up with a value of 0x99.

4-3

The ending cutscene continues as soon as the last firework was launched without waiting for it to explode, so ending with a single firework only costs 1 extra frame and it's usually not worth waiting for another timer tick. For 3 or 6 fireworks however, it is significantly better to wait.

4-4

Very precise optimizations allowed for the second major time improvement in this run, saving another frame rule in 4-4. Unlike most movement optimizations which end up not saving any time due to the frame rule, this one happens to save just enough to make the earlier cycle. This one has not been shown in the latest "all items" movie, and I'm not surprised considering it required optimizations down to a single subpixel to save the frame for the frame rule. It is a combination of the correct amount of screen scroll (0x92) saving 2 frames in the ending cutscene, and starting the firebar after the clip a frame earlier, which is the limiting factor to how fast you can reach Bowser.
Firebars are special in that they don't start spinning right when they spawn, but only when you get close enough to them. Also they don't have a fixed initial position, but rather take the value from whatever enemy occupied their slot before, so your previous interactions can affect the position of later firebars.
Another way firebars are special is their collision detection, which is not based on the same hitboxes as normal enemy collisions, but rather the player's distance to each of the flames, and is checked every frame instead of only every other frame. That is why their hitbox can behave in unexpected ways and hit Mario when you wouldn't expect it, or miss him when it looks like it hit, as shown here.

5-3

This is the first repeat of a level, the exact same level as 1-3, just with some random Bullet Bills throughout. They actually can mess with the usual spawning in the level and make the level impossible by blocking all enemy slots and preventing the platforms from spawning. As mentioned in 1-3, the Koopa floor clip does not save time over just finishing the level normally, so this time around I decided to forgo the clip.

5-4

This is another repeat level, this time of 2-4. Bowser is actually represented by two enemy slots with individual hitboxes. If a fireball hits both at the same frame, both do damage to Bowser. This is shown in this Bowser fight, which uses only 4 fireballs to deal the 5 damage necessary to defeat Bowser.

6-2

The vine glitch is used in this level to teleport Mario forwards, thereby changing the relative screen scroll position and allowing a bounce on the Koopa at the end of the level. The vine glitch works because the developers didn't account for the ability to press left and right simultaneously. The game tries to look up where Mario should be placed relative to the vine depending on where Mario is looking, and by pressing both left and right the game ends up some random value instead, which happens to move Mario 0x90 to the right. The trick by itself is not useful to save time as the setup costs more than the teleport gains, but it is the fastest way to change the relative screen position.
By hitting the vine block a frame early, this run saves 2 frames compared to the current movie.

6-3

Hitting the flag is intentionally delayed by 9 frames in order to avoid 6 fireworks.

6-4

This is another repeat level, of 1-4. It is also the first time Bowser starts throwing hammers at Mario, which have the nasty tendency to cause lag frames when too much is going on at once. The best way to avoid lag frames is to not shoot fireballs, but that's not super helpful when you need to defeat Bowser. By using the trick described in 5-4 for dealing 2 damage per fireball and shooting some early before Bowser starts throwing hammers, I managed to avoid all lag frames, saving 3 frames over the current run.

7-1

Another level where screen scroll can be abused to use and enemy at the end of the level to perform the flagpole glitch. The screen needs to be scrolled to near the maximum amount, requiring at least three individual pipe clips to prepare.

7-2

This is another repeat level, of 2-2, just with some more Bloopers.

7-3

Again a repeat, of 2-3, with some Koopas sprinkled in. The same Cheep-Cheep-based floor clip as described in 2-3 applies. The fish used here is 8 frames slower than the optimal fish used in 2-3, but ends up not costing any time.

7-4

7-4 is another maze level like 4-4 which requires Mario to take a certain path. This is done by checking at very specific points whether Mario is standing on the floor and has the correct Y position.

8-2

Like Cheep-Cheeps, Bullet Bill cannons are random in nature, but they work differently internally. There can be at most 6 cannons active at once in the game's memory, after that it starts overwriting them. For each frame and each free enemy slot of the first 3 slots, a random number is chosen (0-15 for levels until 5-3, 0-7 afterwards), and if it happens to be a valid active cannon slot (0-5), its timer is decreased (the timer starts at 15). When the timer reaches zero, the corresponding cannon will create a Bullet Bill enemy in preparation of firing it. On the next frame, the Bullet Bill decides whether to actually fire, based on whether it is off-screen or too close to Mario, and either starts moving or vanishes again.
As mentioned before, the random numbers in SMB only depend on which frame you're on and can't be manipulated. What can be manipulated though is which random numbers are used when, by controlling which enemy slots are free and which are occupied. That means by killing enemies at the right times, you can influence the occupancy of the enemy slots and therefore indirectly manipulate when the cannons will fire. So if it looks weird that some of the enemies are left alive in this run which could have easily been killed, it's actually because of RNG manipulation.
The Bullet Bill in this run is the best possible spawn, saving 4 frames over the current run.

8-3

Due to how the game timer aligns, hitting the flagpole normally is roughly as fast as waiting and doing the flag pole glitch (the flag pole glitch would still be 2 frames faster). Since this is the only opportunity to do it in this run, I hit the flagpole normally.

8-4

Since the input ends as soon as Mario hits the axe, the frame rule doesn't come into play in this level and every frame counts. Because of this and the fact that it is present in any% as well, 8-4 is insanely well optimized already. While the movements used in the current run were not perfect and I could save some subpixels, they were good enough to not lose a frame anywhere. The pipe entry after the wall clip was particularly frustrating, as it only lacks a single subpixel to enter the pipe a frame early, but alas. I also had other wild ideas, including intentionally taking damage at the turn-around pipe entry, so the screen scrolls to the right and loads the correct loading zone without actually needing to move there, but it turns out the screen just doesn't scroll quite far enough to make it work.
Fun fact, the pipe you start from in the underground section actually has a piranha plant in it, it's just not visible, but it can still damage Mario and can be killed as shown here.
For the final Bowser fight, defeating Bowser is optional as the Bridge collapse happens after the movie ends, but I decided to do it anyway. Mario is getting up close and personal with Bowser, dealing two damage each with two fireballs.

Nach: This is a nice improvement over the existing run. Audience response was mostly not directed at this run, but what was directed to it was positive. Accepting to Moons.
Spikestuff: Publishing.


Skilled player (1040)
Joined: 7/24/2013
Posts: 175
HappyLee wrote:
What you didn't mention in the submission text is that the 1-4 route won't save time without the little trick of getting the Fireflower in 25 speed found by Mars608 and first shown in our "all items" TAS. This is small but greatly important, so I can't believe that it's not mentioned in your well-detailed submission text. Actually it was first found in our new warpless project which had already started after I found the first time improvement.
I actually do explain that you need to keep running speed while collecting the fireflower, and I also mentioned you discovered it independently of me (in case you don't believe me, I submitted the exact 1-4 inputs used in this run to GitHub weeks before your submission of the "all items" TAS). I understand how it feels to you like I stole your discovery here, but that's not what happened.
HappyLee wrote:
Technically, we can submit a TAS right now with equal time but A LOT more entertaining, since Mars608 has already finished it in his way a week ago. Where would we be then? Then your work would become mostly an improvement in 4-4, which looks almost exactly like the same movement as my last run. But I don't want that, since we've always had a larger goal in mind. We understand that your goal is to pursuit for the time limit, but our goal is beyond that, which is to create a perfect run with maximum entertainment. Please seriously consider joining our project if you think our goal makes sense. If you choose not to, we would still respect your decision. Me and Mars608 will probably stick to our original plan in slow pace no matter what happens, and hopefully would make a perfect run someday.
Ok, so I thought about our options a bit more, with some time passed and hopefully some more objectivity. First of all, I'm happy to join you with your project to create an even better warpless TAS, but only if I actually can be helpful in the creation of whatever is left to do. I have already created the tools necessary to do precise optimizations, and I can apply them in furtherance of your project. It feels disingenuous to just join your project without actually contributing, maybe just to get this my submission out of the way of yours. I don't care too much about my name in the author's list, with my submissions I mostly seek closure, not recognition. The submission and publication is something to work towards at the end of the learning experience that is creating these TASes, but I wouldn't mind too much if they're obsoleted a few weeks or months later. So here is my proposal on where to go from here: If you want, you give me an overview on where you are in your project, what is left to do, and we make a decision whether my involvement can be of use (ideally not in this thread though, to avoid spoilers for everyone else, maybe send me a PM and we go from there). If we come to the conclusion that I can't really help you in your endeavor, we'll do nothing, this submission is judged and maybe published, you continue to work on yours, take your time, and eventually try to obsolete mine based on superior entertainment value, as people in this thread have pointed out is possible, just unusual. If I can genuinely help your project, I'm of course glad to do so, and we can decide what to do with this submission when we're at this point. Nach, as you're judging this submission, if you're bothered by the uncertainty around this and potentially wasting your time, let me know.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I'm not bothered. As long as I'm kept in the loop of what's happening, it's all good. By all means continue to discuss, work on a solution, enjoy this run and so on.
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.
Site Admin, Skilled player (1254)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Char­gogg­a­gogg­man­chaugg­a­gogg­chau­bun­a­gung­a­maugg
Nach: do you think obsoletion by a run of the same length, but more entertaining, will work in this case?
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.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
feos wrote:
Nach: do you think obsoletion by a run of the same length, but more entertaining, will work in this case?
I'd have to see the two runs side by side, but we do obsolete a movie if a better one is submitted. If the length is the same, and the audience by a large margin agrees that it is significantly more entertaining, and I find their opinion to be well founded, I would obsolete.
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.
Site Admin, Skilled player (1254)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Char­gogg­a­gogg­man­chaugg­a­gogg­chau­bun­a­gung­a­maugg
I agree.
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.
Expert player (2567)
Joined: 12/23/2007
Posts: 830
MrWint wrote:
I actually do explain that you need to keep running speed while collecting the fireflower, and I also mentioned you discovered it independently of me (in case you don't believe me, I submitted the exact 1-4 inputs used in this run to GitHub weeks before your submission of the "all items" TAS). I understand how it feels to you like I stole your discovery here, but that's not what happened.
That's not what I meant. I meant you missed the real key for the movement in 1-4 to be successful in your very detailed submission text, also the real key for solving the 4-4 puzzle which is jumping earlier in the wall. But I don't blame you, for you've solved those with a bot. What's really hard is to solve those with pure imagination and reasoning, which is exactly what Mars608 did, so that's why I think he deserves some credits.
MrWint wrote:
First of all, I'm happy to join you with your project to create an even better warpless TAS, but only if I actually can be helpful in the creation of whatever is left to do. I have already created the tools necessary to do precise optimizations, and I can apply them in furtherance of your project. It feels disingenuous to just join your project without actually contributing, maybe just to get this my submission out of the way of yours.
As I said, Mars608 and I had already finished planning and testing almost everything, so what's left to do is simply making every stage as perfectly as possible, which I think is not your strength since you didn't do it in this run. To be honest, I don't find your tools very useful in this project except solving the 4-4 puzzle. Most things you've explained in your submission text was already known back in 2012, and all of it except the 4-4 improvement was known to me and Mars608 by the time we were testing this run while making "all items" TAS. Your tools can be very much useful in other projects like Extra Mario Bros boss fights and Hard Relay Mario, and other games like SMB3, but I think for this project we don't need further use of it as we can do even better through our own imagination and reasoning. We just want to add you in the author's list to show respect, as you've spent lots of time into it. I'm sorry if you don't find it acceptable.
Recent projects: SMB warpless TAS (2018), SMB warpless walkathon (2019), SMB something never done before (2019), Extra Mario Bros. (best ending) (2020).
Player (36)
Joined: 9/11/2004
Posts: 2630
HappyLee wrote:
But I don't blame you, for you've solved those with a bot. What's really hard is to solve those with pure imagination and reasoning, which is exactly what Mars608 did, so that's why I think he deserves some credits.
This comes off as somewhat snide and minimizes MrWint's work. I recognize that this may not be your intention, and I don't want to speak for MrWint, but I would personally feel a bit insulted if this were directed at me.
Build a man a fire, warm him for a day, Set a man on fire, warm him for the rest of his life.
Joined: 12/29/2007
Posts: 489
HappyLee wrote:
Your tools can be very much useful in other projects like Extra Mario Bros boss fights and Hard Relay Mario, and other games like SMB3
This I'd like to see.
Skilled player (1040)
Joined: 7/24/2013
Posts: 175
HappyLee wrote:
As I said, Mars608 and I had already finished planning and testing almost everything, so what's left to do is simply making every stage as perfectly as possible, which I think is not your strength since you didn't do it in this run. To be honest, I don't find your tools very useful in this project except solving the 4-4 puzzle. Most things you've explained in your submission text was already known back in 2012, and all of it except the 4-4 improvement was known to me and Mars608 by the time we were testing this run while making "all items" TAS. Your tools can be very much useful in other projects like Extra Mario Bros boss fights and Hard Relay Mario, and other games like SMB3, but I think for this project we don't need further use of it as we can do even better through our own imagination and reasoning. We just want to add you in the author's list to show respect, as you've spent lots of time into it. I'm sorry if you don't find it acceptable.
That's fine, thanks for your honesty. I propose you keep on working on your version of the warpless TAS then without me, no need to add me to the author's list, and submit it whenever you're ready. I'm fine with getting my run obsoleted by yours if it's significantly more entertaining in the eyes of the audience. I'm sorry for having made your submission harder with this. I'm aware my tools and explanations probably weren't really exciting or new to you, but they were to me, and probably a lot of other people. Knowledge around the techniques and mechanics for SMB in particular and TASes in general is not well communicated and hard to come by, so I'm trying to spread the knowledge I gained and discoveries I made as best I can, even though they may have already been known by some.
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
MrWint wrote:
I'm aware my tools and explanations probably weren't really exciting or new to you, but they were to me, and probably a lot of other people.
I appreciated the explanations. It clarified some points for me. Once you know something, it's hard to always gauge how important certain details are to those who don't know it. To someone like HappyLee, they know all these details and don't see anything new when some minor elaboration is added. As I'm less familiar, even though we had many of these documented elsewhere, I felt certain relevant details were added which I was not previously aware of. I also like when well written explanations are in the submissions notes (or directly linked to from the submissions notes), because not all the audience is as familiar with the games as we are. Instead of someone having to go on a wild goose chase to find how something was done, it's ideal if someone can just read it in the submission notes, or be presented with a link to a tricks page or something similar which is organized well and can answer all their questions. Notes which just say, blah blah blah, you've seen all these tricks before, makes it really difficult for a newcomer to find out how something worked.
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.
Experienced player (608)
Joined: 10/23/2004
Posts: 706
Fantastic improvement with very interesting and informative submission text. I also found the run entertaining. Voted "yes."
Current Project: - Mario Kart 64
Expert player (2567)
Joined: 12/23/2007
Posts: 830
Please don't get me wrong (I have trouble expressing in English sometimes). I think the submission text is very well written and detailed and can be a wonderful contribute to our SMB resources page which I've been too lazy and too weak in English to edit, except of the fact that it lacks the real keys to solve the 1-4 and 4-4 puzzles, which I think are small but of great importance. About your tools, I find them new and greatly intelligent, and potentially extremely useful for other projects that lack optimization. I just don't find it very useful for SMB warpless project, since judging from the result, the only new improvement it brought was 4-4, which is very impressive to TASers like me, Mars608 and chatterbox but probably indifferent to others because the movements look almost exactly the same. By the way, I find "List of movement optimizations" from the submission text somewhat laughable and very misleading to others, because my goal wasn't achieving the fastest time in every stage or in every movement, but was to achieve maximum entertainment during my last warpless TAS. So it's not fair to compare something I deliberately slowed down for entertainment to something that only seeks horizontal positions and call them "optimizations", because most of the times, they're not.
Recent projects: SMB warpless TAS (2018), SMB warpless walkathon (2019), SMB something never done before (2019), Extra Mario Bros. (best ending) (2020).
Skilled player (1040)
Joined: 7/24/2013
Posts: 175
About the optimizations, that is fair criticism, as it is not always clear when a slowdown was because of artistic choice and when it was just sub-optimal play. However, I tried to only include situations in which it is obvious that there was no artistic choice involved, since the optimal movement looks exactly like the current one from the outside, just like you brought up in 4-4. If anything, you are missing out on entertainment value you could have by spending these extra pixels more productively. This is something you actually may want to look at for your TAS, as it may give you more room to provide even more entertaining gameplay. If you think I miscategorized some of these though or you wonder how I got to these numbers, please let me know, I'm happy to correct the submission text or explain it in more detail.
Expert player (2567)
Joined: 12/23/2007
Posts: 830
MrWint wrote:
If you think I miscategorized some of these though or you wonder how I got to these numbers, please let me know, I'm happy to correct the submission text or explain it in more detail.
I guess you didn't know what I mean... I have to explain it in detail. For example, I intentionally slowed down at "1-2 initial speed-up" for hitting the mushroom block (which you don't need to in this movie). I intentionally stayed longer in the pipe during the pipe glitch in 3-1 as a stylistic choice, similarly for the 2-1 pipe clip. The way I do 3-2 floor clip and 7-1 pipe clips is also a stylistic choice. 2-3 and 7-3 floor clips has to do with the Cheep-cheep. Maybe you got better "8-2 Bullet Bill luck" but I got clearly more entertaining 8-2 as a whole. "8-4 wall clip pipe entry", I just wanted to slow down before entering the pipe. Why do I have to go full speed before entering a pipe? "8-4 turn-around pipe entry", obviously you were copying my movements from the "maximum coins" TAS or something. As for "2-2 whirlpool alignment", I didn't know it back in 2012, but who really cares? Doesn't save a frame or look like anything else. In short, I didn't make that many mistakes during my last warpless run in 2012, but your submission text made it looks like that I had made plenty of mistakes. It's not fair to compare stylistic choices with maximum horizontal positions search. Nobody really cares for "0.125 frames" or something.
Recent projects: SMB warpless TAS (2018), SMB warpless walkathon (2019), SMB something never done before (2019), Extra Mario Bros. (best ending) (2020).
Experienced player (608)
Joined: 10/23/2004
Posts: 706
I see a lot of references to speed / entertainment trade-offs and stylistics choices in this thread. I figured I'd throw in my two cents and see what other peoples' opinions are. For a game as close to maxed out as SMB and which contains a frustrating frame rule that limits the benefit of "small" improvements. I much prefer seeing how fast each individual level can be performed and would prefer a run that completes a level faster but ends up having to "wait" a few frames longer at the end. To me, a better run is one that completes each level faster, even if that means waiting a tiny bit at the end. This keeps the competition going even when the pesky frame rule means the overall movie may be exactly the same length. In summary, when two TASes complete a level in the same number of frames (from loading that level to loading the next) I'd prefer the TAS that completes the portion controlled by the player faster. I am less impressed by superfluous movement that ultimately slows the player down. It's certainly possible I'm in the minority but I thought I'd post to see where others stand on this topic.
Current Project: - Mario Kart 64
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Weatherton, with that logic, on auto scrolling levels, the player should just always hug the rightmost wall (or whichever way it's scrolling). When you have free time to play around with, make the most entertaining use of it as possible. That's the next criteria after speed.
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.
Expert player (2567)
Joined: 12/23/2007
Posts: 830
Weatherton wrote:
For a game as close to maxed out as SMB and which contains a frustrating frame rule that limits the benefit of "small" improvements. I much prefer seeing how fast each individual level can be performed and would prefer a run that completes a level faster but ends up having to "wait" a few frames longer at the end. To me, a better run is one that completes each level faster, even if that means waiting a tiny bit at the end. This keeps the competition going even when the pesky frame rule means the overall movie may be exactly the same length.
What matters the most in a TAS is overall movie length, secondly, overall entertainment. To me, speed competition or even subpixel competition in individual levels doesn't make any sense because of the frame rule. If that's what you really prefer, you probably wouldn't see cool things like 1-3, 3-3 and 5-3 ground clip or any other cool things, but end up just like a movie made by ROBOTS.
Recent projects: SMB warpless TAS (2018), SMB warpless walkathon (2019), SMB something never done before (2019), Extra Mario Bros. (best ending) (2020).
Joined: 5/23/2014
Posts: 162
On the other hand, if a focus on fastest time to end was made for a certain other submission last year rather than just meeting the frame rule, the judgement might not have been as controversial and possibly may have been different entirely. In this scenario, though, entertainment is definitely the better choice over pure speed.
Skilled player (1340)
Joined: 6/27/2014
Posts: 87
Location: Finland
It's not entertaining to go slower. We are fighting for records here
Experienced player (608)
Joined: 10/23/2004
Posts: 706
Nach wrote:
Weatherton, with that logic, on auto scrolling levels, the player should just always hug the rightmost wall (or whichever way it's scrolling). When you have free time to play around with, make the most entertaining use of it as possible. That's the next criteria after speed.
I think you missed my point. In an auto scrolling level, by all means jump around and be as entertaining as possible. However, still minimize lag and be sure that you finish the level as early as possible. For example, if pushing Mario forward to the right side of the screen allows you to finish the level earlier then be sure to do that over the course of providing entertainment. To me SMB is similar to a racing game at this point. Each course can be viewed individually as well as part of a larger run. If by playing around in a race you end up losing some frames and reaching the end more slowly, even if a frame rule exists that would have negated the gained time, I would prefer that you complete the course as quickly as possible. Still be as entertaining as possible, but don't lose time during each individual course while being "entertaining". Looking at the summary table at the end of this submission text, I prefer this run in all cases to the prior run where frames and sub-frames were saved, even if some little trick was left out because of a frame rule. Again, I'm sure other people see this differently. This is why I asked for others to post their opinions :)
Current Project: - Mario Kart 64
Site Admin, Skilled player (1254)
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11475
Location: Lake Char­gogg­a­gogg­man­chaugg­a­gogg­chau­bun­a­gung­a­maugg
When there's no chance to be actually faster, I don't think reaching the end and waiting out the remaining time will ever pay off. In Sonic, you wait for the score count regardless of how long it takes, because it means the challenge will always be there: the result is measured by in-game time objectively. If Sonic runs preferred real time, competition would've been over years ago, after finding the cheapest compromise between optimization and having to wait. In SMB, in-game time, while it exists and could be used, is traditionally ignored. I don't even know if it was ever considered as a category. Yet, even if it was, which would probably return some challenge and competition, I have no idea how many people would be interested in that. Hmmm. Maybe for SMB the time has come when people have found the most optimal function between optimization and framerules, and it's finally killed the speed competition? Maybe it's the time that people prevented for Sonic by using in-game time? Maybe now it'd really make sense to use in-game time in SMB?
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.
Editor, Skilled player (1440)
Joined: 3/31/2010
Posts: 2108
Adding my two cents to the discussion, speed/entertainment tradeoffs are common and accepted in TASes. In the case of Super Mario Bros., it's even possible to squeeze in extra entertainment opportunities into the run without losing time because of the frame rule. If you want to see the SMB levels being completed as efficiently as possible with no slowdown at all, I'd suggest starting tracking separate TAS IL records for this game.
Experienced player (608)
Joined: 10/23/2004
Posts: 706
Addressing both feos' and scrimpeh's comments. Sonic is actually a game that came to mind as facing a similar issue. We either call SMB largely a maxed out game (although future improvements may happen, they may also not happen) and focus on improving the entertainment or we prolong competition by focusing first on overall length and then on individual level length (from level n load to level n+1 load to ensure flag pole glitches and anything that reduces overall length are still executed). The more objective goal is Overall length first, IL length second and entertainment third. If entertainment is second, it becomes harder to judge which run is better and changes the motivations of successive runners. I'm far more interested in seeing progress towards individual levels approaching the next frame rule than I am in seeing Mario moon walk one more frame or break one more block or shoot one more fireball. Those entertainment pieces, to me, are of tertiary importance.
Current Project: - Mario Kart 64
Emulator Coder
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Weatherton wrote:
In an auto scrolling level, by all means jump around and be as entertaining as possible.
Weatherton wrote:
Each course can be viewed individually as well as part of a larger run. If by playing around in a race you end up losing some frames and reaching the end more slowly, even if a frame rule exists that would have negated the gained time, I would prefer that you complete the course as quickly as possible. Still be as entertaining as possible, but don't lose time during each individual course while being "entertaining".
Behold the contradiction: Generalizing:
Weatherton wrote:
Each game segment can be viewed individually as well as part of a larger game segment. If by playing around in a game segment which is part of a larger game segment you end up losing some frames and reaching the end more slowly, even if a frame rule exists that would have negated the gained time, I would prefer that you complete the smaller game segment as quickly as possible. Still be as entertaining as possible, but don't lose time during each smaller game segment while being "entertaining".
According to your logic, every game segment must be beaten as fast possible. An auto scrolling level consists of multiple screens stitched together which are smaller game segments. Jumping around and moving in the wrong direction means the player in these smaller screens of level are arriving at the end of each more slowly, even though any potential gains are negated by the fact that there's a frame rule which prevents the level as a whole from completing till it has scrolled completely. This logic therefore disallows being entertaining at the cost that some segment of overall inconsequential time use is not used most effectively. Therefore, you cannot jump around in an auto scrolling level to be as entertaining as 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.
Experienced player (608)
Joined: 10/23/2004
Posts: 706
Nach, I see that you're arguing the definition of what a segment is in the game. I contend that there are at least two categories here: Full game and Individual Levels. I think these are objectively defined and would be supported by nearly any speedrunner. There is a game to complete and there are levels to complete (with future levels to load). If you go the next level down and say there are horizontal bars of pixels to load, that could be argued as a tertiary goal before entertainment. My feeling here is that at that level, entertainment is more important. Also, in the case of an auto scroll level (which was your example) you're not loading those horizontal columns of pixels any faster. So, what you actually are referencing is a quaternary goal which could be considered before entertainment. Specifically, the quaternary goal would be the character's average horizontal position over time. Clearly the line has to be drawn somewhere before entertainment should come in. To me, it's after the secondary goal of making the ILs as fast as possible. To me, entertainment should be considered no earlier than this point. But, again, that's me. What I saw with HappyLee's comments earlier is that he greatly values entertainment as a secondary goal. It seems based on the above comments that MrWint values entertainment as a tertiary goal. To me, that definition (entertainment as a tertiary goal, behind IL times and full game time) allows for on-going competition even as the primary goal remains stuck for some time.
Current Project: - Mario Kart 64