I have been looking for improvements to popular games for a long time. Recently, when I tried to do the flagpole glitch at walking speed, andrewg_ came up with the PAL version and also pointed out an useful glitch that only works on that version. I started working on this run as a fun project to take a break from my other projects, which I'm not very motivated to do.
The trick above never got used since I managed to do the flagpole glitch with Mario stuck in front of it, so there was no need to enter a floor (and no need to use a bullet bill in 8-2 either). Later, I also managed to enter the wall in 1-2 which prevented me from continuing on this project for a while. Chances were good that this run would save much time over the NTSC TAS.
I'm not sure about the attitude of people towards this TAS which uses the PAL version in order to save time. I don't think it would be very well-received, but since there's no harm in submitting a finished TAS, here it is!
Since this was only a fun project, I didn't bother much about the 21-frame rule. There is also a lag frame in 8-1 that I couldn't remove. I think it's still a pretty good run. I wanted to make this run a little different than the published TAS and I used some different ways of doing things. Maybe you will like it.
So I will leave this one here. Maybe it can be linked from the published movie.
(I would like TASvideos to change its way of presenting its runs in the future.
See here and here for places where I expressed this. This PAL TAS would be a candidate to put onto a page along with other Super Mario Bros TASes)
adelikat: Claiming for judging. The verdict (either way) will potentially set a precedent for future submissions so I want to handle this one. I hope for lots of votes, comments, and pedantic opinions on this one.
adelikat: Author is improving this movie and some of the possible improvement would have a direct impact on a potential verdict so I am setting this to delayed for now.
mugg: I'm setting this to canceled since I'm not trying to improve this anymore. To my knowledge, klmz is planning to make an improvement so there is no need for this to stay on the workbench.
After watching this run and thought there was really a "new" glitch which wasn't the case, just the same bug but with a different result, I've decided to vote no.
The run doesn't look optimal.
As said earlier by some people which I fully agree, the run just look the same but turboed. It sucks.
Come back with a "TRUE" new PAL version glitch and you might get my vote.
Edit: Also, people should remember the debate between Bionic Commando and Hitler no Fukkatsu which have real differences. I won't understand this site goal if this case will be handled differently.
This is certainly true.
Also -- and I am surprised I have to point this out -- this site serves as the definitive repository for videos of games being played as fast as possible. Even those movies (such as the recent Brain Age run) whose sole purpose is entertainment through humor are executed impossibly quickly with inhuman precision, because that is what we interpret as being the single biggest indicator of a runner's commitment and ability to create a run of consistently exceptional quality. It's boggling that anyone seriously wants this run not to exist on this site, whose primary function is to display runs of this type. Anyone who says otherwise is being disingenuous.
I have no way of knowing or proving this, but I suspect all we are seeing is a bunch of butthurt people who really wish they'd figured this out before MUGG did, and are looking for any excuse to invalidate his incredible effort.
Special request for MUGG: please remake this run and remove whatever inaccuracies people are claiming to have seen. (I don't see them but that doesn't mean they aren't there.)
Joined: 9/12/2009
Posts: 60
Location: None of Your Business, USA
I agree with PikachuMan, this needs to be a separate category. And really I like the NTSC versioin better. But this would be an interesting addition to the site. I'd say MEH
Yes Vote. Published along side the (U) version.
While a lot of people are saying that this is suboptimal or could be improved, I see this as a good thing. Perhaps with a seperate publication, the same sort of frame war will start as has been done with the (U) publication. This could maybe allow for new glitches to be found, or other game breaking tricks. With so little time invested in the PAL version, who knows what may show up.
Naw, I think you're discounting all the people who wouldn't have bothered with a PAL version run, even if they knew it was faster, because to them it's not the "real" Super Mario Brothers.
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
Actually, even the average layperson would probably notice the difference in gameplay on the two roms, as the speed of movement and tempo of the music are different. I certainly did, which led to me even checking this discussion in the first place.
I have been able to enter a floor only by bouncing off an enemy.
Similar to this, but I got it to work with only a koopa troopa too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YklSnam0w-Q
It would certainly save time in 8-1 to enter the floor.
I'm probably not going to say anything that hasn't already been mentioned, but... whatever.
There has been precedent set that when a suboptimal movie is submitted for a game that already has a run, that movie is rejected until a more optimal (or a less obviously suboptimal) movie is submitted. I think that should be followed here.
That said, I do not think this should replace the "JPN/USA PRG0" run if it is accepted. It has modified code that makes it more closely mirror the NTSC versions, and while that modification was done by Nintendo, it still makes the PAL version a different game. This is not the same as another NTSC version being released in Japan/USA, because those are intended to replace an existing game as the "proper" version for those regions. This is a version specifically made for Europe/PAL areas.
As for "entertainment value," I'm surprised this is such a concern. We seem collectively worried that a run like this is somehow less entertaining because of consistent use of the flagpole glitch without enemies. The current run uses such a thing exactly once, in 8-2. 8-3 ends with a "standard" ending, and every other stage that ends in the flagpole... ends with the execution of a different (but similar) glitch every time! That's okay, but somehow this isn't?
Also, the "use the USA version where possible" rule started, I think, because there was an assumption that the vast majority of visitors to the site would be English speakers who would find games in other languages confusing and not interesting to watch. If that rule really is still in effect to any degree, it should probably be reevaluated.
Just my two cents after a years-long posting hiatus. I'd be surprised if anyone even remembers me, truthfully.
This has not applied in any case before where there was a significant time-saving glitch in one version (though usually the U version will be used for the non-glitch run). See Rygar.
This should be published separately from the JU version. Having it out there and set up right (not obsoleting U version, etc) will mean that there is no harm in working to obsolete this one -- it's already been shown that a glitch run of the E version will be accepted and published if it is faster.
If you decide to reject this for being suboptimal then you should still make a decision regarding the obsoletion/publication the optimal version will go through so that we don't end up at this roadblock again later.
I fail to understand why most of the debate here even exists... oh wait, it's tasvideos. Never mind.
Actually because they run at 60 fps and aren't slowed down/speed-compensated. Besides, the NTSC versions are original/precede PAL in pretty much 100% of cases (I can't name even one game that was released in PAL region first and then ported to NTSC-U/J).
No. As a long-time SMB player, I disagree to play Super Mario Bros in PAL mode, if the glitch doesn't work on NTSC mode, it shouldn't be called a glitch, I'm not sure if that's cheating.
Edit: I've discussed this with Chinese best SMB players (including GAP, MFGI), we all think that the E version is a terrible version, it shouldn't be allowed here. I'd like to hear what klmz thinks.
Recent projects: SMB warpless TAS (2018), SMB warpless walkathon (2019), SMB something never done before (2019), Extra Mario Bros. (best ending) (2020).
I don't think PAL and NTSC should be compared like this. They are both official and they both have their own capacities and possibilities. Everyone should be free to decide which version to make a TAS of.
Personally, I would like to see the site distinguish PAL and NTSC runs in the future (where it is justified).
Yeah, see, it's exactly the criteria for justification that are making this harder than it should be. Significantly lifting hard category limits to >3 or removing them altogether is the first, necessary, and long-awaited step to dealing with this problem.
Our judge staff, as well as the current submission poll question — "should the movie be published" — is quite equipped to deal with the oft-envisioned horror of throwaway submissions with ambiguous goals that are expected to plague the workbench as soon as the limits are lifted. The truth is that'll hardly be a problem because we don't reject bad submissions because we don't have enough room for them. We reject them because they're bad. The goal is keep accepting submissions that are good. We know such submissions because entertaining ones will remain entertaining, and technically competent ones will remain technically competent. There is no particular reason nor need to restrict the amount of either of them on the site explaining that with lack of room. For a site that looks to increase its content in both quantity and quality such position seems strange to me.
Sure is SERIOUS BUSINESS in here.
Voting no since the author admitted it wasn't optimal, "Since this was only a fun project, [MUGG] didn't bother much about the 21-frame rule."
When an optimzed PAL run is submitted, then I may decide to participate in this stalemate of a discussion.