where does it say that this run doesn't start from power on?

Well, the submission text says: "This TAS is a run of the 9 Hole course in Wii Sports, with the goal of completing the course as fast as possible. Time begins when "9 Hole Game" is selected" Maybe I got confused about what was meant by that.

A TAS can be timed independently on TASVideos from how the author times it in their youtube encode.

I voted yes. I found this entertaining but I’d also like to see a lowest score run.

I'm going to echo the preference of lowest score over pure speed, but I don't think such a goal change would necessarily change the impressiveness of the gameplay.

On two holes I purposefully land in a Water Hazard instead of onto the fairway because it begins the next stroke more quickly.

Yeah. No. Just looks sloppy. Lowest score would be a better goal, even if it sacrifices some time.

Many, many years ago I posed the question somewhere about future golf games. The question was, essentially, about what would be a better "sub-goal" for the run (besides fastest completion / lowest score): A run that makes perfect hits every single time (always hits the driveway, and pretty much makes a "perfect" game in every possible aspect), or a run that showcases nigh impossible feats (such as hitting the ball way off course, into the rough, hitting trees, or whatever, while still almost miraculously recovering and getting the lowest possible score). Back then there weren't really all that many realistic golf games that were yet TASable, but now finally we are reaching that point, as this run demonstrates. Of course the question being presented here is slightly different: What is better, the lowest possible time at the cost of the score, or the lowest possible score, at the cost of time? Personally, I'm inclined towards the lowest possible score, even if achieving it is slower (but, of course, still as fast as possible). Getting penalties just doesn't feel right for a run that's supposed to be superhumanly perfect.

Of course the question being presented here is slightly different: What is better, the lowest possible time at the cost of the score, or the lowest possible score, at the cost of time?

In one case (Mario Golf: Advance Tour comes to mind), a perfect run of hole-in-ones is only possible after a rather lengthy level-up session and probably +40% Drive clubs in hand. Then you can hole-in-one every Par 5 in the game. Might be worth exploring with a save-anchored movie, but it's doubtful the verification process would be all that interesting, and a best score run just doesn't get the best possible score from level 1 stats, which stops being level 1 after one round anyway. For games where no such progression exists, the question is more interesting. I'm heavily for any sort of completionist goals, and getting worse scores for the sake of time just doesn't feel very complete. To some extreme, if it were possible to Give Up holes like in Mario Golf, it would be faster to just putt off the Tee, Give Up immediately, then finish the round with the worst possible score. Hey, it's faster! Anyway, I would almost always prefer a better scoring run in any golf runs, with an exception where a stats progression exists.

In one case (Mario Golf: Advance Tour comes to mind), a perfect run of hole-in-ones is only possible after a rather lengthy level-up session and probably +40% Drive clubs in hand. Then you can hole-in-one every Par 5 in the game.

In light of this, I suppose I have to update my preference a bit: I prefer the lowest score even if it means a longer run, unless achieving the lowest possible score requires an unreasonable amount of extra time, especially if this extra time is spent somewhere else other than playing the game where the final score is being counted. Optimally, the game which we are "scoring" in this manner ought to start as soon as reasonably possible, with no or very minimal "preparation" elsewhere in the game (unless this preparation is relatively short and helps achieving a better score. What is and isn't "too long" is up to debate and the individual video game in question.)

It just occurred to me the movie file has "blank" input at the end (trail of FF FF FF accelerometer input past input frame 40810 per YAIFE, this is 43938 input frames long). However, the site semmingly relies on tick count for timing runs, which means that even if I remove these frames via a movie file editor (e.g. YAIFE), the site will still report 3:55 (which incidentally is the length of the temp encode). From what I can see, the last effective input is given at around 3:33 (because TAS timing goes from power-on to last required input and not some arbitrary point after the last input was given).

Personally, I actually like the water strategies. It adds a different element to routing, and even if it's not "perfect" in score, I don't see it as any different than taking damage or deaths to save time in other games. It adds a little unique flair to this particular golf game. That aside, this movie is nicely paced and short enough. Yes vote.

Personally, I actually like the water strategies. It adds a different element to routing, and even if it's not "perfect" in score, I don't see it as any different than taking damage or deaths to save time in other games. It adds a little unique flair to this particular golf game.

Yeah, I came to the same conclusion when I was watching the encode. It's the difference between a fastest time vs. a no-damage fastest time run.

Here's a userfile that cuts away about 21.6 seconds of unnecessary input at the end. Everything else is unchanged.

Note that in the submission instructions it is recommended to list a checksum of your ISO. While I still managed to sync it, it would be appreciated in the future if you remember to do so.

For some reason I thought the character only swinging the club forward without going back first looked really funny. I also liked hitting the flag pole. Yes vote

How much time would not entering and exiting the game twice cost due to the different RNG seed? EDIT: How much control does one have over the power of swings in the original Wii Sports Golf? Is it possible to hit the flags a bit lower than in your TAS and still avoid the additional camera movement? Would it be faster to hit the ball slightly harder to hit the flagpole sooner?

Apologies for not providing the checksum, I'll post it here, and can edit the submission myself if needed: Name: Wii Sports [RSPE01].wbfs Size: 337641472 bytes (322 MB) SHA1: 50F4F32B10A0B88D45B286EE24A992BE4F4315A8 To answer your questions Memory, entering/exiting the Expert course saved me 1 second the first time (by preventing the AB check from appearing again). The second enter/exit is hard to estimate, but essentially multiple strategies would not be available: On Hole 1, the wind would be 22 mph East, which has a chance of making the bunker strat impossible, and if not adds some time for turning much farther left to account for the wind. Hole 7 would be the worst timeloss. The wind would be 16 mph West, possibly making the shortcut through the forest unavailable, meaning the strategy on that hole would change to trying to use the bunker strat on the bunker down the fairway and then attempting to get a flagshot from there. The problem with that is there are trees in the line of sight from that bunker to the green, so it is possible I would actually need to land it on the fairway instead. Best case I would lose 4 seconds, worst up to 7 on that hole. Hole 9 also might present some issues, as the wind is 10 mph South and landing on the left-side island requires a nearly full powered shot if there is NO wind. It's possible that the left-side island would be unreachable, and instead I'd have to go to the right side island first, then to the green. The problem with that is the right-side island has a low elevation, and to get the ball in the hole might require rolling it in. And the problem with rolling it in is the ball needs to be moving quite slowly or it will simply bounce off the pin. So Hole 9 has up to 4-7 seconds timeloss as well. Overall I'd estimate in the best case scenario I'd lose 12 seconds if I hadn't entered the Expert course twice before beginning the 9 Hole Game. The power of the swings can be fully controlled. In practice, it is difficult to hit weak shots (below the first dot) as the minimum threshold for movement isn't so low. In TAS this isn't a problem, but what was an issue was hitting powerful shots (above 2 dots) fast. If I tried to hit earlier any earlier on shots like Hole 2, the swing would whiff and hit at the weakest power level. It should be possible to hit faster strong shots in TAS but I could not find any way while building this run. I spent the majority of my time with this TAS optimizing the flag hits. In most cases, it was actually not too hard to find the correct positioning needed to hit the flag. From there the difficulties arose from getting the ball to not only drop directly into the hole but also not bounce or roll around once they fell in. In some cases I could have hit the shot weaker, and the ball would have hit lower on the flag, but it would have resulted in not landing in the hole/bouncing in the cup/extra time spent waiting for the ball to stop rolling in the hole. Hole 2 is an example of the best case scenario: the ball hits low on the flag, goes directly into the hole, and comes to an instant stop. You can hear in the video how the ball makes a sudden chirp as it wedges itself between the flagpole and the hole, and then there is no more sound from the ball. The audience only cheers and the announcer only calls the shot once the ball has come to a complete stop, so there was at least 1 second to save on each hole from optimizing the flag hit and in some cases I shaved off 2-3 seconds from my initial flag hit.

To answer your questions Memory, entering/exiting the Expert course saved me 1 second the first time (by preventing the AB check from appearing again).

This doesn't actually save any time in the context of a TAS, since timing begins from power on. I think Memory is asking how much time is gained or lost by exiting and re-entering twice in this sense, and given the time it takes to do this, is the RNG seeding actually worth it? Clearly from what you've said it saves enough time over the seed you get after the first exit and enter to be worth it, but does just going into 9 hole game from the beginning cost enough time from the RNG seed that it would still be better to enter and exit twice? EDIT: Oh, and another thing I remembered: It's actually slightly faster to reach the title screen by resetting the game rather than pressing A. Whether this affects the Golf RNG seeding (to a disadvantage), I don't know.

To answer your questions Memory, entering/exiting the Expert course saved me 1 second the first time (by preventing the AB check from appearing again).

This doesn't actually save any time in the context of a TAS, since timing begins from power on. I think Memory is asking how much time is gained or lost by exiting and re-entering twice in this sense, and given the time it takes to do this, is the RNG seeding actually worth it? Clearly from what you've said it saves enough time over the seed you get after the first exit and enter to be worth it, but does just going into 9 hole game from the beginning cost enough time from the RNG seed that it would still be better to enter and exit twice?

I figured it probably lost time overall by TAS timing but wanted to know some numbers regardless. I have another question though: Does this game use the RTC for seeding RNG?

I don't think this game uses the clock for RNG, at least what I found is that waiting in the menu did not change what RNG I would get. The fastest way I could generate new RNG was to enter a course, immediately open up the menu, and hit restart. TheProJamer, I think I understand now. If I had simply entered 9 Hole Game before entering any other course, there would have been some unfavorable winds, but not as many as if I had only cleared the AB check and then went into 9 Hole Game. Hole 5 would have had 28 mph Southeast wind which is very hard to play with. Depending on where the ball could get to on the first shot, it might not be possible to hit the flag on the second. And if pin placement on the green was also not favorable, it might not be possible to Double Eagle that hole. So that would likely add 3-8 seconds. Also Hole 8 would have 26 mph Southwest wind, which I think is strong enough to prevent the possibility of a Hole in One, probably adding 4-7 seconds depending on how fast I could get to the second shot. The winds on the other holes are fine, though on Hole 1 (0 wind in this case) I'd estimate a small time loss, maybe 1-2 seconds, from not having any helping wind. Hole 7 (4mph South wind) would probably still need to be an Eagle rather than a Hole in One, but it's hard to say without a lot of experimentation. Overall I'd estimate anywhere from 8-17 seconds lost. The wind RNG that I got after 2 entries into Expert was the best wind RNG that I could've gotten at that point, and even though I would have continued searching for the perfect wind RNG I realized there are literally billions of possible combinations and I had no way of influencing the outcome, so I just decided to start the run at that point. I plan on making another TAS where I change the memory to set the winds to be perfect, which I'm sure is against certain rules here but opens up the potential to save 20+ seconds from the total time of this TAS because it would be much more optimized.

From my very limited testing, RTC appears to affect RNG in some way at least. And yes manipulating memory for perfect winds would be prohibited here (and honestly not as impressive as actually getting the winds through proper RNG manipulation). EDIT: Note you can manually set RTC through configuration > advanced.

I plan on making another TAS where I change the memory to set the winds to be perfect, which I'm sure is against certain rules here but opens up the potential to save 20+ seconds from the total time of this TAS because it would be much more optimized.

If you do that you run the risk of getting a set of wind values which are impossible to obtain normally, making it unsuitable for a TAS following RTA rulings (which I believe was the intention) because you can't get that outcome without cheats. While remaining idle in the Golf menu may not affect RNG at all, perhaps RNG is affected by the RTC in the sense that its initial value depends on the clock (which I imagine would have been what Memory tested). You may want to look into finding the value/s that create the wind values by setting up some breakpoints in Dolphin debug and searching with Dolphin memory engine, look at how those values rely on the RTC, and then finally use the information you have to work out what the time should be when booting up the game in order to get you the best possible combination of legitimate wind values in the shortest amount of time.

I appear to have been incorrect about the RTC, my previous tests did not erase the save data for the game which changed results. EDIT: That being said, I still would believe that entering and exiting expert twice would lose more time than it saves by TAS timing and would be suboptimal by our timing method. We time from power on because timing from start of gameplay could absolutely trivialize RNG manipulation for various games. This submission appears to ignore our rules in favor of the RTA community's rules, which were not made with TASing in mind.

I find it interesting that the fastest game isn't 9 holes in one. It defies expectations and makes each hole potentially a little different. I voted yes.

So far I cannot see any way to really figure out if the menuing strategy is suboptimal without re-TASing the whole thing myself, something that requires way too much effort.