1822 replies to this topic

[Tigers Agent]

The biggest problem with sequels is exactly this - there is usually no big rewrite of the code so basically the only things that change are the bells and whistles. Very very rarely do sequels go back to the drawing board and make the effort to actually improve things from the ground up. PG2 is being rewritten from the ground up and has all the benefits that go along with that ie faster, more stable, better visuals, completely new UI etc. It just takes time with a small team.

 

BTW Key areas of RFactor 2 were completely rewritten (tyre model for example) and so it falls between the two extremes.

I'll take the game left 4 dead 2. lots of rewrite from the first.  ten year old game that is very popular on Steam today. what this golf game could have in common to make it more successful would be a workshop. I know we have the courses, but imagine a place where one could pick up clothing and many other items designed by a community run by Steam. 

[Dazmaniac]

(licks chops at the thought of seeing how this looks...)

 

Unfortunately this is all we have, and probably will have, for quite some time to come.

 

   

[Buck]

@ADX: Do you use reddit?

[mebby]

Our implementation of Speedtrees is better in PG2 as our lighting its much more advanced and we have had several years of experience with them now and sort of know how to get the best visuals out of them. I can see from the previews of TGC 2019 that they are struggling with their speedtrees and their LOD settings look like there's going to be a bunch of 'popping' going on but I guess it's early days for them.

I agree that they have lighting issues.  When TGC2 launched it was horrible.  It's gotten slightly better but it's still not great.

 

The pictures you showed ages ago of the new turf had some good lighting going on.  Would love to see that play out.

 

Regarding pop-in (assuming that's what you meant)... they are saying that there will be no pop-in.  We shall see.

[mebby]

I think the majority of what you're talking about here is linked to the way the avatar is modeled, lit and then animated when you're using a controller. So basically if we could fix the avatar we would instantly have a much more appealing game and I completely agree. Hacker Harry has never been in my dream foursome list! 

 

I think with the advances we have already made with the avatar, turf and overall lighting, things are going to look and feel a lot more 'together' in PG2. Of course if you're playing on a sim the avatar is a non issue anyway and the main concern is with the visuals and physics.

And this right here is what concerns me about how much focus will be applied to the avatar and turf effects, etc.  The focus seems like it would now be on the simulator market which gives me little hope of seeing the JNPG2 I'd hoped I'd eventually see.

 

I'd truly love to be wrong.  I've always said that it's the technically better game and that's still true.  It just needs some polish and TLC in certain areas and it could be the perfect golf game for my needs.

[JCat04]

Our implementation of Speedtrees is better in PG2 as our lighting its much more advanced and we have had several years of experience with them now and sort of know how to get the best visuals out of them. I can see from the previews of TGC 2019 that they are struggling with their speedtrees and their LOD settings look like there's going to be a bunch of 'popping' going on but I guess it's early days for them.

 

I'm very anxious to see your implementation of SpeedTrees in PG2, as well as the lighting.  What you already showed us in 2017 was quite impressive.   I've seen a wide variance in the quality of SpeedTrees thus far in what I've been able to see of TGC 2019.  The SpeedTrees in the stress test beta were pretty plain, IMO.  However, those of the TPC Deere Run preview video looked pretty dang good, to my eyes at least, and I didn't see any pop-in.  I can't say what caliber of PC that preview was being played on, so who knows if an average gaming PC... like mine, would be able to sustain a satisfactory frame rate with that caliber of graphics.

[JCat04]

HB Studios came to their senses today and announced that there will be an option to disable shot previews in multiplayer and Society play.  It shouldn't have taken a lynch mob to coerce them into doing it, but at least they did concede to popular opinion and make what seems to be a no-brainer choice.  I'm relieved to read it...

[Buck]

@JC - That's good to hear..
 

It will be interesting to see what (if anything) they did about the swing difficulty, especially on the highest levels, that seemed so far from where it needed to be in the Stress Test Beta process.

 

I just continue to worry with that dev team as they routinely prove to be skewing towards arcade features.

[adx321]

HB Studios came to their senses today and announced that there will be an option to disable shot previews in multiplayer and Society play.  It shouldn't have taken a lynch mob to coerce them into doing it, but at least they did concede to popular opinion and make what seems to be a no-brainer choice.  I'm relieved to read it...

 

What it tells us is

 

How poor their decision-making process is (not that we didn't already know) to think this was ever a good idea.

 

It's obvious they aren't trying to make "The Golf Club" better, they're trying to morp into Tiger Woods 2020.  I understand it from an economics standpoint, I do, but it doesn't mean I have to like it, I don't.  I LOVED how NOT that type of game it used to be.

[mebby]

What it tells us is

 

How poor their decision-making process is (not that we didn't already know) to think this was ever a good idea.

 

It's obvious they aren't trying to make "The Golf Club" better, they're trying to morp into Tiger Woods 2020.  I understand it from an economics standpoint, I do, but it doesn't mean I have to like it, I don't.  I LOVED how NOT that type of game it used to be.

I'm glad they finally came around but I do agree with what you're saying and I've said as much on their forum.  The sheer fact that this "feature" made it into the game in the way that it did REALLY calls into question their decision making process and what they are ultimately trying to accomplish.

 

I totally understand trying to bring the masses to their game.  But it's not like they are out there marketing this shot preview feature as a way to do that so it's hard to even correlate that feature decision to their stated goals.  So ultimately it just smells an awful lot like a half baked decision.

[Buck]

Yeah, you almost wonder if they have some junior developers and one of them threw out:

 

"many find golf too hard and boring - what if we gave them a full shot preview - maybe only x times per round depending upon club set?"

 

...and sadly someone there in charge said "awesome!  Let's bring in the masses!"

 

Their problem over there is no chief product "editor" to shoot down bad concepts from the get go and shape the direction with a more concerted vision.

[adx321]

Yeah, you almost wonder if they have some junior developers and one of them threw out:

 

"many find golf too hard and boring - what if we gave them a full shot preview - maybe only x times per round depending upon club set?"

 

...and sadly someone there in charge said "awesome!  Let's bring in the masses!"

 

Their problem over there is no chief product "editor" to shoot down bad concepts from the get go and shape the direction with a more concerted vision.

Right

 

That guy was Anthony Kyne, and he has not been replaced (even remotely so).

[maxie]

Why dont you all get together you seem to have a wide range of knowledge in programing graphics marketing and golf physics.I think maybe there could be potential from the forum guys to maybe make a good golf game no pun but serious why not give it a go?

[adx321]

Why dont you all get together you seem to have a wide range of knowledge in programing graphics marketing and golf physics.I think maybe there could be potential from the forum guys to maybe make a good golf game no pun but serious why not give it a go?

 

Because there's little profit in it.  If there were, Mike would have 20 developers working 10 hours a day working on the next version of this game.

 

It's an already niche market competing against monsters like Madden, The Show, etc. (sports gaming dollars)

 

There are far more sure ways of making a buck like marijuana dispensaries, growers, the craft beer craze (in the right location) etc, real estate, etc.

[Drgnslyr221]

Because there's little profit in it. If there were, Mike would have 20 developers working 10 hours a day working on the next version of this game.

It's an already niche market competing against monsters like Madden, The Show, etc. (sports gaming dollars)

There are far more sure ways of making a buck like marijuana dispensaries, growers, the craft beer craze (in the right location) etc, real estate, etc.

Me and my wife have talked about opening a 420 friendly B&B here in Denver. Underserved market really.

[adx321]

Jesus that new video looks terrible - they truly think they have something special when it's just TGC 1.6 with some new logos and gloves

 

And I see Jeffield is still doing his whole "it needs to be a lot harder" despite the fact he never shot more than 3 or 4 under par in TGC1 and was convinced anyone who could was cheating lol

 

He doesn't want it harder for him he wants it harder for everyone in hopes he can then compete (he can't)

[Buck]

Yeah I’m not really sure what everyone is looking at that they think “looks so much better than before“… Visually the game seems nearly identical to the past save for new trees, sponsorships and logos…

I’m more interested to see where the gameplay went after the stress test beta.

I found it rather uncompelling during that stress test beta and it needed to be a lot harder I thought.

[Dazmaniac]

Are HBS supposed to have re-written TGC2019  from scratch?

 

Looks to me as if they have cut and pasted TGC2 and stuck some FedEx and PGA logos and advertising boards in the game and possibly tinkered with the swing mechanic a little. Yes, I know they have some licensed courses now but if I'm honest they look a bit...... TGC2.

 

Oh I forgot, they have the new character creation feature and all that lovely hair. 

 

The recent reveal videos of the TPC courses haven't really done a lot for me either, but I appreciate they may do for others.  

 

Hey-ho. I guess the TGC regulars among us will be all over the game when it releases, but I doubt that I will be.

[Buck]

They definitely absolutely did not re-write anything from scratch unless it involved the trees I guess?

I don’t blame those for being excited that are excited over there.
It’s nice to be playing a game that’s under (publicly disclosed) active development, I get that part of things for sure.

That said, for all these multiple versions over the years, I just don’t think the game is actually evolving very much.

The best summaries of it all really are…
If you already liked TGC2, you are probably going to like TGC 2019.
But if you didn’t like TGC2, you are not going to like TGC 2019.

Not even close to enough has changed or evolved to move that needle in my opinion

[Buck]

Related to my post above, and specifically about the real course re-creations that are licensed, I had this sort of great hope or fantasy that those specific courses that were developed in house and licensed would be using unique textures and techniques to fix the bunker problems and make things look easily identifiable as different and special.

But what they really ended up with was TGC2 courses with tournament assets and sponsor logos all over them.

That just doesn’t do much for me.

In fact, if they grant access to any of those assets to their talented third-party designers, I would expect those guys to make better versions then their own in house team.

I just don’t think their in-house course design work is very good.