41 replies to this topic

[Andrew]

The ball flight on full shots where club head speed is at maximum velocity are very good IMO,the area I feel needs improvement would be on the wedge/short iron shots.
An example would be I have 50 yards to the pin & I select my 56 degree wedge (110 yards full swing) I click at around 45% power to achieve my 50 yard shot but the ball flight becomes very flat ( to flat IMO) because of the reduction in club head speed.
I play golf to reasonable standard & in the same scenario in real life the ball flight would definitely be lower on a half swing but not as low as PG.
I think the algorithm for calculating velocity on shorter shots needs to be tweaked.

Very interesting observation.  It is one of the hardest areas to obtain good data on.  Another reason for the ball flight could be the spin that we assign to a half shot.  Lower spin rates means less lift and a flatter shot.  I believe power is just a simple % of the swing multiplier

[Charles]

My experience is limited to computer golf only, so I lack real world context.  I can't play real golf now because I have rheumatoid arthritis and several fused vertebrae, so computer golf is the only way I can experience it.

So what do you think?  I think the concept of simulated physics is brilliant, but how realisic is it right now?

Opinion away please!

I've been playing the real game for some 25 years and I can testify to the fact that the ballflight looks perfect. The only thing I have trouble with is, is the view on the receiving end of a shot whereby the camera bounces along with the ball. I (and others) have already commented on this and the staff will be working on this. That 'bounce along' camera makes it difficult to really analyze the ball dynamics once hiting the ground. With the post shot cam options one gets a better idea. But other than that, the ballflight in PG is excellent.

[LasseThid]

I think, the ground physics have to be looked at. The pros can put spin one every shot. Should be implemented in the game. (Move the ball in the stance, change angle of the swing plane, etc.). Right now, i cannot get my wedges to spin, even when i hit way more than 100 % and use the highest trajectory possible. Thats not right. Pros have to purposely reduce the spin of their wedges for distance control. 

From my personal observations it seems like the higher trajectory you go for the less spin you get. Dunno if that is right or wrong.

Other than the extreme roll in sand, rough and heavy rough I think the game physics are great. 

This shot is a default 9 iron (slight side hill lie) though... http://youtu.be/YLO9xcJ_3vQ  

[Blackadar]

The physics are generally good, but there are a few areas that I think need work. The ball flight looks really good. Areas where I've seen some odd things:

 

1. Backspin is still off and it's tough to achieve even with a high iron. If I hit a ball on the screws with a 9 iron, the ball should be backing up when it hits the green or at the very least sticking in place unless the stimpmeter is running 12 or 13. The current "bounce and roll" physics don't seem right to me.

2. Ground textures still need some work. The ball shouldn't roll through heavy rough no matter the degree of slope, but you'll often see a ball rolling down a 30 degree slope in heavy rough for 20-30 yards.

3. Putting still seems off. I've seen some weird rolls like the ball seemingly rolling over/through the pin and some weird rolls at the edges of the cup. I swear I saw one put go literally in and out of the cup. 

[woodworkery]

would like to see, more information on the lie of the ball when in the rough, or a bunker.  Like 20/25, 30/40,  40/50,

[dedBuNNy]

All I can say is that if you're using the shot center as a ball, and thinking ball you're going to have issues. Once it was pointed out just what it's not, things got much easier and much more difficult as well. 

 

I have no issues with the ball flight being what is should be. Don't forget watching your ball in real life is far different than watching in the game. Unless you're recording and then taking that video and digitizing it for use in an editor it's not going to look exactly the same. I too notice that sometimes my wedge shots look like they might be drilling a bit low, but for the most part it looks about right.

I do know that graphic settings has a lot to do with appearances, how the ball looks rolling, and even in flight, I've noticed that anyway. 

 

All in all, happy with the  interpretation of ball flight and hitting data.

 

Shot Center.....  hmm hmmm.... lol

[LasseThid]

Blackadar: I try to leave myself with a full wedge or nine iron to the greens most of the time and unless I really screw up the tempo (I'm using Mouse Swing), the ball will spin back once it hits the green. As dedBuNNy pointed out, shot center isn't about where you hit the ball, but how you want to change the trajectory. Adding height to the shot isn't the same as adding spin.

[J.H.Buchanan]

I have seen weird ball physics in every pc golf game I have played and weird things the ball has done on tv - real golf - I am not concerned about it 

[#GCW]

I find the ball physics to be slightly off.

mainly the way the ball reacts when pitching into the rough, it should not roll so much and have such a firm landing.

Also the ability to get a bit more check and check and run on pitch/chip shots would be more realistic, specifically of tight lies around the green.

Playing in soft conditions, the ball should hit and stick with little bounce and spin back rather than the large hop up then delayed spin we see.

Just generally more authentic reaction of the ball on or around the green really.

Another thing I have never understood in golf games is why a shot from the rough is always 80-90% or 50/60% etc, it is more than possible to get a 100% strike on a shot from the rough, sometimes even flyers of 110%, I have never understood why in computer golf it seems the only punishment of rough is on distance, If the ball winds up in the semi rough there should be no reason I can only achieve 90% power, it could be sitting up like an egg looking hugely inviting to rip a 3 wood into a par 5. In my opinion and from many years experience of golf from real to computer golf, the punishment in the rough really should be a tougher to achieve snap. Think about it - when in the rough it is absolutely crucial to hit the ball first steeply - the strike on the ball becomes absolutely paramount - similar to long bunker shots, If you take it slightly to early your club catches the grass loses speed into the ball and grass ruins the strike, therefore the likelihood of a mishit should be increased in conjunction with the severity of the rough, for example - in deep US Open style rough - you really must hit a more than perfect shot to catch the ball cleanly, if not you could flub it 40 yards. It is a really annoyance of mine that golf games assume that a 100% distance can not be achieved from anywhere but the fairway, it even applies in bunkers.

For me also - the result of the shot should be more varied when hitting from the rough I.E the chance of 1 5% flyer or loss of distance so however perfect you hit the shot you cant rely on 100% accuracy with distance as with a fairway shot.

But overall I am very impressed with the game, most certainly will be the greatest golf sim ever on full release. If the ball physics and a few other tweaks can be managed it could be amazing.

[droppedbear]

Not too experienced but am fairly happy with the air physics but the ground physics seem a bit off to me - in particular bounces off mounds and stuff can have seem a bit excessive going sideways a lot more than expected. 

[Modman1]

Played yesterday and my partner hit the ball towards the water.  It hit the rough going one direction and then suddenly turned and raced towards the water.  Like the water was a magnet.  I have read all the comments but what I have seen the ball physics are way off on fw sometimes, in sand a lot and in the rough almost always.  Since there is no save shot ability I guess I will have to learn how to video some of the weird shots I have witnessed.

[Dazmaniac]

For starters they aren't bad at all.

Yes they need fine tuning, improving etc. but as a starting point more than playable.

[Mike Jones]

I find the ball physics to be slightly off.

mainly the way the ball reacts when pitching into the rough, it should not roll so much and have such a firm landing.

Also the ability to get a bit more check and check and run on pitch/chip shots would be more realistic, specifically of tight lies around the green.

Playing in soft conditions, the ball should hit and stick with little bounce and spin back rather than the large hop up then delayed spin we see.

Just generally more authentic reaction of the ball on or around the green really.

Another thing I have never understood in golf games is why a shot from the rough is always 80-90% or 50/60% etc, it is more than possible to get a 100% strike on a shot from the rough, sometimes even flyers of 110%, I have never understood why in computer golf it seems the only punishment of rough is on distance, If the ball winds up in the semi rough there should be no reason I can only achieve 90% power, it could be sitting up like an egg looking hugely inviting to rip a 3 wood into a par 5. In my opinion and from many years experience of golf from real to computer golf, the punishment in the rough really should be a tougher to achieve snap. Think about it - when in the rough it is absolutely crucial to hit the ball first steeply - the strike on the ball becomes absolutely paramount - similar to long bunker shots, If you take it slightly to early your club catches the grass loses speed into the ball and grass ruins the strike, therefore the likelihood of a mishit should be increased in conjunction with the severity of the rough, for example - in deep US Open style rough - you really must hit a more than perfect shot to catch the ball cleanly, if not you could flub it 40 yards. It is a really annoyance of mine that golf games assume that a 100% distance can not be achieved from anywhere but the fairway, it even applies in bunkers.

For me also - the result of the shot should be more varied when hitting from the rough I.E the chance of 1 5% flyer or loss of distance so however perfect you hit the shot you cant rely on 100% accuracy with distance as with a fairway shot.

But overall I am very impressed with the game, most certainly will be the greatest golf sim ever on full release. If the ball physics and a few other tweaks can be managed it could be amazing.

Some very good points here. The problem we and other games have is showing the ball lie in enough detail so the player can make an informed choice about how the ball might react from the rough. At the moment we shot now info other than the ability to turn on the grid for a good look at the slope. We will be adding more info so you can make informed choices before you hit a shot as to what you might expect in regard to distance and spin loss and perhaps this will be slightly randomised to account for the different lies people get in the rough IRL.

[Mike Jones]

I think, the ground physics have to be looked at. The pros can put spin one every shot. Should be implemented in the game. (Move the ball in the stance, change angle of the swing plane, etc.). Right now, i cannot get my wedges to spin, even when i hit way more than 100 % and use the highest trajectory possible. Thats not right. Pros have to purposely reduce the spin of their wedges for distance control. 

Lofting up will not increase spin FYI. Hitting past 100% will.

[#GCW]

That sounds great Mike, the idea of a small percentage of randomization with shots from the rough is very authentic IMO, however well you swing the club IRL - you can never quite judge how it will react out of the rough - and nor should you be afforded the luxury of knowing how it will react having missed the fairway/green in the first place, Rough should still be penal but in the game I think it should be more penal to getting a good strike than purely with distance loss. I.E making the snap vary from difficult to extremely difficult to hit depending on the severity/depth of the rough.

 

I just want to be able to hit 100% distance of the club in hand with a clean strike from the rough, and i feel no golf game has ever allowed that really, just because I am in the rough it shouldn't mean I can only hit my 8 iron 130 yards - because that's not true as long as I hit the ball cleanly, I mean an 8 iron from the semi rough is a very easy shot to hit normally with full power in truth- and in no way should be limited to 90% distance. The penalty lies in the loss of spin and how it will react off the club/on the green (where randomization comes in) I think you guys know what I'm getting at anyway

I must add in case anyone think I am being negative etc.. that I think the Air physics are SUPERB and the best I have ever seen in a golf game.

 

Regards,

[jacksaff]

A couple of points on ball physics:-

As a few have mentioned, the spin levels for partial wedge shots are a little low. In real life I would much rather be 70 yards out than 110, but in the game you lose all control in this situation. With a 56 degree wedge you are still hitting the ball pretty hard from 70 even allowing for the 'puter golfer hitting it a bit further than me. From 50 yards it gets much harder to stop the ball.

On the unusual bounces, I suspect that the courses in PG are a lot steeper around the greens than most of us are used to. If you look at replays and pay attention to the slopes, the bounces do not look unreasonable to me.

The fairways seem very soft on all courses and/or the landing physics are a bit off. Low shots up the fairway pull up very quickly. A low, hard mishit wood out of the rough should skid a long way, not stop up in a few yards.

All up, this has been great fun so far. It's also very nice to be able to come on here and see developer feed-back. Oh, and thanks for releasing this for linux too!

[Joe Habiger]

The air physics is very good, we know this by simulating side by side with real launch monitors, the ground physics is ok but needs more work. 

I heard this from BJ as well, taking off and in the air it's beautiful but ground physics need some tweaking and I agree. I mainly would just like to see a bit more roll on textures as they stop to quick except sand.

[Sinewiz]

That sounds great Mike, the idea of a small percentage of randomization with shots from the rough is very authentic IMO, however well you swing the club IRL - you can never quite judge how it will react out of the rough - and nor should you be afforded the luxury of knowing how it will react having missed the fairway/green in the first place, Rough should still be penal but in the game I think it should be more penal to getting a good strike than purely with distance loss. I.E making the snap vary from difficult to extremely difficult to hit depending on the severity/depth of the rough.

 

I just want to be able to hit 100% distance of the club in hand with a clean strike from the rough, and i feel no golf game has ever allowed that really, just because I am in the rough it shouldn't mean I can only hit my 8 iron 130 yards - because that's not true as long as I hit the ball cleanly, I mean an 8 iron from the semi rough is a very easy shot to hit normally with full power in truth- and in no way should be limited to 90% distance. The penalty lies in the loss of spin and how it will react off the club/on the green (where randomization comes in) I think you guys know what I'm getting at anyway

I must add in case anyone think I am being negative etc.. that I think the Air physics are SUPERB and the best I have ever seen in a golf game.

 

Regards,

This is most certainly something that others golf games refuse to understand. It should be within the realm of possibility to occaionally hit a ball out of light rough and have it travel it's intended distance. It's not impossible!!! Instead you automatically see 75%-85% or %50-60% or whatever preconfigured distance they have come up with. 

[Dazmaniac]

This is most certainly something that others golf games refuse to understand. It should be within the realm of possibility to occaionally hit a ball out of light rough and have it travel it's intended distance. It's not impossible!!! Instead you automatically see 75%-85% or %50-60% or whatever preconfigured distance they have come up with. 

 

Not forgetting also going further, thanks to the flier.

 

[Mike Jones]

Regarding average carry and roll out distance on normal fairway - it's pretty much pga average. If you change settings to firm if max firmess the ball bounds and bounds and you can get 30 or 40 yards of bounce and roll.

 

It seems over the last few years people have got used to having NO options and here we are providing people with LOTS of them

 

Don't be satisfied with defaults, experiment and I'm sure there will be a setting you like. Personally I like firmness 6 and stimp 12, feels very realistic to me compared to what I'm used to in real life.