30 replies to this topic

[Richard]

Buck, I don't believe that the Dev's want ideas from some other game.

They have their own ideas about how they want this game to be.

Plus suggestions from this community whom want to play PG.

 

I sure the developers follow the competition. It's a standard business practice. These guys have been around awhile and that's why we have the quality game today and it will only get better.

[lefty1948]

Agree 100% Richard.

[tlvx]

I was watching some twitch footage of ea's new golf game... and, it all looks a bit cartoonish to me. I just didn't feel like I was ever immersed amongst a golf course... even at Chambers Bay.

 

I actually think this game looks better when maxed out. If it doesn't now, it most certainly will by release... which is when a fair comparison can be made.

 

That said, I think the ea game probably plays much smoother on max settings.

[IanK]

I think that both games look good, but different. Can't be any more diplomatic than that. ;-)

[Davefevs]

Just to give a different view, I'm quite keen to see some stuff re Rory. My son has an Xbox, my laptop runs PG stutters even at 800x600, so I'm happy to see some stuff.

I've got EA Access and have just started downloading it.

Graphically, I think. PG looks crisp, and EA looks less crisp, but more real....could be my eyes though.

In terms of gameplay, I suspect the 10 hours test on EA Access might be as far as it goes, but I'm trying to be open minded. It might be good to play less seriously with my son, and PG be the more sim. A new laptop seems a way away, so EA might be a £40 short term fun until the Xbix port.

[Buck]

Graphically, I think. PG looks crisp, and EA looks less crisp, but more real....could be my eyes though.
 

 

This is a really interesting point and was one of the things that really stood out in the shot to shot comparison here.  

 

The distance view of trees/atmosphere in the Rory shot seems to have some atmospheric scattering or lighting magic or "something" happening that gives it a very realistic look (especially the farther from the golfer you get).  

 

Or maybe just more and/or different anti-aliasing perhaps?

 

Perhaps that's something that could come to PG at some point?

[Dazmaniac]

Looking at both screenshots, it seems both games a very different FOV/DOV setting.

 

While the pics are of the same hole, it looks much longer in EARory than the PG offering. Also it appears someone has stood on the EARory left side tee marker as it is half buried in the ground, lol.

 

Also the EARory animation seems to have a rather small head for his body, or is that just me.

[IanK]

Yes, tiny head. I thought the same thing.
I've always thought that golf games in general make holes look longer than they actually are, especially on par 3s. PG redresses that in my opinion.

[Buck]

There are a variety of small differences, agreed, additionally the Rory shot is 10 yards further back as well.

They may have chosen a wider FOV to make the follow cam show you more stuff as you go along, among a lot of reasons to choose one way or the other. (Make it look more expansive/immersive)

In the flight simulation world this is a commonly adjusted setting where you balance realism in the size of objects directly in front of you with the ability to see things in the periphery.

There is no right or wrong answer on the field of view decision as it's a compromise in both directions.

[Dazmaniac]

I think next time around, EA should really consider using EA to help them fine tune their games, lol.

 

Especially if Fistful of Steel's post in the other thread is anything to go by.

 

[marts30]

RMPGA looks washed out to me, overly white. Boring static skies/clouds. PG can look a lot of ways, RMPGA can only look one way. Is there even visible wind effects?