83 replies to this topic

[NoPutt]

I think they nailed the name Perfect Golf,

now if they had called it Perfect Water,

I may have something to complain about.

[Buck]

I think they nailed the name Perfect Golf,
now if they had called it Perfect Water,
I may have something to complain about.

My golf game frequently involves water

[NoPutt]

Hehe, Mine too, I keep a variety of splash

sounds handy when designing. Hopefully one

day we will be able to have a skipping contest,

I plan to excel in that.

[mebby]

I agree with Buck. If TGC can have reasonable reflections without a reduction in frame rate it seems like PG should as well.

[Dazmaniac]

True, TGC is not perfect. Still, I'd like the reflections to have some basis in reality. What on earth is being reflected in this screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/kwpuCGU.jpg

I wasn't defending PG reflections in my post, just highlighting that while TGC has better reflections they are a tad too mirror line.

It's one annoyance I have with PG that the stock reflection that is applied has no relation to the surrounding terrain and looks bad.

[nightowl]

How much is the frame rate hit?  To my knowledge, no one has provided actual numbers.  Is it (roughly) 5 fps, 10, 20? 

[Armand]

Are we able to skip the ball on the water's surface?  I doubt it ... but hopefully it comes to us one day. 

[Acrilix]

For the most part I don't mind PG's reflections at all. The one exception is when you get those like nightowl posted with the giant tree trunks?!

[Buck]

For the most part I don't mind PG's reflections at all. The one exception is when you get those like nightowl posted with the giant tree trunks?!

 

They aren't reflections at all - It's just a really unconvincing fill of colors that is consistently "wrong" looking.  Also note how the sky colors aren't even close a lot of the time too...(which you'd think would be low hanging fruit...)

 

To me, the Water & the lack of any thickness to the rough grasses (the 'ol volumetric grass thing) are the big standouts where the game is falling short visually still.

[MERACE]

I'm wondering if the requirement of having a DirectX 11.0 compatible graphics card is the reason reflective water is an option in TGC and not PG?


-MERACE

[JoeF]

Or is reflective water the reason why I can't above 15 - 20 fps at the High setting in TGC while I can run PG at Ultra High with everything maxed out?

[mebby]

Or is reflective water the reason why I can't above 15 - 20 fps at the High setting in TGC while I can run PG at Ultra High with everything maxed out?

I can run TGC at the highest settings and still get about 60 fps. Using Nvidia 970 GPU.

[JoeF]

I can run TGC at the highest settings and still get about 60 fps. Using Nvidia 970 GPU.

I'm using an Nvidia 960.

[Buck]

I can run TGC at 60fps in 4k with room to spare. Water doesn't seem to be holding it back on my system.

[nightowl]

I'm not holding my breath that anything will change.  IIRC, the developers mentioned having to prioritize things (i.e., integrating the new animations took precedence over making reflections look better) -- though, notably, without committing to making reflections look better.  I won't belabor the point (more than I already have) except to point to another ludicrous example:  http://www.perfectpa...ing-on/?p=48560

 

Regardless, I'm pleased with the many improvements to PG during EA.  It's the best golf sim available, IMO -- and will only get better! 

[mebby]

I'm not holding my breath that anything will change.  IIRC, the developers mentioned having to prioritize things (i.e., integrating the new animations took precedence over making reflections look better) -- though, notably, without committing to making reflections look better.  I won't belabor the point (more than I already have) except to point to another ludicrous example:  http://www.perfectpa...ing-on/?p=48560

 

Regardless, I'm pleased with the many improvements to PG during EA.  It's the best golf sim available, IMO -- and will only get better! 

Yes - definitely.  It's the real deal as far as golf games go.  No doubt there.  I think the devs understand that the only reason we are always pushing for more is because it's just so damn good to begin with.  Seems counter intuitive to think that way but it's true...

[DoGgs]

AMD A10 4.4gh

R9 280x

8gb Ram

Asus gamer MB

TGC chugs at detail 4 and 5 in game but performs better in GNCD

PG performs well enough on high settings in game,but course forge and unity is chugging real bad after only 9 holes built, it's so bad i am considering  leaving my latest track as a 9 holer, it seems to get slower after each hole, god knows what it will be like if i do get to 18.

[Griz891]

I'm pretty content with the course designer for TGC. Course Forge, the more I keep hearing about it and all you need to learn, the less interested I am. Just what DoGgz is experiencing with it so far, sounds to me like it's going to be hard pressed to design a course with the stress it puts on your PC. Not to mention having to learn how unity works. I just don't feel very confident that myself or my PC is going to be able to handle it. The GNCD works great on my PC and it's alot of fun to mess around with which keeps me occupied for now. Winters in Montana....You have to have some kind of hobby to pass the time....LOL

[DoGgs]

I guess it depends on ur spec griz...my cpu is what holds me back i think!  but when you look at whats going on in unity and CF surely i should be able to have it running pretty well considering my spec, or is it a case of unity not being optimised enough to cater for anything but high end machines.   I fondly remember creating a few courses with the course architect in PGA 2000 and its not a million miles away from CF, saying that i think unity is the problem, and nothing to do with CF, either way it does not bode well for people looking to create, unless of course you have a high end machine.

[Griz891]

I guess it depends on ur spec griz...my cpu is what holds me back i think!  but when you look at whats going on in unity and CF surely i should be able to have it running pretty well considering my spec, or is it a case of unity not being optimised enough to cater for anything but high end machines.   I fondly remember creating a few courses with the course architect in PGA 2000 and its not a million miles away from CF, saying that i think unity is the problem, and nothing to do with CF, either way it does not bode well for people looking to create, unless of course you have a high end machine.

I remember designing on PGA2000. My computer has a Nvidia GeForce 750TI so I doubt it would do the job for CF. Your probably right, it's probably Unity that's dragging things down. I thought TGC's course designer was equipped with unity, or is that just the game?