174 replies to this topic

[frank70]

The stats over at OGT speak for themselves:

 

The best players on tour pro average 24-25 putts per round (4-5 strokes better than the best players on the PGA tour). And the best in the game putt 0.25-0.30 putts/GIR better than the best putter in the world - Jordan Spieth.

 

As we are in early access, for me this part of the game needs serious work, when we want to have a sim down the line on the highest difficulty level.

 

As all shots putting has to be divided into preparation and execution. That is very important, because it would be rather lazy to get the stats in line with only changing one of these elements.

 

Preparation: You have to read the line and you have to get a feeling how much power is needed to get the ball to the hole. In real life you look at the conturs of the green, the grain and you go around the putt to get an idea how much the putt is uphill or downhill.

 

In the game we have the BLI or the Grid ...... and both have way, way too much information. Both have every "pimple" of the green layed out in front of you. So there never ever is a uncertainty about the break. In real life even the top pros sometimes misread a putt, especially when it is longer than 10 feet.

 

Possible solution: Taking away the Grid or the BLI and the uphill/downhill information on tour pro would be a possible solution. But then we would have less information than in real life because on a 2d monitor and with the current grass textures it is not easy to see the lines (especially on shorter putts).

 

Some other options to discuss:

• a special green cam with better grass textures (nvidia turf?)
• a special green cam without any grass. Just the terrain.
• a "fuzzy" green reading. Grid cells farher away from another. BLI information only every 2 feet.
• thermo/coloured green reading. Severe breaks are red (uphill) and blue (downhill). Subtle breaks would be in a greyish colour. This way it would be more difficult and sometimes a little guessing game (as in real life) to read the exact break. 

 

Execution:

 

I am a mouse swinger and can say: It isn't easy at all to get the ball away from the blade on a straight line. Mike stated that they will implement a timing factor into the putting (probably with a ratio like in the long game). Of course i will try it out but i believe that a lot of putts will not be played straight then. I don't know if this is a realistic represenation of a a golf pro. I can of course not give an exact number, but i don't think that pros push or pull 50% of their putts. I would try a timimg factor because it represents the putting motion better than the current implementation but the penalty for mistiming it slightly or missing a straight line with the motion should be reduced then.

 

For me the biggest problem is the abundance of 100 % information in reading the putt. The difficulty of execution is absolutely okay at the current state of the game.

[MimicPS]

Good discussion point Frank.

 

Also a MotionSwinger here. For me in my real-life game, I am much better at reading a green than I am at actually being able to exectute the putt in terms of pace and delivery off of the clubface. I think that would be the same for many, but from experience both in computer golfing and real-life, I know also the inverse is true too, where someone is more consistent in their putting stroke and yet can't read a green for toffee!

 

I think the concept of 'fuzzy' info is a good one, and one I would very much like to see built into the games absolute top level. In the same way I would life to see the rough offer way less hard 'info' and instead rely on knowledge and experience, I think that putting could also benefit from the same to make it a real discipline to be constantly practiced and mastered.

 

My absolute preferred option would be to have the green reading as we do at present with the free cam, lose the grids and BLI at Tour Pro (Elite) level, and also dispense with the meter. I would like the player to be able to use the cam quickly and easily along the putt's axis, from behind the player's line all the way through to beyond the hole, and the whole delivery is performed by feel.

 

I also agree with the dev team idea that tempo should play a part, but this MUST be a 1:1 ratio or slightly adjustable from that point according to how a player feels to recreate the 'shoulder-rock' nature of the putt. It absolutely cannot maintain the same strike ratio of the normal swing of an iron or wood.

 

I think we'd see much more realistic stats then, and if you didn't keep up with the regular discipline of practice such a putting style would require then personal stats would fall away accordingly.

[frank70]

Yeah, fuzzy information (graphical!!!) in the rough would be huge.

 

But first and foremost, the devs really have to look at the short game. The stats at OGT say it all. Chips should roll wayyyyy longer out of the rough. And flops and bunker shots as well. This part of the game is simply not realistic, but i haven't heard any opinion by Mike or Andrew about that.

 

Right now there simply is probably no place on the course from where you cannot get up and down. I sometimes play purposely in the greenside bunker on the par 5s instead of leaving myself a 50-60 footer on the green. The average PGA Tour professional converts 50% (!!!!) sand saves, the best around 60 %. The best PGA players convert around 68 % of their scrambling attempts, the average 58 %.

 

In the real game scrambling and putting sets apart the very best from the best ..... in Perfect Golf so far it is kind of an equalizer.

[Mike Jones]

I agree minor tweaking is needed at tour pro level and I have already suggested one of the ways we are going to do it.

 

Real tour pros play at stimp 12 -14. Most OGT tournaments are not played with those settings. I would like to see some stats from OGT with 13-14 stimp tournaments on some courses based on real world tour venues - we have some

[frank70]

You are right Mike, the higher stimps certainly will play a role in the stats.

 

But don't you think, that we have "too perfect information" compared to real life (reading the line)? A misread of a putt is impossible. I would love the element of sometimes guessing in which way the putt will break in the game.

 

P.S.: Then you should tell the guys at OGT to setup the next tournaments with no stimp under 13  . But don't mix that up with windy and hard conditions .....

 

P.P.S.: Mike, have you seen my 4 little videos in the "scrambling too easy?"-thread? What do you think about it? The ratio flight/roll is more like 1 to 4 or 1 to 5 in this videos. In the game it's more 1 to 2 or 1 to 3 (out of the rough). 

[Crow357]

What about like a "green reading mode" where you can see the approximations of the slopes, but no hard numbers, then this mode disappears when you go to aim?  And no mouse aiming, all you can do is turn your golfer?  This could be put in with the F5 cam perhaps.

[Mike Jones]

You are right Mike, the higher stimps certainly will play a roll in the stats.

 

But don't you think, that we have "too perfect information" compared to real life (reading the line)? A misread of a putt is impossible. I would love the element of sometimes guessing in which way the putt will break in the game.

 

 

I guess you can play without the grids or BLI but in all seriousness how many people would really want to play like that? You might find a dozen people.

 

At some point you have to realize that most people don't want to work too hard even at tour pro level and that again for most people TP is all the difficulty they can handle.

 

We can't and wont' make the game for just a few elite players and like I mentioned above you have the ability to make it harder by reducing your information and upping the stimps to real life levels. I'd be interested to see what the stats would be in a scenario for that across the entire field.

[frank70]

We can't and wont' make the game for just a few elite players and like I mentioned above you have the ability to make it harder by reducing your information and upping the stimps to real life levels. I'd be interested to see what the stats would be in a scenario for that across the entire field.

 

That's right, the bigger audience is almost the most important one. I am just putting up ideas to make the game as much sim as possible ... for the people who like to play it that way. Nailing the complexity of golf - the different elements of decision making and execution - is the biggest weakness of all golf games we know that far. So imho exactly there lies a chance for PG to stand alone in the competition.

 

Putting: Problem is, that the information without Grid or BLI is worse than in real life. So, something in between would be perfect. And all this would only be an option in the highest difficulty level. Maybe you could call it sim mode.

[highfade]

That's right, the bigger audience is almost the most important one. I am just putting up ideas to make the game as much sim as possible ... for the people who like to play it that way. Nailing the complexity of golf - the different elements of decision making and execution - is the biggest weakness of all golf games we know that far. So imho exactly there lies a chance for PG to stand alone in the competition.

 

Putting: Problem is, that the information without Grid or BLI is worse than in real life. So, something in between would be perfect. And all this would only be an option in the highest difficulty level. Maybe you could call it sim mode.

 

I agree with most of what you say and also like the idea of fuzzy info but not taking it away altogether. One of the biggest fails on tourpro imo is the wind, taking judging the wind out and replace it with rolling a dice info, bad idea. 

[MimicPS]

Ok.... how's this for 'fuzzy'?.... have the grid or BLI but make it so the grid cannot be 'enhanced' to increase the information given by reducing grid square size, and that the BLI gives putt break direction but no indication of severity of slope. A sort of 'semi-blind' fuzzy putting aid.

[neveready4]

There are always a lot of people that think every portion of this game is not tough enough. I suggest that another level be created that have to play with their monitors turned off. That should solve their problem of the game not being difficult enough.

[mebby]

There are always a lot of people that think every portion of this game is not tough enough. I suggest that another level be created that have to play with their monitors turned off. That should solve their problem of the game not being difficult enough.

Just because a higher difficulty level isn't for you doesn't mean it doesn't have merit.  Difficulty levels are an option after all right?

[bobbywins22]

Putting in this game really is too easy and does need to be addressed at some point - the guys on this forum who also play the other golf Sim if they are honest will will agree that that their putting system is a lot harder and more realistic - food for thought ?

[frank70]

There are always a lot of people that think every portion of this game is not tough enough. I suggest that another level be created that have to play with their monitors turned off. That should solve their problem of the game not being difficult enough.

It has nothing to do with "not tough enough". Scores are just numbers. To ask how this scores are achieved is the question the devs of every sport sim has to ask themselves. When the average putts per round number in the most difficult level in the game is 4-5 strokes lower than the number the best putter in the world puts up, this is an indication that this element of the game is not quite right.

 

But maybe Mike is right, that putting on real courses with stimps of 13 and 14 brings the numbers better in line. The current tournament in Chicago Oaks though isn't a good indicator. The rounds are setup with gusty, gusty, windy, windy conditions - not many tournaments in real life are played under these conditions on Parkland Courses. So, the shots into the green are really hard to gauge. The putts are getting longer - therefore the statistical numbers are piling up a little bit.

[mebby]

It has nothing to do with "not tough enough". Scores are just numbers. To ask how this scores are achieved is the question the devs of every sport sim has to ask themselves. When the average putts per round number in the most difficult level in the game is 4-5 strokes lower than the number the best putter in the world puts up, this is an indication that this element of the game is not quite right.

 

But maybe Mike is right, that putting on real courses with stimps of 13 and 14 brings the numbers better in line. The current tournament in Chicago Oaks though isn't a good indicator. The rounds are setup with gusty, gusty, windy, windy conditions - not many tournaments in real life are played under these conditions on Parkland Courses. So, the shots into the green are really hard to gauge. The putts are getting longer - therefore the statistical numbers are piling up a little bit.

Oddly enough... I putt better on higher stimps (say 12) than lower stimps (anything 10 and below).  The exception was in the PGA Tournament with a stimp of 8 and soft conditions because I could easily fire the ball right at the pin for consistently short birdie putts.

 

A 14 stimp is going to be difficult no matter what.  But I constantly leave putts short on lower stimps (10 and below) as I can't seem to program my brain to hit the ball hard enough.

[neveready4]

The best putter in the world is playing for millions of dollars and we are playing for fun. Maybe he has a little more stress on him than we do. I guarantee you that his putting average is better than mine is.

[Sliceapottomus]

Agreed  higher stimp makes putting harder. I for one would not want it to get any harder. I just normaly dont play lower stimp games unless they are a tourney... maybe the guys with the low putt stats are just throwing darts and have 2 foot putts all the time.... again there will be some things you cant replicate here on a computer game exactly as it is in real life. even if you could you'd still have people arguing over it ....... people want to compare real life stats with computer golf stats, sure thats fine go ahead but your not comparing apples to apples. real life stats are not achieved with a mouse in hand.......that being said I still applaud PP for the job they are doing in trying replicate a real round of golf. to those clicking and true swinging you are not really playing a simulation unless you are swinging a club. 

[DennisHarris]

First and formost putting stats for a computer golf sim will never be equal to PGA Tour IRL stats. The reason is simple, greens in real life have grain to deal with, various other imperfections, like spike marks, ball hitting green indentations, and other wear and tear that a computer based sim can not duplicate.   Sim greens are pristine 24 hours and 7 days a week.  Can this sim create natural breaks towards water?  No it can not at this time.  So this sims putting stats should naturally be better than real life PGA Tour stats. 

The Perfect Golf game is top shelf.  Why take the game over the top as some seem to want.   

[Acrilix]

First and formost putting stats for a computer golf sim will never be equal to PGA Tour IRL stats. The reason is simple, greens in real life have grain to deal with, various other imperfections, like spike marks, ball hitting green indentations, and other wear and tear that a computer based sim can not duplicate.   Sim greens are pristine 24 hours and 7 days a week.  Can this sim create natural breaks towards water?  No it can not at this time.  So this sims putting stats should naturally be better than real life PGA Tour stats. 

The Perfect Golf game is top shelf.  Why take the game over the top as some seem to want.   

 

I don't agree with this at all. It is perfectly possible to simulate all the imperfections. The problem for a dev would be getting game players to accept them. Most game players are very anti-randomness in a game of skill. They want to feel that if they pull off the perfect shot that they will be rewarded by the perfect result. The market, time, and resources dictate what is included in a game or sim - not what is possible.

[Golden Bear]

I agree minor tweaking is needed at tour pro level and I have already suggested one of the ways we are going to do it.

 

Real tour pros play at stimp 12 -14. Most OGT tournaments are not played with those settings. I would like to see some stats from OGT with 13-14 stimp tournaments on some courses based on real world tour venues - we have some

 

Great point on the stimp level.  Yet here most who play the hardest settings are always on 10 stimp exclusively, medium pins and calm winds always.  Heck...I now have to set all round I want to play in since the 1.3.7 version was implemented because almost all rounds by anyone I see are always these exact settings.  With all the options to change things up on setting courses with a scarce few like myself using them drives me nuts.  Raising the stimp level, using hardest pins and hard fairways and greens make scoring a low round much more difficult on their own than using easy course settings and higher difficulty settings aka pro and tour pro ever will.

 

ps...Here is a suggestion I cannot believe no one has yet brought up.  There should be no gimmes allowed at the pro and tour pro levels.  All here speaking of simulating the pros know that there is no such thing as a gimme when they play.  Imo gimmes should not be in the game whatsoever.  Any takers on this important point?