Jump to content


Photo

swings


  • Please log in to reply
210 replies to this topic

#101 Golden Bear

Golden Bear

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 853 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:14 AM

mebby, on 07 Mar 2016 - 04:13 AM, said:

Hahaha! Them is fightin' words!!!

You guys crack me up. :)



#102 bortimus

bortimus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,234 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:15 AM

Golden Bear, on 07 Mar 2016 - 04:08 AM, said:

Some like tlvx seem to be taking this personally.   That is my sole intended purpose debating in this thread, the betterment of the game for all.  I live for online play and have over 1800 hours so far so I do know how the online lobby has transpired very well.  Let this wait until there is more than 100 players  on a given day.  With more players the inevitable splitting of the lobby would then not induce the feared waiting for minutes to get a round going syndrome.

Fair enough GB.  I can see where everyone is coming from. Agree to disagree on a few points but no big deal.  

 

Just saying there's a few (maybe more!) players who would be enticed to play online more often with a few different options.  


  • Golden Bear likes this

#103 sirputterman

sirputterman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:17 AM

And sadly as usual when all the points have been exhausted it turns into something more personal just trying to make a point.

I have said my peace on the subject and I will make it clear of my stance. 1) As of right now I just don't see it as a priority and certainly not a thing that needs to pushed to the front of "things that need to be added" 2) If the online game grows to a point that there is plenty of games to chose from then fine have a look at it at that time. 3) When the game is released and there is enough demand for this option then again I have no issue with it being added but not at the expense of the general improvement of the game as first  in either new features or bugs being fixed.

That is how I feel but that is only my opinion.  


  • mebby likes this

#104 Golden Bear

Golden Bear

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 853 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:20 AM

@ tlvx   "Believe me, this is not personal to me.

 

It's clearly personal to you though. You are the one that seems to have a problem figuring out how to play the game on one of the five levels offered."

 

Do you not realize you have said that same thing to me multiple times and it is being personal?  I can play the game on all levels and have experimented on every max/max part of settings in all combos possible.   So in the future if you are going to say it is not personal to you please do not put your foot in your mouth in the very same post.  You can disagree with my take on the subject and that is fine.  Just do it like everyone else in a professional manner without the foolish personal attacks that make the sender lose credibility.



#105 mebby

mebby

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,517 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:21 AM

sirputterman, on 07 Mar 2016 - 04:17 AM, said:

And sadly as usual when all the points have been exhausted it turns into something more personal just trying to make a point.
I have said my peace on the subject and I will make it clear of my stance. 1) As of right now I just don't see it as a priority and certainly not a thing that needs to pushed to the front of "things that need to be added" 2) If the online game grows to a point that there is plenty of games to chose from then fine have a look at it at that time. 3) When the game is released and there is enough demand for this option then again I have no issue with it being added but not at the expense of the general improvement of the game as first  in either new features or bugs being fixed.
That is how I feel but that is only my opinion.


Agree that all points have been made. It was a good discussion.

We can probably have a mod lock it up now before it spins out of control! Thanks for keeping things civil!

Steam Name: Turnerm05

Swing Type: RTSC | Tour Pro | XB1 Wireless

 

Intel i7 4790K 4.0GHz

GTX 1080 Founders Edition

16GB DDR3

1 TB Samsung 850 EVO


#106 bortimus

bortimus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,234 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:21 AM

sirputterman, on 07 Mar 2016 - 04:17 AM, said:

And sadly as usual when all the points have been exhausted it turns into something more personal just trying to make a point.

I have said my peace on the subject and I will make it clear of my stance. 1) As of right now I just don't see it as a priority and certainly not a thing that needs to pushed to the front of "things that need to be added" 2) If the online game grows to a point that there is plenty of games to chose from then fine have a look at it at that time. 3) When the game is released and there is enough demand for this option then again I have no issue with it being added but not at the expense of the general improvement of the game as first  in either new features or bugs being fixed.

That is how I feel but that is only my opinion.  

I agree, nothing personal.  Not a priority for me either.  

 

I would like to see it tried at some point and see if it has merit.  



#107 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:23 AM

Golden Bear, on 07 Mar 2016 - 04:20 AM, said:

Do you not realize you have said that same thing to me multiple times and it is being personal? I can play the game on all levels and have experimented on every max/max part of settings in all combos possible. So in the future if you are going to say it is not personal to you please do not put your foot in your mouth in the very same post. You can disagree with my take on the subject and that is fine. Just do it like everyone else in a professional manner without the foolish personal attacks that make the sender lose credibility.[/background][/font]


If you can play on all the levels... than prove it by doing it.

Stop attacking everyone that wants to have a level playing field as somehow automatically, "arrogant," or having a, "win at all costs attitude."

That's utter nonsense.

Stop arguing against options for other player's preferences, that would add to the quality of their experience, while taking nothing away from anyone else.

Learn how to play more than just one setting, competently, instead of pigeon-holing yourself to settings that aren't even included in one of the five default difficulty options.

Or, just keep doing what you've been doing. But, that's your problem. Not anyone else's.

#108 mebby

mebby

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,517 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:24 AM

bortimus, on 07 Mar 2016 - 04:21 AM, said:

I agree, nothing personal.  Not a priority for me either.  
 
I would like to see it tried at some point and see if it has merit.


Maybe a good idea for a poll but... We know that that thread will just turn into a (likely more passionate) version of this thread! LOL

Steam Name: Turnerm05

Swing Type: RTSC | Tour Pro | XB1 Wireless

 

Intel i7 4790K 4.0GHz

GTX 1080 Founders Edition

16GB DDR3

1 TB Samsung 850 EVO


#109 bortimus

bortimus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,234 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:26 AM

mebby, on 07 Mar 2016 - 04:24 AM, said:

Maybe a good idea for a poll but... We know that that thread will just turn into a (likely more passionate) version of this thread! LOL

Yeah it done blowed up in here  :blink:

 

Good discussion though


  • mebby likes this

#110 Golden Bear

Golden Bear

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 853 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:50 AM

sirputterman, on 07 Mar 2016 - 04:17 AM, said:

And sadly as usual when all the points have been exhausted it turns into something more personal just trying to make a point.

I have said my peace on the subject and I will make it clear of my stance. 1) As of right now I just don't see it as a priority and certainly not a thing that needs to pushed to the front of "things that need to be added" 2) If the online game grows to a point that there is plenty of games to chose from then fine have a look at it at that time. 3) When the game is released and there is enough demand for this option then again I have no issue with it being added but not at the expense of the general improvement of the game as first  in either new features or bugs being fixed.

That is how I feel but that is only my opinion.  

I used my daily quota of likes up already.  Strange that there is a limit on them.  I like this post, haha.   :)



#111 Golden Bear

Golden Bear

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 853 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:52 AM

bortimus, on 07 Mar 2016 - 04:26 AM, said:

Yeah it done blowed up in here  :blink:

 

Good discussion though

Git 'er done!  



#112 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 05:14 AM

sirputterman, on 07 Mar 2016 - 03:49 AM, said:

Sadly there are physical limitations even in a video game. Age, injuries, disabilities can all effect what method we have to use to play. I'm not one of these people but they do exist and they too do enjoy playing this game. I would certainly be against anything that would not allow anyone to be able to join a game just because they did have one of the situations I mentioned excluding them from playing any game.  

 

So, this is all the more reason to have more options.

 

The point is that everyone has to start out with the same potential in multiplayer video games.

 

Whether a given user actually has the free time that would afford them the ability to realize this potential, is just a fact of their own life.

 

It's not like a video golf game can actually test each and every user's actual real life golf handicap before creating their in-game character.

 

Nor can a golf simulator verify who it is that is actually swinging the club.

 

So, we all start out with the same potential.

 

If there's a legitimate reason for each user to start with varied potentials regarding non-simulator video golf... I'd like to know what it is.

 

The only reason I know of, that has been actually used to determine varied potential in multiplayer video games, is money.

 

But, whether such an enterprise, is legitimate... is debatable. It's certainly not ever going to be *fair* to promote the ability to pay to boost one's own video game attributes over others.

 

It certainly may be fair to have financial advantages in terms of real world golf access; but, having money to burn is not going to be fair within an arbitrary video golf environment.

 

So, what other reason is there?



#113 frank70

frank70

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,538 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 07 March 2016 - 09:11 AM

Golden Bear, on 07 Mar 2016 - 03:26 AM, said:

If there were 1000's or at least 100's of players online what you suggest would be viable.  But until such a day exists, what I and others profess will become factual.  There will be waiting games for all in online lobbies.

 

It would be nice to just once not have this game pandering to those who want every single option their way.  Some do not seem concerned that they are sucking the joy out of this for others.

 

One person had the audacity in a post to request that 3 click be done away with.  This person seems concerned not  with the enjoyment of those with handicaps who would find mouse swings too difficult to use.  It is this selfish attitude that seems to be haunting this forum now with one side wanting it all and not wanting to compromise for others one single bit. 

 

If there is such a demand for rounds where every little thing is preset for all, then it should be a cakewalk to find like minded players for a group.  The honour system would be used.  If one is not willing to use the honour system with those they play with, I suggest finding players you do trust.

 

Some will disagree with my post and that is fine.  Yet it is how I and some others feel.  Winning is never important while playing a game, only fun is.  Those who want these options mentioned in these posts are very concerned about winning or what they perceive as a fair chance of winning.  There is no other way to look at this.  Otherwise players would simply load up a round for all to play and simply have a good time.  I have found 127 friends who think this way in the game.  So we are out there too.

GB, i think you are missing one point: You say, that video games are only about fun. But fun can be had in quite different ways - it is a very subjective thing. You are a passionate multiplayer - i am not. I really like to play in tournaments and be competitive and i am waiting for a career mode. So: No matter how the devs set up the lobby .... i will not play that often in it, because i like other modes of the game better and i do not have endless time playing the game. Guys who do not want to play against different swing styles or different difficulty levels .... probably do not play with you right now. You won't lose them as potential players if they get a seperate lobby - you never really had them.

 

It's just one thing i don't like with your posts: You claim to know what fun is and you think you are the speaker of 85 % of the players. How many copies have been sold until today? More than 10.000. And you see at best 100+ guys in the multiplayer lobby. How can you be so sure, that you speak for the majority? The numbers don't back it up. It rather seems that a lot of guys don't like playing multiplayer. 

 

So people have every right in the world to make suggestions for changes within the game. I want more realism in the physics and with the scrambling/putting and couldn't care less about multiplayer. And every time me or others are posting about things you and Dennis Harris jump all over us, criticizing us of overanalyzing. What do you defend? Sometimes i just lose you within your argumentation.

 

You want all difficulty levels and all swing mechanics in one field. Point is, that these options are in the game on purpose - to give the players a chance to play the game differently. And if they want to play the game with other people who made the same choice of options: Why is this a bad thing? Your approach "all players in one big pot" is the TGC approach. And you are doing everything to take away options from players - options that are in the game by design.

 

Why is that? 



#114 MimicPS

MimicPS

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 517 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 09:37 AM

A couple of points on 'multiplayer' and visible players in the lobby....

 

You can, in fact, open a solo player game and invite friends on your list, thus negating the visibility of games within the lobby area....

 

and furthermore to this, you can also close the #Global chat area and never actually show up on the lobby list.

 

Both of these factors make it rather difficult for anyone but the dev team, with access to server traffic statistics, to accurately give a figure on how many players are actually playing the game and in which manner, be it multiplayer or solo.



#115 Armand

Armand

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,399 posts
  • LocationCalgary

Posted 07 March 2016 - 02:49 PM

Wow, a lot of posts to catch up on in this thread!  The discussion has pretty much ended, but I'd still like to comment with my thoughts.  And in fear of stirring up any issues, here goes ....

 

Oftentimes, I felt like both sides were making points that supported the opposite opinion than what they were supporting.  In my view/summary, I don't think anyone is saying that there shouldn't be more lobbies or groups of like-minded players (those who play with the same settings).  At the moment, there aren't the numbers of players in the lobby to justify the "segregation" into such groups of like-minded players.  If I recall correctly, GB doesn't play in tournaments - his choice for fun is multi-player, pick-up games in the lobby.  I think if a group of "anything goes" players existed along with the "RTSC, no aids only" group, then all would be satisfied.  But only if there are sufficient players in each group to easily find pick-up games.

 

For tournaments, I can see why some players want all to be on the same level - the winner is thus identified as the "best virtual golfer" for that week.  For me, I'd like to play tournaments at my preferred level of play (which is Tour Pro and turning off all aids) - even if the tournament is set for beginner or hacker or amateur or Pro level.  So, I guess you could say I'm of similar opinion to GB, but I also have no issue being set at a "disadvantage" against the majority of the field.  If can't play at my desired settings, I'll choose to play solo rather than in such tournaments (and note that some players don't get much enjoyment playing solo, they may choose to not play at all).


  • AwYea, mebby and Golden Bear like this

#116 AwYea

AwYea

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 274 posts
  • LocationWest Virginia

Posted 07 March 2016 - 03:05 PM

Armand, on 07 Mar 2016 - 2:49 PM, said:

Oftentimes, I felt like both sides were making points that supported the opposite opinion than what they were supporting.  In my view/summary, I don't think anyone is saying that there shouldn't be more lobbies or groups of like-minded players (those who play with the same settings).  At the moment, there aren't the numbers of players in the lobby to justify the "segregation" into such groups of like-minded players.  If I recall correctly, GB doesn't play in tournaments - his choice for fun is multi-player, pick-up games in the lobby.  I think if a group of "anything goes" players existed along with the "RTSC, no aids only" group, then all would be satisfied.  But only if there are sufficient players in each group to easily find pick-up games.

 

I've flipped flopped. I'm steady set now, especially since it's still early, letting as many play together as possible to figure things out. I do think 3C and RTS-C will have to be seperated, but  i can see in the future RTS-M-TP's, the very best playing with 3C.

 

My problem was going to OGT and playing that 1st tourney, had a blast, but i didn't know exactly what the API was doing and what admins were having to do to track everything so beautifully.  I got an idea now, didn't DL the API, but read pdf. I would just love for auto-scoring to be implemented for solo or mp rounds. I know that's not high priority right now and other things deserve precedent. 


PG + OGT & MP = Golfing Bliss! 

Steam-ahhyeaa


#117 mebby

mebby

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,517 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 07 March 2016 - 03:07 PM

Armand, on 07 Mar 2016 - 2:49 PM, said:

Wow, a lot of posts to catch up on in this thread!  The discussion has pretty much ended, but I'd still like to comment with my thoughts.  And in fear of stirring up any issues, here goes ....

 

Oftentimes, I felt like both sides were making points that supported the opposite opinion than what they were supporting.  In my view/summary, I don't think anyone is saying that there shouldn't be more lobbies or groups of like-minded players (those who play with the same settings).  At the moment, there aren't the numbers of players in the lobby to justify the "segregation" into such groups of like-minded players.  If I recall correctly, GB doesn't play in tournaments - his choice for fun is multi-player, pick-up games in the lobby.  I think if a group of "anything goes" players existed along with the "RTSC, no aids only" group, then all would be satisfied.  But only if there are sufficient players in each group to easily find pick-up games.

 

For tournaments, I can see why some players want all to be on the same level - the winner is thus identified as the "best virtual golfer" for that week.  For me, I'd like to play tournaments at my preferred level of play (which is Tour Pro and turning off all aids) - even if the tournament is set for beginner or hacker or amateur or Pro level.  So, I guess you could say I'm of similar opinion to GB, but I also have no issue being set at a "disadvantage" against the majority of the field.  If can't play at my desired settings, I'll choose to play solo rather than in such tournaments (and note that some players don't get much enjoyment playing solo, they may choose to not play at all).

I completely agree with the underlined section above (and a lot of the rest of your post too btw :)).

 

This very discussion is completely circular because both sets of people want to play with like minded individuals ultimately.  Although... to your point and also to GB's point - I, personally, would be fine playing the occassional pick up game with anyone of any skill level using any mix of assists while I played on TP with all assists off.  That's still fun for me as long as my playing partners are decent company. 

 

But I think the reality is that most people enjoy playing with others of a similar skill level using similar settings... but I could be wrong.


Steam Name: Turnerm05

Swing Type: RTSC | Tour Pro | XB1 Wireless

 

Intel i7 4790K 4.0GHz

GTX 1080 Founders Edition

16GB DDR3

1 TB Samsung 850 EVO


#118 frank70

frank70

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,538 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 07 March 2016 - 03:12 PM

AwYea, on 07 Mar 2016 - 3:05 PM, said:

I do think 3C and RTS-C will have to be seperated, but  i can see in the future RTS-M-TP's, the very best playing with 3C.

I can't see that at all. One plays without meter, with the need of a certain swing ratio - and the other has a meter (a slow one compared to other games) and hasn't to bother with a combination of rhythm, swing plane, ratio and mishits. Especially with the short game and putting 3-click will be easier by design. You want to play exactly a 60% shot? Good luck with the RTS-M. With 3-click? You see it right on the screen, when 60% is reached.

 

I can see MS and 3-click playing together with some sort of parity - but not RTS-M and 3-click.



#119 Golden Bear

Golden Bear

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 853 posts

Posted 07 March 2016 - 03:28 PM

@ Frank70   "It's just one thing i don't like with your posts: You claim to know what fun is and you think you are the speaker of 85 % of the players."

 

I think you need to reread the post where someone said they speak for this 85% as it was not me.

 

"So people have every right in the world to make suggestions for changes within the game. I want more realism in the physics and with the scrambling/putting and couldn't care less about multiplayer. And every time me or others are posting about things you and Dennis Harris jump all over us, criticizing us of overanalyzing. What do you defend? Sometimes i just lose you within your argumentation."

 

You have been told by more than Dennis and I that you should not try to compare real life scoring stats to that in a video game but did continue with all the novels on stats tracking etc.  

 

Why is that?  We obviously will never see eye to eye and that is fine.



#120 sandybunker

sandybunker

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 07 March 2016 - 04:17 PM

3 clickers don't have take a slaughtering from the other swing types on here. You are lucky if I hit that snap at six o'clock ten times in a round on pro or tour pro. Its not particularly easy. Line up a 15 footer on a totally flat green and miss that snap a fraction and the putt veers off target. There's hardly a straight hit throughout an entire round at those settings so this my swings harder than yours is getting a bit tedious.
  • sirputterman, Golden Bear and stringb like this

I7 3770k

8GB RAM

Nvidia GTX 670

240GB SAMSUNG EVO SSD





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users