316 replies to this topic

[jt83]

Have you tried it? You don't get a perfect read, but when i play real golf i don't get that neither. There are a lot of putts that behave a little differently than i expected them to do. If you look at it from this angle, playing without BLI or grid might be closer to reality than the 100%-information the Bli gives us.

 

Haven't tried it.  I could, but I don't think it'll be pretty.  The grid saves time and IMO you can't really read a virtual green without a little help.

 

I haven't read the whole thread, but if we're talking about realism, I'd prefer the focus to be on the physics.  At the end of the day it's a game.  If total realism is sought, you have to pick up a club and actually swing at a ball.

[Crow357]

Haven't tried it.  I could, but I don't think it'll be pretty.  The grid saves time and IMO you can't really read a virtual green without a little help.

But there are visual cues.  Since the cup is perfectly vertical, if your golfer is standing on flat ground, the pin will intersect the corner that is formed by your golfers forehead and the cap.  Also, you can see the side slope of the cup by hitting F4 and looking behind.  And, until you try using the F5 cam and "walking" around your putt, you won't believe how much you can see on the surface of the green. 

 

Of course, if all you want to do tho is save time, then this isn't for you.  You'll spend prolly an additional 30 seconds or so reading the putt once you know what to look for.  Takes a round or two to get used to it.

[Steve2golf]

I get playing with no grid, just fail to understand the logic. If I can get the information in 2 seconds or a minute, I prefer 2 seconds.

[Crow357]

I get playing with no grid, just fail to understand the logic. If I can get the information in 2 seconds or a minute, I prefer 2 seconds.

Yes, because its the SAME EXACT information isn't it. 

It's another way of reading the green that isn't as precise.

[frank70]

Do we have changes to the swing mechanics of certain shots/devices in the next patch?

[frank70]

Back to the thread title "A realistic round of golf, an impossible dream".

 

I take another round of a Tour Pro tourney of OGT. This time a round of a very, very good RTS-C player - Divotmaker. I take him, cause he plays with a legit controller. This means he has FIR and GIR stats, we can take seriously. There are quite a few RTS-C-players who hit it 305-310 yards on average of the tee with around 90% accuracy. I hope we see a change to that in the next patch. But until then it makes no sense to look deeper into the scores of those players. Has to have something to do, which controller is used.

 

So, Divotmaker shot an absolutely brilliant -15 in the first round of the RTS-tournament in Massachusetts. No man ever has shot such a low round on any PGA tournament in real life. A round for the ages. But how did he get there?

 

He hit 12/14 fairways. That's 85%. Statistically that's a little high, but he uses the caliber ball (285 yards on average). So this stat is absolutely within a realistic range.

 

He hit 12/18 GIR. 66% - perfectly realistic stat, average on the PGA Tour.

 

With his ballstriking he has set himself up for a average too good round. What happened next?

 

He hit the ball at a proximity of 19,33 feet for his 12 GIR. This stat is not easy to compare to real life stats, cause the PGA only lists proximity to the hole for all approaches, not only for GIR. But 19,33 looks well inside realistic range.

 

Real life chance to make birdie from 19,33 feet is on average 19% (from 15-20 feet) .... but i take Jordan Spieth who made 28% from that range.

 

When Jordan hits 12 greens at a proximity of 19,33, statistically he is making 3,36 birdies. I am generous .... he makes 4.

Divotmaker made 13 ... and an eagle.

Difference: Spieth: under par on 4 holes - Divotmaker: under par on 14 holes. 

 

What about those 6 holes the green was missed?

 

Spieth scrambled for 65% last season. That means he would have made 2 bogeys statistically when he misses 6 greens

 

4 birdies - 2 bogeys. Statistically one of the best players in the game would have shot a 70 - around his scoring average which was 69,47 strokes.

 

Now, Divotmaker made no bogey in 6 scrambling situations.

 

13 birdies, 1 eagle - no bogeys - scored a 57. That he made 5 holeouts in that round (how realistic is that??) played an important part as well.

 

I understand the arguments, that we are only playing a video game and that it is difficult to simulate the difficulty of real golf. But in my example we have a 13 shot difference between real life golf and JNPG. We have seen a 57 scored with an average+ performance tee to green. That's simply too far away from reality to call the game a sim - or more precisely: the scoring of the game.

 

Don't get me wrong: I love, what PP has done that far. The long game is so well balanced in difficulty (sans certain 3rd party controllers). But i think, if PP wants to follow their vision to create a realistic golf sim, big, groundbreaking changes for the short game would be the right way to go.

 

P.S.: @Divotmaker: Great, great round. I know, that you are using a legit controller. You are a great player. But you (and everybody else who breaks 60) shouldn't be that good. I took your round as an example, cause it really showed the inbalance in difficulty (long game/short game) so well. I hope, you are good with that.

[Sliceapottomus]

The pro's use real clubs and have umpteen body parts that have to be in sync to pull off a great shot.

[frank70]

The pro's use real clubs and have umpteen body parts that have to be in sync to pull off a great shot.

I know, that we have a different opinion on that topic. For me, that is no problem at all.

 

But why is the long game so realistic and feels so good and satisfying when you are playing well? If it is possible to transfer/simulate the difficulty of performing a good golf shot for the long game .....  why shouldn't it be possible for the short game?

 

I am really interested in an answer to that question. Right now the line of argument is: It's not possible .. it's a video game. But we all see, that it is possible. See: long game.

[DennisHarris]

Every single discussion on this topic is nothing more than opinion. (including mine I might add)  

I doubt every stat or opinion (including my own) can rightfully be compared to any real PGA tour stats.  PP has already said tweaks to the chipping, pitching are still needed.  So stop already.    Short game tweaks are coming.  Just not fast enough for some.   Just like the course forge for the rank a file members.  Everything gets done eventually.  Wait your turn and stop crying wolf. 

Also - No matter what tweaks are made at TourPro difficulty they trickle down to every other level to.  Soon everyone but a few will be playing pro or lower instead of TourPro.  That is likely reality.    

[frank70]

Every single discussion on this topic is nothing more than opinion. (including mine I might add)  

I doubt every stat or opinion (including my own) can rightfully be compared to any real PGA tour stats.  PP has already said tweaks to the chipping, pitching are still needed.  So stop already.    Short game tweaks are coming.  Just not fast enough for some.   Just like the course forge for the rank a file members.  Everything gets done eventually.  Wait your turn and stop crying wolf. 

Also - No matter what tweaks are made at TourPro difficulty they trickle down to every other level to.  Soon everyone but a few will be playing pro or lower instead of TourPro.  That is likely reality.    

You are right. Tweaks have been announced.

 

I wanted to back up my opinion with numbers. And i am of the opinion that these numbers show, that the changes can not be only little cosmetics (at Tour Pro).

 

P.S.: I dearly hope that most changes only will apply to the higher difficulties. For instance shot execution. The only change for all would be changed physics out of the rough. I wouldn't want other levels than Tour Pro to be effected by change.

[DivotMaker]

Back to the thread title "A realistic round of golf, an impossible dream".

 

I take another round of a Tour Pro tourney of OGT. This time a round of a very, very good RTS-C player - Divotmaker. I take him, cause he plays with a legit controller. This means he has FIR and GIR stats, we can take seriously. There are quite a few RTS-C-players who hit it 305-310 yards on average of the tee with around 90% accuracy. I hope we see a change to that in the next patch. But until then it makes no sense to look deeper into the scores of those players. Has to have something to do, which controller is used.

 

So, Divotmaker shot an absolutely brilliant -15 in the first round of the RTS-tournament in Massachusetts. No man ever has shot such a low round on any PGA tournament in real life. A round for the ages. But how did he get there?

 

He hit 12/14 fairways. That's 85%. Statistically that's a little high, but he uses the caliber ball (285 yards on average). So this stat is absolutely within a realistic range.

 

He hit 12/18 GIR. 66% - perfectly realistic stat, average on the PGA Tour.

 

With his ballstriking he has set himself up for a average too good round. What happened next?

 

He hit the ball at a proximity of 19,33 feet for his 12 GIR. This stat is not easy to compare to real life stats, cause the PGA only lists proximity to the hole for all approaches, not only for GIR. But 19,33 looks well inside realistic range.

 

Real life chance to make birdie from 19,33 feet is on average 19% (from 15-20 feet) .... but i take Jordan Spieth who made 28% from that range.

 

When Jordan hits 12 greens at a proximity of 19,33, statistically he is making 3,36 birdies. I am generous .... he makes 4.

Divotmaker made 13 ... and an eagle.

Difference: Spieth: under par on 4 holes - Divotmaker: under par on 14 holes. 

 

What about those 6 holes the green was missed?

 

Spieth scrambled for 65% last season. That means he would have made 2 bogeys statistically when he misses 6 greens

 

4 birdies - 2 bogeys. Statistically one of the best players in the game would have shot a 70 - around his scoring average which was 69,47 strokes.

 

Now, Divotmaker made no bogey in 6 scrambling situations.

 

13 birdies, 1 eagle - no bogeys - scored a 57. That he made 5 holeouts in that round (how realistic is that??) played an important part as well.

 

I understand the arguments, that we are only playing a video game and that it is difficult to simulate the difficulty of real golf. But in my example we have a 13 shot difference between real life golf and JNPG. We have seen a 57 scored with an average+ performance tee to green. That's simply too far away from reality to call the game a sim - or more precisely: the scoring of the game.

 

Don't get me wrong: I love, what PP has done that far. The long game is so well balanced in difficulty (sans certain 3rd party controllers). But i think, if PP wants to follow their vision to create a realistic golf sim, big, groundbreaking changes for the short game would be the right way to go.

 

P.S.: @Divotmaker: Great, great round. I know, that you are using a legit controller. You are a great player. But you (and everybody else who breaks 60) shouldn't be that good. I took your round as an example, cause it really showed the inbalance in difficulty (long game/short game) so well. I hope, you are good with that.

 

Then followed that up with a blazing -7 with a bogey.....chipping in this game is too easy, especially when the cup in on a flat surface. That accounts for the five "holeouts".....ironically when we played this last week, I don't recall having any round even remotely close to that one. It was almost the perfect round for me and one of the best I have ever played.....and that came after 2 weeks of being sick in bed and not touching a controller for 4 days.....go figure.

 

Lastly, I do not consider myself a "great" player by any means. I am a decent player who is streaky, but until I get consistently good at both PGA and RTS Tours, I am still just one of the guys trying to have some fun.....

[Greensboronclion]

All these points that are being made are great points and as someone who has not touched my mouse and played at all since last Friday you give me hope Divotmaker on my return this Sunday.  lol.  Now we all know the short game is to easy and needs to be a tad harder but how do we do it.  Some things I see that are way to easy are the sand shots and the pitch shot.  I real life the sand shot is not an easy play but I would rather be in the sand than the rough and when seeing my ball go off line I try to will it into the trap.  I read where Mike said they are working on plugged balls and that and a few tweaks can fix that problem so if that gets fixed that is one battle one.  Now the pitch is just way to easy and with any device you can dial it in so this needs to be fixed and I understand the ball can be stopped from the fairway but it shouldn't from the rough and if we can take the spin off from the rough that can fix that problem.  We also need to fix the lob shot as it to is way to easy and would like to see a skulled shot for bad miss hits brought into play for this and the chip shot as not once have I ever skulled a ball in the game and I sure have in real life.  Just a few thoughts.

[frank70]

Then followed that up with a blazing -7 with a bogey.....chipping in this game is too easy, especially when the cup in on a flat surface. That accounts for the five "holeouts".....ironically when we played this last week, I don't recall having any round even remotely close to that one. It was almost the perfect round for me and one of the best I have ever played.....and that came after 2 weeks of being sick in bed and not touching a controller for 4 days.....go figure.

 

Lastly, I do not consider myself a "great" player by any means. I am a decent player who is streaky, but until I get consistently good at both PGA and RTS Tours, I am still just one of the guys trying to have some fun.....

You are the No. 5 ranked player at OGT. I think that's pretty good. 

 

We are getting used to these ridicolous scores. Otherwise you wouldn't have said "Then followed that up with a blazing -7 with a bogey". I mean, offer any pro on the PGA Tour a -7 before he tees off . Every freaking player would pack it in and take it within a second. A -7 is a great score in real life. In the game it has become kind of a disappointment. That's the point, and the problem we discuss in this thread.

 

And the most important thing: If you strike the ball from tee to green a little above average and don't expect a round of 2 or maybe 3 or 4 under par but a way lower round .... the immersion of playing the real thing goes away. The static of a golf sim is in danger imho.

 

Divotmaker: I know you are hesitant to support changes because you have worries about gameplay as a whole. But i know as well, that you like realism. I wanted to break down with these numbers, how necessary these changes for the sake of realism are - and how far away we are from that in certain aspects of the game.

 

No need to go any deeper in this thread. The numbers are clear. The problem is identified (short game+ especially putting). Let's wait for the next update. Maybe we will see a change for the better.

[DoGgs]

I can't be the only one noticing swing changes in this game with controller, i played 3 rounds in euro fed ex, tour pro at black swan.  After 3 rounds i was -20 and clear, played my 4th round and visited the range just before to ensure my swing was ok, during the round my gentle fade had changed to a hook, now i know i was not swinging any different because i have a routine that i adhere to, i finished +4   After this i went straight back to the range and lo and behold my swing returns to what i have honed before, maybe my controller is playing up but its so annoying as it now makes me question what i have practiced.  BTW  black swan is not the place to be wayward off the tee and have your game fall apart! 

[DivotMaker]

You are the No. 5 ranked player at OGT. I think that's pretty good. 

 

We are getting used to these ridicolous scores. Otherwise you wouldn't have said "Then followed that up with a blazing -7 with a bogey". I mean, offer any pro on the PGA Tour a -7 before he tees off . Every freaking player would pack it in and take it within a second. A -7 is a great score in real life. In the game it has become kind of a disappointment. That's the point, and the problem we discuss in this thread.

 

And the most important thing: If you strike the ball from tee to green a little above average and don't expect a round of 2 or maybe 3 or 4 under par but a way lower round .... the immersion of playing the real thing goes away. The static of a golf sim is in danger imho.

 

Divotmaker: I know you are hesitant to support changes because you have worries about gameplay as a whole. But i know as well, that you like realism. I wanted to break down with these numbers, how necessary these changes for the sake of realism are - and how far away we are from that in certain aspects of the game.

 

No need to go any deeper in this thread. The numbers are clear. The problem is identified (short game+ especially putting). Let's wait for the next update. Maybe we will see a change for the better.

 

Oh I agree Frank.....I was being facetious about the -7 as that should happen on a GREAT round, not be a disappointing round....and the short game could definitely use some tuning. Fully support you using my round to support the case moving forward.

[DivotMaker]

I can't be the only one noticing swing changes in this game with controller, i played 3 rounds in euro fed ex, tour pro at black swan.  After 3 rounds i was -20 and clear, played my 4th round and visited the range just before to ensure my swing was ok, during the round my gentle fade had changed to a hook, now i know i was not swinging any different because i have a routine that i adhere to, i finished +4   After this i went straight back to the range and lo and behold my swing returns to what i have honed before, maybe my controller is playing up but its so annoying as it now makes me question what i have practiced.  BTW  black swan is not the place to be wayward off the tee and have your game fall apart! 

 

I have this happen every week.....in fact had this happen yesterday. Shot a 57 at Boston in rd 1 on Tuesday AM. That same afternoon I shot -7.....and was all over the place on the tee and approach shots.

[mebby]

I can't be the only one noticing swing changes in this game with controller, i played 3 rounds in euro fed ex, tour pro at black swan.  After 3 rounds i was -20 and clear, played my 4th round and visited the range just before to ensure my swing was ok, during the round my gentle fade had changed to a hook, now i know i was not swinging any different because i have a routine that i adhere to, i finished +4   After this i went straight back to the range and lo and behold my swing returns to what i have honed before, maybe my controller is playing up but its so annoying as it now makes me question what i have practiced.  BTW  black swan is not the place to be wayward off the tee and have your game fall apart! 

I've noticed a fair amount of variety in my swing from round to round but I just chalked it up to me not being super consistent.

 

But honestly, whatever it is (me or the game) I don't care because I think it adds a layer of realism.  Some rounds I still feel like I'm chasing my swing around and some rounds I feel like I can't miss.  And then sometimes, it will change on me mid-round and I start losing my confidence.

[frank70]

One thing: This high amount of hole-outs does happen to RTS-C and 3-clickers. Not to RTS-M players. Chipping and pitching absolutely straight is really difficult with the mouse. To get ratio, swing plane and heel/toe mishit absolutely perfect is almost impossible. So 99 of 100 chips or pitches go a little left or right from the intended line.

[mebby]

One thing: This high amount of hole-outs does happen to RTS-C and 3-clickers. Not to RTS-M players. Chipping and pitching absolutely straight is really difficult with the mouse. To get ratio, swing plane and heel/toe mishit absolutely perfect is almost impossible. So 99 of 100 chips or pitches go a little left or right from the intended line.

Chipping and pitching seems more difficult on RTSC than it was a few months ago.  I think they made a tweak or two in the last release but I can't confirm (it may just be in my head).  But I do agree that chipping and pitching are mostly too easy on RTSC (can't speak for 3C).  I know that I dread when I trickle onto the green 50 feet away from the pin.  I'd much rather stop short and have a little pitch to give me a guaranteed up and down at worst or a hole-out at best.  So that lone tells me that pitching and chipping might be too easy.

 

In real life, my short game is horrible anyway so it's hard for me to connect the dots between real life and this game.  So I may be a little "off" in my opinion based on my own personal short game woes.

[Acrilix]

One thing: This high amount of hole-outs does happen to RTS-C and 3-clickers. Not to RTS-M players. Chipping and pitching absolutely straight is really difficult with the mouse. To get ratio, swing plane and heel/toe mishit absolutely perfect is almost impossible. So 99 of 100 chips or pitches go a little left or right from the intended line.

 

There's something wrong with chipping on RTS-C as it's almost impossible not to chip straight compared to all the other shots.