316 replies to this topic

[Greensboronclion]

I don't know how hard or easy it would be to change things on the fly and I think we all agree the game plays better than we all have ever seen a golf game play before. If you fix this does it mess this up or vice verse none of us know.

[highfade]

I don't know how hard or easy it would be to change things on the fly and I think we all agree the game plays better than we all have ever seen a golf game play before. If you fix this does it mess this up or vice verse none of us know.

 

I would think it would be the easiest thing in the world to make it better, to make it great will take a bit more time and effort. Not fixing something because you're afraid of making it worse is also not the way to go.

 

I love this game and what Andrew and Mike have accomplished is astounding but I'm not going to keep applauding if somethings need and can be done to fix this and make it even better.  I know there is a crowd who'll rather stick to what they are use to and I see that making bold changes now can cause a stampede, that's why  I'm starting to think it would be best for PP not to go on with PG but start working on PG2.  

[mebby]

I could do that for you, using beginner mode 3 click and dial every shot to within inches of the flag.

Hey Stopits - Just checking in to see how that video you are working on is coming along to show us all how you can boil this game down to simple math.

[scajjr29]

With regards to RTS-M, you have to take into account it is NOT a 'real-time" swing.  Probably the best RTS-M swing was in Custom Play Golf2/World Golf Challenge 2011. I can stop the swing literally an inch before the ball in that game because the mouse movement is directly tied to the golfer animation. 

In JNPG where I stop the backswing ISN'T the power I'm expecting cause I see the animation drop the club a bit before the downswing starts so I'm actually hitting it with less power. So I may have to swing to 103% to get 100%, 100% to get 90%, etc. To me JNPG's RTS-M is just 3-click with the mouse and golfer where the swing meter used to be.

To me I want a computer golf game to allow me, an average real-life golfer, to play with the ability of a pro, with a swing interface, preferably real-time tied to the golfer animation, that with practice gives me a repeatable swing with predicable results 90% of the time. If I have scores of 67-77 most of the time that is, to me, a good representation of real golf at that level.

 

 

Sam

[DennisHarris]

I am sure the folks @ PP are listening to everyone's feedback.  I have supported this game by purchasing every PP course and the new ball.   And I realize JNPG is a game in development.  This is crystal clear as we have no female or left handed ANI.  Eye candy to many but essential items if you are a female or left handed golfer.   JNPG still has cameras going underground or in some cases under the ocean.  We have an F8 key glitch.  Lets let PP get all basic game play glitches eliminated before we move on to fine tuning.  That is my request.

Rumor has it that the long awaited Course Forge will soon (couple weeks) be released as a beta to the public.  Good news!

This post might be considered a negative post by some and that is fine.   I am simply being honest and expressing my 2 cents.  

Thanks PP for this game.

 

P.S.  What is a realistic round of golf.  I do not know apparently.  I play 18 holes shoot a -1, -4 and +2 in MS Amateur.  I guess that is not realistic enough for the (opps I said it) top 10% of the Tour Pro folks.

[Greensboronclion]

Well I have to say I am starting to figure out RTS-M and liking it more each hole I play.  Its a heck of a lot of work but so far it has been worth it and I have switched all my play to it and have now committed to it for the long haul.  I have played them all and they all have their plus and minus but as much as I like the MS mode I had to make a choice as you cant be great in one if you play all the swings.  You can hit the ball straight with RTSM at Pro and higher you just have to practice and I see that it would be the same with RTSC.  That is the one advantage of 3C and MS is you don't have to put the time in that you do with the other swings at the higher levels as I can play both MS and 3C at TP and keep it at par but best round at Pro with is a 72 tho I just finished one event with a 73 and shot 77 at Mass and with the stimp at 14 for me that was pretty good.  I think after a year and half I can see why others are doing well and that is due to practice and that is what we will be doing from now on.  Great game.

[highfade]

You can even today download the full Grand Prix 4 game (updated to 2016) which originally came out I think in 2002 and have a more realistic race or season than  any of the  F1 Codemasters titles.  We had a blast the past holiday playing GP4 hotseat full races and even with the dated graphics the core game is just spot-on.

 

I think some developers just get it right, to create a game with longevity. I think Links got it right with a little the help from the MOD.

[frank70]

You can even today download the full Grand Prix 4 game (updated to 2016) which originally came out I think in 2002 and have a more realistic race or season than  any of the  F1 Codemasters titles.  We had a blast the past holiday playing GP4 hotseat full races and even with the dated graphics the core game is just spot-on.

 

I think some developers just get it right, to create a game with longevity. I think Links got it right with a little the help from the MOD.

But the scoring wasn't that realistic in Links as well.

 

By the way scoring: Rory in Boston ..... -15. Winner in the OGT tournament probably around -45. Enough said, although it was at Pro level. Some guys registered under 90 putts - PGA Tour average is 116. Well .... that is not realistic (and putting isn't that more difficult at Tour Pro).

 

The game is still great fun to play. To me especially because of the really immersive RTS-M swing mechanic for the long game. Short game isn't a very good simulation of the difficulty of that part of the game yet - and the numbers show it.

 

One question for everybody who defers to comparing game stats to real life stats: How would you rate the simulation aspect of an NBA game where you can shoot consistently 60 - 70% from three and the scores would be 180:180 after 48 minutes? Would you say that the game is a great simulation?

[highfade]

Frank, I think you are one of the unfortunate few who are too good for the game.  

 

But I do understand your view, the very best at the game should be playing realistic scores on the most difficult level. For the rest of us we should just drop our ego as well as our difficulty level. I was lucky with Links, playing very realistic scores on Champ level.

 

With PG as it is now I'm shooting realistic scores playing 3-C on TP  but the I still maintain that the way you get to that score is totally out of wack.  I like MS-H but Am is too easy for me now and Pro is too difficult. (about 6 to 8 shots difference )

[frank70]

Frank, I think you are one of the unfortunate few who are too good for the game.

 

But I do understand your view, the very best at the game should be playing realistic scores on the most difficult level. For the rest of us we should just drop our ego as well as our difficulty level. I was lucky with Links, playing very realistic scores on Champ level.

 

With PG as it is now I'm shooting realistic scores playing 3-C on TP  but the I still maintain that the way you get to that score is totally out of wack.  I like MS-H but Am is too easy for me now and Pro is too difficult. (about 6 to 8 shots difference )

Maybe i am wrong, but your scores were very competitive everytime you teed it up on Tour Pro using 3-click? You racked up quite a few Top 10s, right? If yes, then you were able to shoot scores that were lower than they should be (if we talk about a simulation).

 

MS-H: Have you tinkered around with your mouse settings? Windows settings (acceleration off and slow movement), mouse software (dpi settings), in-game (sensitivity settings)?

 

I have spent alot of time in the first one or two months when i switched to RTS-M with that. Until i found a combination that suits my hand/mouse movement and that gave my a good rhytmic feel when swinging. It's worth the time, because the swing can feel very, very different if you change some variables.

 

P.S.:  but I still maintain that the way you get to that score is totally out of wack.

 

That's the point all along. It's the scores of the best 30+ players. But the main problem is the way they are achieved. We all hope that we will have a lot more players in the future. And then we maybe will have 100+ players that are scoring well below what a simulation should allow.

 

And one thing i noticed: The gap between the Top players and the good players is closing ..... because practice will bring that. We will see a lot more guys in the future who go really low.

[mebby]

Hey Stopits - Just checking in to see how that video you are working on is coming along to show us all how you can boil this game down to simple math.

Man... do y'all here those crickets??

[frank70]

Probable winner OGT event (Pro, but still): -45, 80 (!!!!) putts for 72 holes; 92% scrambling, 100% (12/12) sand saves.

 

And this scoring with really realistic long game stats: 55% FIR and 67% GIR.

 

Thread title: Realistic round of golf? Well, not so much. There shouldn't be any questions left about the inbalance between long game and short game.

 

But the devs will change some things up. I am sure.

[Greensboronclion]

Lets face it we are not going to get scores like they have on the PGA tour in a video game.  The only thing holding scores down are the green speeds and even that isn't stopping it as the only Stimp it seems we have had this week is 14 and I know of no PGA event other than maybe the Masters and US Open that have those stimps all week long.  Right now we are setting courses up to keep the best players down and only the hacks like myself are not taking advantage of it anymore.  I could do it with 3C and MS but am sticking with RTSM even tho I just cant judge the distance of the putt but I will figure it out sooner or later.  My point is if you take away the fast greens the scores will be even lower but it sure would be a lot more fun than playing Master greens every round but hey that's just me.

[DennisHarris]

The ability to hit straight shots with a mouse or controller is so much easier than hitting a golf ball with a real club. So IMO Perfect Golf FIR, GIR  and putting is better in Pro and Tour Pro difficulties than real life PGA statistics.  So a realistic round of golf is in the opinion of the individual player.  The constant drone of comparing PGA Tour stats to Perfect Golf stats is comparing apples to oranges.  Perfect golf is the best golf game in production today.  Can improvements be made - yes!  And I'm certain improvements will be made. 

Want an expert level for Perfect Golf. Eliminate rough/ bunker loss percentage completely.   And how about eliminating wind range, no BLI or Grid.   Watch the statistics change with that.  I think an API change could produce such a challenge w/o any other changes to the game.   

A golf game that is exactly like real life will not appeal to a broad base of players IMO.  We play this game to live the dream. 

[mebby]

The ability to hit straight shots with a mouse or controller is so much easier than hitting a golf ball with a real club. So IMO Perfect Golf FIR, GIR  and putting is better in Pro and Tour Pro difficulties than real life PGA statistics.  So a realistic round of golf is in the opinion of the individual player.  The constant drone of comparing PGA Tour stats to Perfect Golf stats is comparing apples to oranges.  Perfect golf is the best golf game in production today.  Can improvements be made - yes!  And I'm certain improvements will be made. 

Want an expert level for Perfect Golf. Eliminate rough/ bunker loss percentage completely.   And how about eliminating wind range, no BLI or Grid.   Watch the statistics change with that.  I think an API change could produce such a challenge w/o any other changes to the game.   

A golf game that is exactly like real life will not appeal to a broad base of players IMO.  We play this game to live the dream. 

Completely agree on removing BLI and Grids!  I hope we get this capability soon.  On the NAP tour we're getting fairly realistic scores/stats by simply removing Grids and BLI.  This is based on the honor system because that's all we've got but I believe most (if not all) people are genuinely following the rules.

[Crow357]

Probable winner OGT event (Pro, but still): -45, 80 (!!!!) putts for 72 holes; 92% scrambling, 100% (12/12) sand saves.

 

And this scoring with really realistic long game stats: 55% FIR and 67% GIR.

 

Thread title: Realistic round of golf? Well, not so much. There shouldn't be any questions left about the inbalance between long game and short game.

 

But the devs will change some things up. I am sure.

I understand what you're saying, but Mike and Andrew have already said they don't want to tweak this game for the few elites that shoot -45.  If you make it so that the -45's of the world shoot, say, -20, then the rest of us are gonna shoot +25.  I'm just not gonna participate in online tourneys, if I'm gonna shoot crap scores like that. 

[frank70]

We would get closer to realistic scores if there would be an alternative way of reading the greens (BLI and grid are way too precise) and if the execution of certain shots (flops, chips, pitches, greenside bunker, putts) would be sufficiantly difficult.

The solution to the “scoring problem“ is obvious. The question is, if the devs want to change it and if there is a way to come up with a special green reading view without spending too much time with (development time costs money).

The penalty of the scrambling shots could be altered quite easily i would suppose. And the ball physics probably as well.

[frank70]

I understand what you're saying, but Mike and Andrew have already said they don't want to tweak this game for the few elites that shoot -45. If you make it so that the -45's of the world shoot, say, -20, then the rest of us are gonna shoot +25. I'm just not gonna participate in online tourneys, if I'm gonna shoot crap scores like that.

But has everybody to play Tour Pro difficulty? The difficulty of the game should be dependant of the difficulty level of choice .... not by unrealistic difficulty of certain shots.

What i don't get: The long game is really a challenge - even for the best players. Why is the short game on the exact opposite side of the spectrun. That' on purpose?

A lot of guys have criticised TGC for lack of challenge. We have seen already a winning score at OGT on Tour Pro level of -54. To be honest: JNPG isn't that far away from TGC scores anymore.

[Crow357]

But has everybody to play Tour Pro difficulty? The difficulty of the game should be dependant of the difficulty level of choice .... not by unrealistic difficulty of certain shots.

What i don't get: The long game is really a challenge - even for the best players. Why is the short game on the exact opposite side of the spectrun. That' on purpose?

A lot of guys have criticised TGC for lack of challenge. We have seen already a winning score at OGT on Tour Pro level of -54. To be honest: JNPG isn't that far away from TGC scores anymore.

I guess you're going to have to agree to disagree with the devs.

[Sup?]

Probable winner OGT event (Pro, but still): -45, 80 (!!!!) putts for 72 holes; 92% scrambling, 100% (12/12) sand saves.

 

And this scoring with really realistic long game stats: 55% FIR and 67% GIR.

 

Thread title: Realistic round of golf? Well, not so much. There shouldn't be any questions left about the inbalance between long game and short game.

 

But the devs will change some things up. I am sure.

 

 

 Come on Frank... it was my best round thus far on OGT.  You usually win and it wasn't but a week ago that you had a better score than that!  I had a few very fortunate shots that to be honest I thought would be horrible, however the wind came into full effect and somehow turned them into excellent shots.  Also keep in mind that I have been playing this game since it first came out so calculating shots comes fairly easy for me compared to somebody that hasn't been playing a long time.

 

I play quite a bit online with perfect strangers that have been playing a minimal amount of time and on the Beginner level that are horrible... so I think experience and time generally makes better players.  BTW, I rarely have a perfect snap but for some reason I was getting very close to the snap line for this week's tourney.  Most likely because it was an official PP course and the stuttering is not as apparent vs a lot of the user made courses.  Those FIR's and GIR's are pretty much the norm for me as well.