Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 12:55 PM
Did i miss the post where people asked for randomness putting?, it's a bit like when HBS added a handicap system and a careery mode, didn't read any post asking for that, but i guess i must remember this is not my game it's PPs so they can do what they want. FYI i think "realistic" greens are so far away from being realistic PP could get in trouble for false advertising lol.
Correct.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 12:57 PM
I have to say I 110% disagree…
For the first time ever I feel like I'm watching a golf ball rolling on real grass.
The unrealistic thing was the perfectly flat greens of old (and stil in the "perfect" setting)
I repeat that there is no such thing as perfect. You made this mistake again.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 12:58 PM
For someone who is in2minds you're certainly of1mind.
That was as uncalled for as the garbage thrown at me daily.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 01:00 PM
And i do like the realistic putting it's a great idea no problem, BUT if i'm playing with you I WANT THE SAME PUT AS YOU HAVE if i'm on the same putting line as you, example if i'm 2 inches behind you and your put goes left of the cup (with correct pace and line) I DON'T WANT MY PUT TO GO RIGHT OF THE HOLE (with correct pace and line) why is that so hard for you to understand?.
Do not keep trying to explain what is easily seen and you are 100% correct. The elitists here think they know all and refuse to offer rebuttals. Their headgames run rampant as well. I am used to them now. They could not offer a decent rebuttal if their lives depended on it.
You are correct and they are dead wrong.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 01:02 PM
This guy could be Golden Bear III.
Who is Golden Bear 2?
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 02:08 PM
What type of greens are we trying to emulate/replicate with "realistic" greens?. i would guess it would be PGA standards.
What type of grass is being emulate/replicate?.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 02:29 PM
Valid points have been made on all sides re the green options but I don't see the reason for people to keep posting and either inciting others or pushing their agenda beyond what might be considered reasonable. If you wish to continue discussing the green options you don't care for please do it via PM.
PS I also think it's unreasonable that if the same person makes 10 posts out of the last 12 in this thread, that would normally be considered spam so let's see no more of that please.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 04:34 PM
The realistic puttinig is not realistic at all on a flat straight putt of 9 ft if you have make good contact and straight it will go in .The random cigar buts on the greens dont make it realistic,i think this was because players were complaining about putting stats and this is how the developers have tried to even it up.Too many players are wanting this game to be too realistic , you cant have a golf game on a pc/console to be like on the course but they can do their best to suit the players that want it that way.That seems to be the problem some guys think that playing golf on a pc/console can be made to be like real golf that like saying truck simulator is like driving a real truck .AND guys give the guy a break he makes valid points
Yep in2minds makes great points but the smarmy attitude of The Clique keeps acting up.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 04:39 PM
I'm starting to get the sense that we now have a new incarnation of StopItsHere among us
There are a number of trademark signs that are supporting my suspicion...
One of the major problems here is people playing the failed detective. I keep getting told I am Golden Bear, now the same bs is happening to in2minds. For people to tell me I am argumentative yet they deliberately try to peeve off others is proof yet again that I am in the right. Argumentative is accusing someone of being someone else. That is Tiger's Cist's job.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 04:41 PM
The new realistic putting is totally awesome!
Great great work Devs!
Could not help but troll again could you. Thanks again for proving what I already knew. You like to cuase trouble yet say it is others doing this. Fail!
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 04:43 PM
Reading these posts is like watching Zebedee come round on the Magic Roundabout again and again and again.
In your opinion remember that.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 04:45 PM
That's a question no doubt but it wasn't the question I asked. The whole point of realistic greens is that they are by definition unpredictable, what you seem to want is that they become predictable so you can read the imperfections which kind of defeats the object of the exercise and would in fact make the 'realistic greens' less realistic. As that's would negate the point of having realistic settings in the first place I can tell you we have no plans to make the unpredictability more predictable
Trying to code a game for randomness is not realistic. in2minds is correct. 
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 04:46 PM
1.This is a pc game NO the greens are not "a living entity"
2. "It has it's own micro eco system" again NO this is a pc game
3 " Creatures and insects burrowing tirelessly beneath the surface" NO sorry THIS IS A PC GAME
4. "The wind blows debris onto the finely manicured grass" NO ITS A PC GAME
5. "A golfing green is not static, it is constantly in flux" NOT IN A PC GAME.
What you are seeing is a randomised script simple.
But yes i realise i will have to live with it it's a devs decision, i hope the 5 people who use it enjoy it.
Thumbs up.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 04:48 PM
@in2minds:
Golf.
Involves.
Luck.
(Good & bad luck)
So does this game now as we are attempting to best simulate a real golf experience.
If you don't like the new realistic green settings, simply do not use them.
There really is no more to say.
Yet you keep saying it.
Advanced Member
Posted 12 December 2016 - 04:49 PM
Well at least people will know why you were banned...again.
Advanced Member
Posted 14 December 2016 - 07:53 PM
That is a great point actually.
We should remember that PP is hoping to release this on consoles and perhaps they are keeping that very different demographic in mind with some of their design/feature decisions also!
I know one thing - RTS-C usage will go through the ROOF when it gets to consoles (for obvious reasons)
i have some doubts there, i dont see this game being succesfull on the consoles, why not, easy, its a different animal playing
on those machines, they want easy, not realistic.. consolegamers jsut want a fun golfgame, not one where you have to learn
quite a few weeks to get good at.....i see this in other games too.
but we wiull see what will happen, a few thou surely will be sold.
there is a lot of difference between a good simulation and a good game, and it takes different ppl to appreciate them.
Advanced Member
Posted 14 December 2016 - 08:00 PM
This guy could be Golden Bear III.
haha really? and me thinking it was Fred Flinstone all the time.
Advanced Member
Posted 14 December 2016 - 08:11 PM
i have some doubts there, i dont see this game being succesfull on the consoles, why not, easy, its a different animal playing
on those machines, they want easy, not realistic..
Try playing this game on RTS-C on the lowest levels of difficulty...
It's basically "auto-golf" that makes The Golf Club actually look challenging.
I think we have a really wide range of optional difficulty built into PG right now, it's just that most of us don't go anywhere near the lower end as our interests don't lie there....but it's there for those that want it.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
