50 replies to this topic

[IanK]

Just a clarification re the putting distance system, it will only work out how far you might have to swing for a flat putt therefore all the slope and elevation information you have to figure out on your own. It sounds easy but in practice we've found it to be quite challenging. To beat the PGA tour averages you'll have to be pretty good at reading the greens.

Thanks Mike, but that's what most golf games have in the past have been like, but it's the chipping and pitching that bothers me most in golf games. Why do we have options for pitching and chipping when we should have to set these shots up for ourselves?

[Mike Jones]

Thanks Mike, but that's what most golf games have in the past have been like, but it's the chipping and pitching that bothers me most in golf games. Why do we have options for pitching and chipping when we should have to set these shots up for ourselves?

 

I think it boils down to the fact that you only move a mouse or a controller a very short distance compared to a real golf club therefore your movements are not as linear in game. Having said that we don't currently have a lob shot button in PG because you can adjust the height of the shot yourself if you want to hit a soft lob.

[Parboy]

Just a clarification re the putting distance system, it will only work out how far you might have to swing for a flat putt therefore all the slope and elevation information you have to figure out on your own. It sounds easy but in practice we've found it to be quite challenging. To beat the PGA tour averages you'll have to be pretty good at reading the greens.

Putting is the most challenging part of this game in my opinion, as it should be. I have lost count of the number of flat putts I have missed because of a less than perfect snap. It is very unforgiving, even with medium swing aids enabled. I have also blown many a putt past the hole trying to judge the perfect speed.

[LasseThid]

I've never understood why computer golf games don't have a full swing on all clubs, so for a flop shot, for instance, you would have to set the shot up yourself by altering, feet position, grip, ball position, swing speed etc. This would give you a 'true' golf simulator in my opinion.

That would be as close to real life golf as you could get!

[Kablammo11]

I beg to differ. Flop, pitch and chip are 3 distinctly different shots in my book, requiring different stances, swing motions and wrist actions - and neither require a full swing. Whereas currently the shot center allows to set the shot height to replicate each three of these, this specific part of the gameplay is the least realistic in my opinion.

[Ron Piskorik]

I beg to differ. Flop, pitch and chip are 3 distinctly different shots in my book, requiring different stances, swing motions and wrist actions - and neither require a full swing. Whereas currently the shot center allows to set the shot height to replicate each three of these, this specific part of the gameplay is the least realistic in my opinion.

 

I strongly agree.  The short game needs to be made more realist after EA.

[Vader jr.]

^^^ +1

I'm another one of those that like the 'feel' of the putting in TGC. I would like something similar to eventually be in PG.

-MERACE

Hi.

Aren't you the same person who's been teaching TGC golfers to switch to a "top down" view when putting to make it easier to use the golfer's feet to determine precisely how far back to pull the putter (in relation to the golfer's feet) for each distance?

While it's certainly creative and clever, it's not really "feel" based IMO.

It's just another type of visual meter.  You're visually guiding the swing in relation to a fixed object.  Pure "feel" golfers don't do that.

TGC's putting system is defintely meant for hardcore gamers which is why the masses of casual gamers don't have much success with it.

Most of my casual gamer friends have no interest in playing TGC because of the putting system (even though they love EA golf games).

Plus not everybody wants the "lotto" effect of having the ball shoot 30 feet past the hole from the slightest mis-twitch in your putting swing.   Real life doesn't have that same lotto effect. 

PP can do whatever they wish of course, but duplicating TGC's putting system and catering to the sim crowd is like shooting themselves in the foot and alienating most of the casual gaming world just to appease a few hardcore players. 

I like the way PG is developing so far.  I just hope PG doesn't get "tilted" towards the hardcore crowd during the early access beta on Steam (where most of those players will undoubtedly be hardcore players).  I hope that PP keeps the needs of the casual gamers in mind too.

We already have TGC for those who want that experience, I see no logical reason to create TGC Part Deux by copying their putting system.

[IanK]

I beg to differ. Flop, pitch and chip are 3 distinctly different shots in my book, requiring different stances, swing motions and wrist actions - and neither require a full swing. Whereas currently the shot center allows to set the shot height to replicate each three of these, this specific part of the gameplay is the least realistic in my opinion.

Exactly, but why can't these be chosen by the player? If we have real time swing mechanics similar to the old PGA game, you could even alter your swing plane to assist you in your shot making. For example, you might want to play a splash shot with a slightly flatter plane!
I suppose my point is that even if a player in real life sets up for shots such as a flop, chip, or pitch, he still has the ability to play a full swing. Surely that's where the skill in the short game lays.

[Kablammo11]

Exactly, but why can't these be chosen by the player? If we have real time swing mechanics similar to the old PGA game, you could even alter your swing plane to assist you in your shot making. For example, you might want to play a splash shot with a slightly flatter plane!

 

 

It would depend on how they are chosen - by changing the parameters yourself each and every time, or as shot type presets that can be called up quickly? Or shot variation, why not, that are configs which the player gets to define the way he wants to - and then quickly load when needed. It's all already there (mostly). The question is more: how do we get to select what we want efficiently?

[IanK]

Hi.
Aren't you the same person who's been teaching TGC golfers to switch to a "top down" view when putting to make it easier to use the golfer's feet to determine precisely how far back to pull the putter (in relation to the golfer's feet) for each distance?
While it's certainly creative and clever, it's not really "feel" based IMO.
It's just another type of visual meter.  You're visually guiding the swing in relation to a fixed object.  Pure "feel" golfers don't do that.
TGC's putting system is defintely meant for hardcore gamers which is why the masses of casual gamers don't have much success with it.
Most of my casual gamer friends have no interest in playing TGC because of the putting system (even though they love EA golf games).
Plus not everybody wants the "lotto" effect of having the ball shoot 30 feet past the hole from the slightest mis-twitch in your putting swing.   Real life doesn't have that same lotto effect. 
PP can do whatever they wish of course, but duplicating TGC's putting system and catering to the sim crowd is like shooting themselves in the foot and alienating most of the casual gaming world just to appease a few hardcore players. 
I like the way PG is developing so far.  I just hope PG doesn't get "tilted" towards the hardcore crowd during the early access beta on Steam (where most of those players will undoubtedly be hardcore players).  I hope that PP keeps the needs of the casual gamers in mind too.
We already have TGC for those who want that experience, I see no logical reason to create TGC Part Deux by copying their putting system.

I think the putting in TGC is one of the best things in the game, relying on 'feel' rather than a meter. I would be more than happy if the system on PG is similar.

[IanK]

It would depend on how they are chosen - by changing the parameters yourself each and every time, or as shot type presets that can be called up quickly? Or shot variation, why not, that are configs which the player gets to define the way he wants to - and then quickly load when needed. It's all already there (mostly). The question is more: how do we get to select what we want efficiently?

In my ideal world you would hone your skills in a practice round, or on the range, and 'save' your shot setups for use on the course. You would also have the ability to tweek the chosen setup before you play the shot. The swing length,speed and tempo would still have to be played out as in real life.

[MERACE]

Hi.
Aren't you the same person who's been teaching TGC golfers to switch to a "top down" view when putting to make it easier to use the golfer's feet to determine precisely how far back to pull the putter (in relation to the golfer's feet) for each distance?
While it's certainly creative and clever, it's not really "feel" based IMO.
It's just another type of visual meter.  You're visually guiding the swing in relation to a fixed object.  Pure "feel" golfers don't do that.
TGC's putting system is defintely meant for hardcore gamers which is why the masses of casual gamers don't have much success with it.
Most of my casual gamer friends have no interest in playing TGC because of the putting system (even though they love EA golf games).
Plus not everybody wants the "lotto" effect of having the ball shoot 30 feet past the hole from the slightest mis-twitch in your putting swing.   Real life doesn't have that same lotto effect. 
PP can do whatever they wish of course, but duplicating TGC's putting system and catering to the sim crowd is like shooting themselves in the foot and alienating most of the casual gaming world just to appease a few hardcore players. 
I like the way PG is developing so far.  I just hope PG doesn't get "tilted" towards the hardcore crowd during the early access beta on Steam (where most of those players will undoubtedly be hardcore players).  I hope that PP keeps the needs of the casual gamers in mind too.
We already have TGC for those who want that experience, I see no logical reason to create TGC Part Deux by copying their putting system.

I use a combination of a top down camera view and the "feel" of the movement of my PS4 controller to perform my putts in TGC. I also use my peripheral vision while looking down at the ball to guage the distance of my backswing while putting IRL. It works well for me in both instances.

As for PG, the game has many setting options to appease both the "hardcore" and "casual" players.


-MERACE

[RobV]

Hi.

Aren't you the same person who's been teaching TGC golfers to switch to a "top down" view when putting to make it easier to use the golfer's feet to determine precisely how far back to pull the putter (in relation to the golfer's feet) for each distance?

While it's certainly creative and clever, it's not really "feel" based IMO.

It's just another type of visual meter.  You're visually guiding the swing in relation to a fixed object.  Pure "feel" golfers don't do that.

TGC's putting system is defintely meant for hardcore gamers which is why the masses of casual gamers don't have much success with it.

Most of my casual gamer friends have no interest in playing TGC because of the putting system (even though they love EA golf games).

Plus not everybody wants the "lotto" effect of having the ball shoot 30 feet past the hole from the slightest mis-twitch in your putting swing.   Real life doesn't have that same lotto effect. 

PP can do whatever they wish of course, but duplicating TGC's putting system and catering to the sim crowd is like shooting themselves in the foot and alienating most of the casual gaming world just to appease a few hardcore players. 

I like the way PG is developing so far.  I just hope PG doesn't get "tilted" towards the hardcore crowd during the early access beta on Steam (where most of those players will undoubtedly be hardcore players).  I hope that PP keeps the needs of the casual gamers in mind too.

We already have TGC for those who want that experience, I see no logical reason to create TGC Part Deux by copying their putting system.

Great post!  I also hope PG does what they feel is best for the game and not get swayed by the people who frequent the forums and have the most posts.   You like the game, play it!  You don't, move onto something else.   For the record, I really don't "feel" anything in the TGC's putting system.   I find it constantly inconsistent and quite frankly, very frustrating... 

[shimonko]

Hi.

Aren't you the same person who's been teaching TGC golfers to switch to a "top down" view when putting to make it easier to use the golfer's feet to determine precisely how far back to pull the putter (in relation to the golfer's feet) for each distance?

While it's certainly creative and clever, it's not really "feel" based IMO.

It's just another type of visual meter.  You're visually guiding the swing in relation to a fixed object.  Pure "feel" golfers don't do that.

TGC's putting system is defintely meant for hardcore gamers which is why the masses of casual gamers don't have much success with it.

Most of my casual gamer friends have no interest in playing TGC because of the putting system (even though they love EA golf games).

Plus not everybody wants the "lotto" effect of having the ball shoot 30 feet past the hole from the slightest mis-twitch in your putting swing.   Real life doesn't have that same lotto effect. 

PP can do whatever they wish of course, but duplicating TGC's putting system and catering to the sim crowd is like shooting themselves in the foot and alienating most of the casual gaming world just to appease a few hardcore players. 

I like the way PG is developing so far.  I just hope PG doesn't get "tilted" towards the hardcore crowd during the early access beta on Steam (where most of those players will undoubtedly be hardcore players).  I hope that PP keeps the needs of the casual gamers in mind too.

We already have TGC for those who want that experience, I see no logical reason to create TGC Part Deux by copying their putting system.

Agree with a lot you say here, but don't fear, PG's putting is nothing like TGC's and I only recently commented in the tester's forum how I appreciate PG's putting as a non-hardcore gamer, so I think you'll approve. I have no success with TGC's and was quite glad to read you indicate I'm not the only one.

[IanK]

Agree with a lot you say here, but don't fear, PG's putting is nothing like TGC's and I only recently commented in the tester's forum how I appreciate PG's putting as a non-hardcore gamer, so I think you'll approve. I have no success with TGC's and was quite glad to read you indicate I'm not the only one.

I, for one, like the putting on TGC and your comments about the putting on PG are quite worrying.

[shimonko]

Have you played a lot of it though?

I feel TGC missed the the mark with their short game - TW14 on the xbox360 has the same style of putting and it was something I picked up immediately and really liked. I think it's just how excessively far you have to swing the club back in TGC for the shot distance required.

[IanK]

Have you played a lot of it though?I feel TGC missed the the mark with their short game - TW14 on the xbox360 has the same style of putting and it was something I picked up immediately and really liked. I think it's just how excessively far you have to swing the club back in TGC for the shot distance required.

Yes, I play it quite a lot. Admitted the really long putts are tricky to judge, but anything under 40' are fine.
The short game is too easy, which is why I would like to see the player having to set up to play pitch and chip shots themselves. For instance, if I've got a pitching wedge in my hand I might be able to hit it 120 yards with a full swing. A pitch shot shorter than this should require the correct set up by the player and having to hit a percentage of the maximum 120 yards. You shouldn't be offered a 'pitch shot' option with a full swing of, say, 45yards. Then, if you're 45 yards away from the pin, all you've got to do is hit a full shot. The same goes for chipping.

[axe360]

Yes, I play it quite a lot. Admitted the really long putts are tricky to judge, but anything under 40' are fine.
The short game is too easy, which is why I would like to see the player having to set up to play pitch and chip shots themselves. For instance, if I've got a pitching wedge in my hand I might be able to hit it 120 yards with a full swing. A pitch shot shorter than this should require the correct set up by the player and having to hit a percentage of the maximum 120 yards. You shouldn't be offered a 'pitch shot' option with a full swing of, say, 45yards. Then, if you're 45 yards away from the pin, all you've got to do is hit a full shot. The same goes for chipping.

 

Then you will Love this game...

[IanD]

Yup, the only shortened meter is the Chip Meter.

 

All other shots use the full meter. This isn't the end of the deal though... it's simply the start. What develops from this... who knows!

Currently, the only limitation is Chipping with anything less than a 6 iron. This will be addressed in the future, and one reason for not being able to select a 3 iron, is because of the animation.

 

As for lob/flop shots... I've enjoyed using the 64W on a high shot and seen some great results.

[axe360]

Forgot about that one Ian, thanks..