|
Post by bruce on Oct 24, 2019 9:39:05 GMT -5
I realize accuracy as far as yardage and such such be accurate, but when doing real courses should some of the accuracy be sidelined in favor of better "sim" gameplay ? I'm doing some work on Eastward Ho and the course was built when hickory sticks were used so yardage to bunkers and such were a lot different than with modern clubs. Also the fairways when accurate yardage is used seem very wide. Playtesting with them slightly narrower seems better, but I'm not sure If its a good idea or not. Opinions ?
|
|
|
Post by whodatmatt34 on Oct 24, 2019 12:06:33 GMT -5
As far as distances to bunkers and stuff like that off the tee, I think the best thing to do is to create the course using the real distances, then add a fictional back tee set that plays better with in-game distances. I can't really say on width, though. Alot of people prefer accuracy, but I think most people would also say to design for yourself first. You could always publish two versions, one that's accurate and then another tour version that's more suited to play interesting.
|
|
|
Post by 15eicheltower9 on Oct 24, 2019 16:39:15 GMT -5
To me, accuracy seems like a visual thing. So if you tighten up the fairways maybe bring the surroundings in a little too. Distances should probably be the same length wise or the overhead view would be off and people would notice. But like matt said, design for you. It would be refreshing to see an rcr with a personal twist. Not that the rest aren't great, but real courses are built with budget and land restrictions, in this game we have neither.
|
|
|
Post by linkslover on Oct 25, 2019 7:34:37 GMT -5
I designed Northwood Golf Club creating 18 holes based on holes I have played in real life, but adapted them for the game. They are inspired by not replicas of. That is a route you could take.
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Oct 25, 2019 9:17:05 GMT -5
Thanks for the opinions and information, its nice to get info from people in the know !
|
|
|
Post by 15eicheltower9 on Oct 25, 2019 9:25:06 GMT -5
Thanks for the opinions and information, its nice to get info from people in the know ! I wouldn't say, "in the know" per se. But we have opinions
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Oct 25, 2019 11:37:35 GMT -5
I played against a ghost on one of my fav courses and I'm still using "beginner" clubs so most of the distances are fairly real, that is If I could actually hit the ball straight. But whoever I was playing against outdistanced me, by at least 50 yards on par 5 holes. it was ridiculous to say the least. they were almost driving some par 4's! As far as I'm concerned using the beginner clubs is the only way this game should be played If accuracy is something to be concerned with. But its good to be able to talk to people who design not only a lot of courses but good ones. Well thought out and with details to match. I have made 4 course so far and one was the one I learned to play on. I have it now finally transferred from the original TGC to TGC 2019. So any time I want I can go and play on it, even though its now gone and turned into a housing project. I'd like to try a LIDAR course, but I just don't understand the concept well enough to try it, even after reading some good guides as well.
|
|
|
Post by linkslover on Oct 25, 2019 12:44:05 GMT -5
Sounds like the ghost was using master clubs.
|
|
|
Post by gamesdecent on Oct 25, 2019 22:03:33 GMT -5
My Cypress Point and Fishers Island play best without the master club driver in the bag. ~280 yard drive seems to fit the "tips" tees nicely. Some people asked for longer tees to accommodate master clubs, but with those two, there simply wasn't room on the plot to do that on holes where it was needed. So I would say it's up to you as the designer on whether you want a longer tee set for video game players, while keeping the standard real life tee sets for players who want the authentic experience. This is probably the route I will take with my National Golf Links of America RCR, because I think it has room to extend the length and challenge video game players. In the end, it's your course, do what you want to with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2019 1:25:21 GMT -5
Try to keep the fairways the real width. I believe Eastward Ho has very undulating terrain, so unless you're hitting through it with master clubs it's best to leave them wide. Plus, it gives more options as to where in the fairway you want to play to position yourself ideally for the next shot.
To give it some more teeth and/or to preserve strategic intent, you may want to consider adding some fictional back tee boxes. I did this on two oy my LiDAR courses, won't be doing on the current one and will bring back again for the 6th. When doing this I normally just bumped all the tees back 1 box on those holes but for Wolf Run I plan to have one tee set with all the back tee distances and then a second fictional back tee set that will occupy the extended fictional teeing areas where applicable and will share a box with the 'real' back tees when not. That way, the rest of the sets are kept right where they're supposed to be.
|
|
|
Post by grovey31 on Oct 27, 2019 5:58:56 GMT -5
If you’re doing a LiDAR version of Eastward Ho! (Or any other course for that matter) PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE keep it as accurate as possible. That course is sooooo good and doesn’t need any help. If your concerned with people driving greens, that’s not the courses fault, it’s the stupid distance that the clubs go. 90% of people playing Eastward IRL hit the ball 220-250 off the tee. It’s like Petty said, people who want to play it and get a real life feel for the course will have to either use a different club set or swap out the driver on master clubs for the 2wood. Cypress and Fishers are two of the the best courses (it not the best) in this game and just as in real life, can lose all of the architectural intent just for the sake of unrealistic distance. It just doesn’t make sense to me that we use realistic terrain data and realistic course yardages and then we play the courses with the most unrealistic club settings. I know I’m ranting a bit but please understand that this is in regards to LiDAR courses that I’m making this plea/argument. Also I just love Easward Ho! so much and would be pretty upset to see it changed very much just to accommodate things that people can simply change with their club settings.
On different note, THANK YOU for taking this course on, I’ve read the course data isn’t the best but it’s such an amazing course and more people need to see it.l and experience it.
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Oct 27, 2019 10:43:39 GMT -5
I am trying it, but right now thru the PS4. I'm not familiar enough to try it with LIDAR, nor could I anyways since I'm using the PS4. In the future I plan on using the PC, but to start all over again would be a mess to say the least. But I want to make it both challenging and as accurate as possible. Its tuff because it was pretty much redone in 2004 and restored to original, I maybe I should say updated by Keith Foster. I have the first nine holes done, but looking back at more pictures the topography just doesn't look right, so I need to go back in one hole at a time and redo the landscape. Theres a lot of Fiscul(?) type grass too which I hoped would be easier with multiple plantings, but since that doesn't work I'll have a lot of manual planting to do. A little help would be appreciated on this course from time to time, although I'm not sure how that could be done, but If anyone wouldn't mind it would be greatly appreciated, but not absolutely necessary. Anyways appreciate the help and advice. Its funny at first I just wanted to get it done and published, but with all the info and interest now it has taken on a greater importance, especially since its in the same state. BTW can I get it out there somehow to playtest without actually publishing it ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2019 12:00:41 GMT -5
Keith Foster is pretty well respected for his restorations. He's no Fazio when it comes to that stuff (who insists on putting his own touches on the course to its detriment). DO NOT tighten the fairways. You can do so in a 'tour' version but make it very subtle: if you do so it should be no more than 2-3yds narrower than actual as otherwise it changes the way the course plays as opposed to making it slightly more challenging. Super high FIR% is always going to be a thing in TGC no matter how narrow the fairways are, so it's better to keep it real width. If you want to make it more challenging, my first tip would be to make the hole locations more difficult. I know the feeling: you're worried that everyone will rip the course apart and go -15 on it, and tbh with some thought put into those hole locations it's not all THAT likely to happen. At least it doesn't have two par 5s under 460yds like Fishers Island does, which makes the course so easy to tear apart in TGC ( gamesdecent they play it as a par 70 for tournaments). And if you do add some fictional back tee boxes, only add them in places that make sense i.e. where the hole strategy benefits from them and where the terrain can accommodate them pretty naturally. There's nothing worse than having something that looks so obviously 'tacked on' as part of such an otherwise great course. I added five of them on Black Rock, and good luck figuring out which ones they are without looking at a scorecard or an aerial view of the course
|
|