|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 26, 2016 2:22:30 GMT -5
I enjoy this game,and enjoy the tours greatly. There is a problem,however. The courses designed and then selected for the tours.
We all have our preferences regarding which courses we like/dislike,this is obvious,and so it is difficult to please all of the people all of the time,if not impossible,BUT,please designers,remember that any course must first be an enjoyable experience to play,a challenge which,with good play,can be overcome. Note 'with good play'...none of us want soft greens and dialing in for a birdie on the approach.
Up next on the Euro tour is 'Pilansburg' a nice looking course. I've practiced the first two rounds but I doubt I will be again. A few interesting holes but a great number which are simply a large-ish green with a flag placed three or four yards from the front of it. This means,on a number of holes,playing into the rough or onto the fairway in front of the flag to try to get close. Fair enough - this can be done,but,time and time again? Hole after hole? Is that interesting to play? Absolutely not - it's a yawn fest for me.
We know designers try to keep the scores down,but please do it with imagination. This game MUST be an enjoyable challenge.
Last week on Web 'Odina' was the course. I know players found it tough but though I didn't officially play it thanks to a lucky exemption to Euro a couple of weeks ago,I did nevertheless load up the tour and play it. A very interesting course,with elevation changes,contoured greens,landing areas on greens etc etc. Everything I like about this great video game.
Making nice looking courses and then putting the flag right on the front of the green,hole after hole,as far as I'm concerned,is bone idle designing. It's a bore to play,which is far more serious in my opinion. I don't mind playing a very tough course,in fact I love it,but it must be tough for the right reasons,and above all - be INTERESTING!
Edit: 'The Nomad' was the course in Web last week which I liked,not Odina.
|
|
|
Post by rod81simo on Apr 26, 2016 5:31:29 GMT -5
The setups IMO at Pilansburg are brilliant!!!! Firm and Fast isn't for everyone but I for sure am going to be keeping it on the roster, we've had 3 weeks of medium firmness greens and I think it's about time it was brought back in a big way! Yes, I totally agree that the level of pin tucking on these setups is sadistic but I'll be damned if it doesn't put up massive score variance as it is impossible for the most part to leave yourself a straightforward chip/flop, the puns are tucked in places where running your ball up sometimes won't be available and neither will short siding for the easiest of chips/flops either, the guy that wins this event will be the guy who used course management the best and had some luck on the greens, I'm looking forward to it and think that csugolfer60 has done a superb job! The course is spectacular to look at, you're right, but it's the design that is first class too.... It's a shame you don't see it this way
|
|
|
Post by BIELSALUFC on Apr 26, 2016 6:38:15 GMT -5
Odina is this weeks course on the Euro tour.
I understand where you are coming from, but what other protection is there against high scores when guys are just so good. Even when the pin is tucked, stick it in the rough then flop it in
|
|
|
Post by boomboom on Apr 26, 2016 7:09:50 GMT -5
Pilansburg: I have to admit, my first few go around on this place was a rage quit fest, but then I muscled through a few more. I dam near made -14 on 1 of the set-ups. My notes on 1 of the set-ups is concerning that they have "play for chip" on 10 holes, however that is only on 1 of the setups over 4 days. The designer definitely has designed a course again that over the 4 days will highlight weakness in your game. I'm quite sure if there is a part of your game not spot on, you are going to experience much difficulty.
The course is score able, I certainly have seen that first hand.
The course is a golf course, looks like a golf course, is pretty, has plenty to look at, has golf holes that look like golf holes, and is my pick for play next week.
|
|
|
Post by csugolfer60 on Apr 26, 2016 9:54:44 GMT -5
You have to have thick skin to be a tournament course designer The only thing I would say is that making the course "enjoyable" is quite opposite what it takes to host a tournament - it's actually the goal of the designer to design a course that will break mentally weak players based on their expectations of what a golf course "should" be and how it plays. I think you'll find the best players find their enjoyment from winning. And a big part of that is realizing that 90% of players will crumble simply because they don't feel "comfortable". Or, in other words, I'll let Pete Dye say it best - "Golf isn't fair, so why should the courses be?"
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 26, 2016 10:53:12 GMT -5
I don't believe it is being 'mentally weak' to dislike a course.
This is not about scoring high or low on any course,this is about enjoying the challenge. For me,practicing whether landing three yards into the rough before the hole is better/worse than four yards - it just doesn't hold my interest,hole after hole. For 'rough' we can substitute the fairway before a raised pin. Essentially it's a similar calculation.
Variety is the spice of life. If a course is boring obviously I'm not going to enjoy playing it.
This is a criticism of the courses which seem often to be expected on the tours,not just of this course.
I think,in an effort to at least try and keep the scores down at a level approaching real golf,we are losing out on variety in some cases. Placing holes three yards onto the green front time after time - it gets a bit boring.
If scoring -15 on a course is possible with good play,and most importantly the course is interesting to play,with a variety of challenges,then so be it. Just because that score is not realistic in real golf - so what? This is a video game. Hopefully changes made by HB in the future will see to aspects of the game which can make things too easy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2016 10:59:25 GMT -5
Could you tell us which courses you've published so we can get an idea what you view as a fair course?
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 26, 2016 11:02:20 GMT -5
I have no interest in making a course. I can tell you I like The Nomad,which I believe some people don't,and Tye Dunes is another favourite. There are others but I don't see the point in making a list.
By the way,I did not say the course was unfair - I said it was not interesting to play. There is a difference.
It is perfectly fair - it's the same course for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 26, 2016 11:33:24 GMT -5
Odina is this weeks course on the Euro tour. I understand where you are coming from, but what other protection is there against high scores when guys are just so good. Even when the pin is tucked, stick it in the rough then flop it in My mistake,the course on Web I was talking about was 'The Nomad' not Odina.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2016 12:39:17 GMT -5
Going to do my best not to come off as an ass on this topic. I'm very much on the fence, and understand both sides of the debate.
I'll be the first to admit that it's annoying and somewhat unrealistic to have a pin 3 yards into a green that is firm and fast when the approach shot is 175yds +. The ball physics as they relate to how the react on the green in TGC really don't allow for much give, so in some cases it plays as almost a "forfeited" shot...meaning you're just trying to minimize the punishment. If the greens are undulating or heavily sloped then you're really just taking birdie out of the equation and making a player save par. Now...there's nothing wrong with having those holes on a round, but having almost half of a round like that is not enjoyable..not to me anyways.
That being said, a player's inability to adjust to the course and conditions isn't the fault of the course. Everybody is playing the same circumstances.
It's far from easy to set greens up to make everybody happy. I spend TONS of time when I make firm greens to insure that they are the right size, fair breaks, fair angles, multiple landing zones. It's easy to criticize when you haven't done it. I do believe that in many cases courses are taken to unrealistic dimensions to make it a challenge for upper level players, but I don't have a solution as to how to make that better.
Anyways...just my 2 cents...not trying to be offensive or ruffle feathers.
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 26, 2016 15:01:24 GMT -5
Pilansburg: I have to admit, my first few go around on this place was a rage quit fest, but then I muscled through a few more. I dam near made -14 on 1 of the set-ups. My notes on 1 of the set-ups is concerning that they have "play for chip" on 10 holes, however that is only on 1 of the setups over 4 days. The designer definitely has designed a course again that over the 4 days will highlight weakness in your game. I'm quite sure if there is a part of your game not spot on, you are going to experience much difficulty. The course is score able, I certainly have seen that first hand. The course is a golf course, looks like a golf course, is pretty, has plenty to look at, has golf holes that look like golf holes, and is my pick for play next week. I think I shot -8 or -9,I'm not sure which. My point has nothing to do with the scoring on a course. Anyway,if people enjoy this particular course then that is good for them. I'm sure there will be courses I like and others hate too.
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Apr 26, 2016 15:03:54 GMT -5
I go back to the simplest way to take away the "play for the rough" scenario is to take away the rough. Krampus was a great example of this. Large greens so you could play for the greens and putt for birdie on a tucked pin, but if you went for the pin and missed, your ball simply ran off the back or side where there wasn't any rough and into a collection area. There were some holes with rough placed around the green but it was MOSTLY in areas where you wouldn't normally play to go for the pin and 15+ yards from the pin. There were a few holes like the first par 5 that you could play for the rough, but that is okay for a couple holes in 18.
Collection areas folks, no rough. This forces players to either 2-3 bounce it onto the green in firm conditions or play for the green and a longer putt, unless they hit that perfect shot.
|
|
|
Post by csugolfer60 on Apr 26, 2016 15:43:37 GMT -5
I go back to the simplest way to take away the "play for the rough" scenario is to take away the rough. Krampus was a great example of this. Large greens so you could play for the greens and putt for birdie on a tucked pin, but if you went for the pin and missed, your ball simply ran off the back or side where there wasn't any rough and into a collection area. There were some holes with rough placed around the green but it was MOSTLY in areas where you wouldn't normally play to go for the pin and 15+ yards from the pin. There were a few holes like the first par 5 that you could play for the rough, but that is okay for a couple holes in 18. Collection areas folks, no rough. This forces players to either 2-3 bounce it onto the green in firm conditions or play for the green and a longer putt, unless they hit that perfect shot. I'll be interested to see if you like the new Legacy at Cape Point, which was an experiment to intentionally try to prevent the rough near the pin, and to punish aggressive shots that are misplaced. It'll be tough, but hopefully a good strategic test.
|
|
reebdoog
TGCT Design Competition Directors
Posts: 2,742
TGCT Name: Brian Jeffords
Tour: CC-Pro
|
Post by reebdoog on Apr 26, 2016 15:47:58 GMT -5
I think half the problem in this thread is the title. It should be called "My personal feelings on course difficulty" or something similar. As it is it sounds like "Hey designers...listen up for how to do things right". Not how it was intended I know.
The other half is folks forgetting that this is entirely subjective and that everyone is going to enjoy things differently when it comes to course design. That's just how it is. We'd be better served to simply play the ones we like and enjoy and also play the ones we don't and soldier on knowing someone else probably thought that was the best course they ever played.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2016 16:38:40 GMT -5
I think half the problem in this thread is the title. It should be called "My personal feelings on course difficulty" or something similar. As it is it sounds like "Hey designers...listen up for how to do things right". Not how it was intended I know. The other half is folks forgetting that this is entirely subjective and that everyone is going to enjoy things differently when it comes to course design. That's just how it is. We'd be better served to simply play the ones we like and enjoy and also play the ones we don't and soldier on knowing someone else probably thought that was the best course they ever played. This
|
|