|
|
Post by ErixonStone on May 6, 2019 15:16:17 GMT -5
Furthermore,and this is the only thing that i absolutely disagree and can't understand..why the tour has to protect the less strong players? It isn't about "protecting the weaker players"; it is about accessibility. We want as many people to play and enjoy the tours as possible. We want the tours to be as competitive as possible. For comparison, consider True-Sim. Many people enjoy playing it, but its participation tops out at about 100. For many who have tried it, not being able to see turns the experience into a grind. The result: a tour dominated by a few people. I don't see the benefit of making things harder just to make them harder, and I do see detriment to it. There is, of course, some nuance to it, as there are some "harder" options that increase the engagement and improve gameplay. Your mileage may vary in that aspect (Forced Master Clubs, for example, although XBox Users and PC Users might not agree; Wind speed hidden (meter displayed but number turned off)). |
|
wmr5277
Amateur Golfer
Posts: 226
TGCT Name: Vitaly Potapenko
Tour: PGA
|
Post by wmr5277 on May 6, 2019 15:21:00 GMT -5
Furthermore,and this is the only thing that i absolutely disagree and can't understand..why the tour has to protect the less strong players? It isn't about "protecting the weaker players"; it is about accessibility. We want as many people to play and enjoy the tours as possible. We want the tours to be as competitive as possible. For comparison, consider True-Sim. Many people enjoy playing it, but its participation tops out at about 100. For many who have tried it, not being able to see turns the experience into a grind. The result: a tour dominated by a few people. I don't see the benefit of making things harder just to make them harder, and I do see detriment to it. There is, of course, some nuance to it, as there are some "harder" options that increase the engagement and improve gameplay. Your mileage may vary in that aspect (Forced Master Clubs, for example, although XBox Users and PC Users might not agree; Wind speed hidden (meter displayed but number turned off)). I was only talking about the PGA. All PGA guys should be able to still be great with a couple subtle changes to make it harder. Personally I liked how it was done last season. With the top 50 on their own tour. |
|
|
|
Post by mcbogga on May 6, 2019 15:49:52 GMT -5
Furthermore,and this is the only thing that i absolutely disagree and can't understand..why the tour has to protect the less strong players? It isn't about "protecting the weaker players"; it is about accessibility. We want as many people to play and enjoy the tours as possible. We want the tours to be as competitive as possible. For comparison, consider True-Sim. Many people enjoy playing it, but its participation tops out at about 100. For many who have tried it, not being able to see turns the experience into a grind. The result: a tour dominated by a few people. I don't see the benefit of making things harder just to make them harder, and I do see detriment to it. There is, of course, some nuance to it, as there are some "harder" options that increase the engagement and improve gameplay. Your mileage may vary in that aspect (Forced Master Clubs, for example, although XBox Users and PC Users might not agree; Wind speed hidden (meter displayed but number turned off)). Not being able to see what? No zoom to aim you mean? On the TST you can still follow your shot. The wind speed is really not much more than an aesthetic change as the meter is accurate down to plus minus 1mph. It not really creating score variance. It was better, albeit cumbersome, in TGC1 where the flag was used and it was plus minus 2-3mph. I do agree that the distances as range is a silly setting as it does not represent even the information environment of your Sunday golf league. Really comes down to what the game should be. From a video game perspective, scores do not matter one bit. However, if we want to mimic a golf tournament, scores - or rather score variance - is a crucial component. High level golf on championship layouts is still a game centered around par, generally. Making a birdie on most holes requires some good shots, and a mistake or some mediocre shots will yield bogey. There is a real possibility of all three outcomes on an average hole. Eagles are rare as are double bogeys, but they do happen. That is golf, and part of what makes the game great is balancing the need to chase birdies by taking on riskier shots with the risk of making double or worse which is really hard to recover from. The issue with -60 scores is that they completely counteract this balance. Birdie is the norm, but outside of par 5s and drivable par fours - eagle is still a matter of luck more than skill and very unlikely. The score variance is not there and the game becomes a race not to make par. There is no way to catch up after a bogey or even a couple of pars. Does not resemble golf at all. Not that it needs to if the goal is a video game competition. To me, that game is not very interesting, since I like golf a lot more than video games. Note that this is a minority opinion from someone who plays without assists and also no loft box, follow cam or swing feedback. Now - that is a proper grind. Which is what golf is all about. |
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on May 6, 2019 23:57:23 GMT -5
Furthermore,and this is the only thing that i absolutely disagree and can't understand..why the tour has to protect the less strong players? It isn't about "protecting the weaker players"; it is about accessibility. We want as many people to play and enjoy the tours as possible. We want the tours to be as competitive as possible. For comparison, consider True-Sim. Many people enjoy playing it, but its participation tops out at about 100. For many who have tried it, not being able to see turns the experience into a grind. The result: a tour dominated by a few people. I don't see the benefit of making things harder just to make them harder, and I do see detriment to it. There is, of course, some nuance to it, as there are some "harder" options that increase the engagement and improve gameplay. Your mileage may vary in that aspect (Forced Master Clubs, for example, although XBox Users and PC Users might not agree; Wind speed hidden (meter displayed but number turned off)). The comparison with the tst is a bit too much. I'm talking about just to play with no aim marker. Tst is an other thing,made for the chad thundercock that is (or is not) in all of us. Is obvious that a lot of players would dislike this approach. I would be mad to propose this. But this change is intended just for the pga tour and it would affect just the best tour, that is supposed to be played by the best players we have. I thing that the easiest way to see if i'm right or wrong in my thought that this change could be not just meneageable by everyone, but even cheered like good news,could be to ask to them. If for them this change is too much or if it really damages their pleasure to play,well,every discussion is useless. |
|
wmr5277
Amateur Golfer
Posts: 226
TGCT Name: Vitaly Potapenko
Tour: PGA
|
Post by wmr5277 on May 7, 2019 7:16:19 GMT -5
mcbogga said - The issue with -60 scores is that they completely counteract this balance. Birdie is the norm, but outside of par 5s and drivable par fours - eagle is still a matter of luck more than skill and very unlikely. The score variance is not there and the game becomes a race not to make par. There is no way to catch up after a bogey or even a couple of pars.
Well said. This is the point I was trying to make. You make (4) pars in a row (especially if one of those pars is on a par 5), and you can kiss a top 10 on the PGA Tour goodbye. Where if the settings were a bit tougher; that might not be the case.
|
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on May 7, 2019 8:10:06 GMT -5
mcbogga said - The issue with -60 scores is that they completely counteract this balance. Birdie is the norm, but outside of par 5s and drivable par fours - eagle is still a matter of luck more than skill and very unlikely. The score variance is not there and the game becomes a race not to make par. There is no way to catch up after a bogey or even a couple of pars. Well said. This is the point I was trying to make. You make (4) pars in a row (especially if one of those pars is on a par 5), and you can kiss a top 10 on the PGA Tour goodbye. Where if the settings were a bit tougher; that might not be the case. I'm not completely sure that,with some change (every kind of change,i mean),you can catch up the gap created when you lose some stroke. Theorically speaking,being the conditions more or less always the same for everybody (i'm not so sure about wind force and direction cause i noticed how it changes from round to round even playing always with the same setup,but this is at least realistic,not something to complain about),the values into the field should be always the sames. Obviously someone could pay for some change more then other players,but in the end i'm not sure that any change can affect so much this side of the situation. What you wish,i mean. So the main reason to think about the change for me stays just in the simple realism that to play a course without zooming on the aim marker would add to our journey and,maybe,in some variation in the finale scores,but i have the feeling that it would not affect the competition so much in terms of scoring. Is even for this reason that for me is a good change, not too tough. We could gain a lot of realism,paying very little in terms of added difficulty. I simply can't find negative sides in this change. And,on another side,i can't find another change useful or not too tough that could be implemented. The distance information would be absolutely out of time,if in order of more then 2-3 yards. The grid on greens in fact would turn the pga tour in the tst and is not what we're looking for. Not counting the fact that would be absurd to shut off the green's grid while we're keeping on the aim marker. And at this moment i can't find others changes. But to shut off the zoom on aim marker seems very cool to me. I can't see bad things about this change. And playing the pga tour would be very special and a different challenge that the euro or the web.com tour. It's just this,in my eyes.  |
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on May 7, 2019 8:10:40 GMT -5
This is video game golf where a golf swing is approximated by moving a short stick a total distance of about 2 inches. It cannot possibly replicate the dispersion of real-life golf. There are no aids that can be disabled to make up for that.
|
|
wmr5277
Amateur Golfer
Posts: 226
TGCT Name: Vitaly Potapenko
Tour: PGA
|
Post by wmr5277 on May 7, 2019 9:51:28 GMT -5
This is video game golf where a golf swing is approximated by moving a short stick a total distance of about 2 inches. It cannot possibly replicate the dispersion of real-life golf. There are no aids that can be disabled to make up for that. Yes. Obviously. Many including myself are still going to shoot really good scores no matter the settings. Like I said at the beginning of this thread....some kind of mix of settings to make each round 1 or 2 strokes harder for the PGA Tour |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2019 10:49:33 GMT -5
There should be a way to hide the elevation info because you don't really know that in real golf unless you have one of those caddy books. You have to eyeball it in real golf.
|
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on May 7, 2019 11:21:12 GMT -5
There should be a way to hide the elevation info because you don't really know that in real golf unless you have one of those caddy books. You have to eyeball it in real golf. I'm not 100% sure,but honestly i was pretty confident that elevation changes,just like distance,it should be something that every caddie/pro golfer knows quite well before to start a round and that can be almost exactly checked everytime in every point of a course. But i have never played golf,sadly. I'm just assuming this. |
|
|
|
Post by mcbogga on May 7, 2019 13:35:29 GMT -5
This is video game golf where a golf swing is approximated by moving a short stick a total distance of about 2 inches. It cannot possibly replicate the dispersion of real-life golf. There are no aids that can be disabled to make up for that. Of course it could, if designed to do so. If it should is a matter of opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by mrohde4 on May 9, 2019 10:20:02 GMT -5
I see your point,but as above said,it's not just about to have an harder game,it's to have a game a bit more realistic and,not last,more enjoyable. Just to play the courses the way as they are intended to be played. Cause in the way we are playing,in fact we don't know what a blind shot is. We are losing a lot of emotions that this magic game could bring to us. And with no need to speak about the ridicolous scores at pebble beach,augusta or everywhere,i think about the loss of appeal on every single link course. Or you really are enjoying your time at muirfield or at st aindrews playing eith aim marker? I don't believe it. I repeat it,this idea is about the love for the game,is not about the difficulty. And above all,i'm sure that if i'm good enough to play with no aim marker with no evident damages on my score,every player,with a bit of practice could manage the change. I'm sure. Furthermore,and this is the only thing that i absolutely disagree and can't understand..why the tour has to protect the less strong players? Is not the first time i heard this kind of statement,that you have to think to the casual players who plays just for passing time.. but i can't understand. If i'm not good enough to reach the pga,(and probably is exactly what will happen),for sure i would never blame the tour to be tougher. If i'm not strong enough or if i can't practice enough,it's my prpblrm,why it could become a problem for all the community? I think we have a lot of categories just to have the best players in the best category. I think that a pga player has to be good enough to menage a game with no aim marker. And i bet that all of they could. And in the end don't sounds a bit strange that from web.com to the pga we have the same difficulty level? Just my opinion,of course. And if you are sure that this change would have less benefits that issues,i disagree, but easily understand. No doubt that the tour is already pretty enjoyable the way it is. Just my .02 but the game is two adjustments away from being "what we all want." Unfortunately implementation both up to HB and probably not appropriate for this thread or forum. 1. A green contour display system somewhere between the current grid and no grid. What is it? Not sure, but a happy medium where slope is visible but not a bright neon eyesore. The grid takes attention away from the course's beauty and "grid golf" can take away from the experience. On the flip side, playing with No Grid isn't ideal because the subtle 1-2 cup breaks can be invisible. Infuriating and not realistic. Given the current state of golf video games, it's puzzling why the green-reading system is identical to mid-90s games. 2. Fix the flick swing and short swing lines. This half-exploit significantly reduces a player's accuracy variance which allows for full-lofted dart throwing. All you need is solid tempo and your shots are 50-75% more accurate than a player whose swing lines reach the top. This is half the reason why some believe the game is too easy. |
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on May 9, 2019 11:25:52 GMT -5
I see your point,but as above said,it's not just about to have an harder game,it's to have a game a bit more realistic and,not last,more enjoyable. Just to play the courses the way as they are intended to be played. Cause in the way we are playing,in fact we don't know what a blind shot is. We are losing a lot of emotions that this magic game could bring to us. And with no need to speak about the ridicolous scores at pebble beach,augusta or everywhere,i think about the loss of appeal on every single link course. Or you really are enjoying your time at muirfield or at st aindrews playing eith aim marker? I don't believe it. I repeat it,this idea is about the love for the game,is not about the difficulty. And above all,i'm sure that if i'm good enough to play with no aim marker with no evident damages on my score,every player,with a bit of practice could manage the change. I'm sure. Furthermore,and this is the only thing that i absolutely disagree and can't understand..why the tour has to protect the less strong players? Is not the first time i heard this kind of statement,that you have to think to the casual players who plays just for passing time.. but i can't understand. If i'm not good enough to reach the pga,(and probably is exactly what will happen),for sure i would never blame the tour to be tougher. If i'm not strong enough or if i can't practice enough,it's my prpblrm,why it could become a problem for all the community? I think we have a lot of categories just to have the best players in the best category. I think that a pga player has to be good enough to menage a game with no aim marker. And i bet that all of they could. And in the end don't sounds a bit strange that from web.com to the pga we have the same difficulty level? Just my opinion,of course. And if you are sure that this change would have less benefits that issues,i disagree, but easily understand. No doubt that the tour is already pretty enjoyable the way it is. Just my .02 but the game is two adjustments away from being "what we all want." Unfortunately implementation both up to HB and probably not appropriate for this thread or forum. 1. A green contour display system somewhere between the current grid and no grid. What is it? Not sure, but a happy medium where slope is visible but not a bright neon eyesore. The grid takes attention away from the course's beauty and "grid golf" can take away from the experience. On the flip side, playing with No Grid isn't ideal because the subtle 1-2 cup breaks can be invisible. Infuriating and not realistic. Given the current state of golf video games, it's puzzling why the green-reading system is identical to mid-90s games. 2. Fix the flick swing and short swing lines. This half-exploit significantly reduces a player's accuracy variance which allows for full-lofted dart throwing. All you need is solid tempo and your shots are 50-75% more accurate than a player whose swing lines reach the top. This is half the reason why some believe the game is too easy. Two cents well spended i agree. In fact,as i said from the start of the discussion,the proposal to play with no aim marker is not mainly for a matter of difficulty level,but just for amusement and "love" for the idea to play the game of golf a bit much more as it is intended to be played. I know that the issues with the clubs and the system disparity are not fully menageable or solvable,but we can do something to have more fun while we are playing this game. About the grid,is hard to play without it  easports tried in some game to propose a compromise,leaving the grid but shuting off the moving lines. But the antiaestethic grid stays,even adopting this solution. It's a setting for very good players,anyway. Maybe a bit too much even for a lot of actual pga players. But in the end the game is pretty enjoyable even right now. I love it!  |
|
|
|
Post by fadgewacker on May 13, 2019 14:50:46 GMT -5
If it were to happen: No lie grid and no aiming circle Would be fine for me, but distances and elevations need to remain accurate IMO.
If anything further than those 2 things, make the elevation a range.
|
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on May 13, 2019 23:47:25 GMT -5
If it were to happen: No lie grid and no aiming circle Would be fine for me, but distances and elevations need to remain accurate IMO. If anything further than those 2 things, make the elevation a range. I still not tried the tst tour so i don't know it perfectly..but what would it be the real difference between the pga tour and the tst,doing so? The idea here is not to replicate a tst tour on the pga. Just to made a bit more enjoyable the journey. I fear that a lot of players would be unhappy about playing this game with no grid on the greens. But i can't be wrong,obviously. |
|
easports tried in some game to propose a compromise,leaving the grid but shuting off the moving lines. But the antiaestethic grid stays,even adopting this solution. It's a setting for very good players,anyway. Maybe a bit too much even for a lot of actual pga players. But in the end the game is pretty enjoyable even right now. I love it! 
