Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2019 4:21:31 GMT -5
@andersnm Funny how you mention that. I feel there will always be an element of 'making courses tough enough to prove suitable for video game play.' I am trying to walk a tightrope with a fictional project that will hopefully be tough enough to be challenging for a typical TGCT player but also with options easy enough that it isn't way too hard to play on simulator. The key to that idea is to make the green surfaces extremely pitched, that way they don't have as many micro-sections as a lot of fictional courses do but so that, when slowed down to IRL speeds in the 8-11 stimp range, are perfectly playable. On 187 it won't be 'believable' as a real course, but drop the green speed to 144 and it would. Every aspect of this course has 'is this viable on simulator' asked about it, right down to the 5 sets of tees to accommodate drive distances as low as 200-220yds including roll. To design for simulator is a superb way to go about designing courses for golf and not the video game itself. My advice for both you and Ezzino is to stop thinking of the video game, and do the true challenging task of making the course fun and challenging for all players - from driving distances as low as 180 yards to the best. This way ezzinomilonga will get the solution to his wind problem - because every course and hole plays different with different winds, and if the course is made to be fun and challenging for all distances, then all is good. Granted - to design courses for all players are difficult to say the least. And, be aware that with low swing speed and carry, you get lower trajectory so the player will carry less distance, and the ball will roll futher. A typical player who hits 200 yards with a driver will not carry the ball more than perhaps 150 yard. So when considering where to put bunkers, how the fairway should go etc. are very different when designing for these players compared to the long hitting pros with high trajectory and much more spin. And when you need to combine the considerations from different tees etc - it all gets quite complicated and difficult. But imho - the courses will be much better as a result. I don't think I agree that only the greens are the key - designing greens is always important, and the greens undulations and contouring should match the design of the hole. You need to consider different trajectories and angles - and this must also match the strategy of the hole - like what side of the fairway is the optimal place to be for the best approach angle to the green etc. As far as I have seen, I think you guys have a very good understanding of the principles of this - the key to me is to consider how the green plays for different swing speed, trajectories, spin rates etc. But a golf hole is more than the green, even though I agree that the green is the most important of any golf hole.
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on Nov 9, 2019 7:00:19 GMT -5
For the little I have understand playing and reading, everything is important on a golf course. Is clear that too easy or too tough greens can easily ruin a course no matters how good can be the rest..ans I'm also pretty sure that to create a very good green is the tougher thing to do on design, but fairways, hazards and distances are vital too, especially to create a strategic course. arielatom thank you for the advices You know, Brian Silva is one of the actual designers I like the most. Is really clever, for me. You and @andersnm give to me a lot of things to think about..and I'll do. Anyway..is too soon to say what I'll do exactly, the idea to create courses having in mind SIM players is something I like a lot, but I must admit that the challenge to create a course tough enough also for who plays with aids is something different and is exciting, in a certain way. Probably soon or later I'll try to do both things. I'm also sure I'll not do practice on RCRs. I have too much respect for every golf course to create a cheap recreation just cause I need to do practice. I'll do it only when..and if..i'll be sure I can offer a good work a very nice looking and accurate course. Unfortunately, for a lot of questions and other things I wish to say/share, I'll need to wait to be at home again. Late next week, actually. Meanwhile I can just think about the whole thing and to draw holes looking for interesting ideas.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2019 11:50:16 GMT -5
Yes, Yes, and Yes to what both of you are saying.
@andersnm I haven't really seen the type of average player you're talking about regarding ball flight. Perhaps it's more of a US thing but most of the 30-cappers I play with hit relatively high, weak slices. I think it's that their swing speed isn't all that low, their contact is just poor. So I was thinking more like 170 for minimum carry distance. Also consider how unlikely you are to find sim players that can't carry drives more than 150, and that even if there's a sizeable player base like that my course would be too hard for them. It wouldn't exactly be 'easy' for sim more so than 'playable.' And everything you said about playing angles, green contours that favor shots played from a smaller portion of the fairway, etc. would be exactly how you add difficulty and interest to a course without sacrificing how playable it is for the masses: easy to play but not so easy to score.
Based on the restriction of having 'only' 5 sets of tees to work with, I would need to publish multiple versions to accommodate everyone. I'm not sure that's the smartest move either, not initially at least. Without publishing multiple versions, I feel it's best to go with a setup that works for the majority of the community rather than trying to satisfy everyone but end up half-assing it as a result. A future members version would be an ideal way to address that issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2019 12:21:28 GMT -5
Yes, Yes, and Yes to what both of you are saying. @andersnm I haven't really seen the type of average player you're talking about regarding ball flight. Perhaps it's more of a US thing but most of the 30-cappers I play with hit relatively high, weak slices. I think it's that their swing speed isn't all that low, their contact is just poor. So I was thinking more like 170 for minimum carry distance. Also consider how unlikely you are to find sim players that can't carry drives more than 150, and that even if there's a sizeable player base like that my course would be too hard for them. It wouldn't exactly be 'easy' for sim more so than 'playable.' And everything you said about playing angles, green contours that favor shots played from a smaller portion of the fairway, etc. would be exactly how you add difficulty and interest to a course without sacrificing how playable it is for the masses: easy to play but not so easy to score. Based on the restriction of having 'only' 5 sets of tees to work with, I would need to publish multiple versions to accommodate everyone. I'm not sure that's the smartest move either, not initially at least. Without publishing multiple versions, I feel it's best to go with a setup that works for the majority of the community rather than trying to satisfy everyone but end up half-assing it as a result. A future members version would be an ideal way to address that issue. You have not played much with older golfers or women then? Sure, many high handicappers have good swing speed but erratic ball striking. And no designer can take the slicers and hookers into deep consideration, because the course would then be 200-250 yards wide on every hole - or more! I play regurarly with older golfers, and many hit well, straight, but with slow swing speed. This is due to the fact that their physics is not youth anymore. In fact, they should drop the driver - sell it, and replace it with wedges and hit higher lofted clubs of the tee - because that is more optimal to their swing speed. But believe me: many golfers I play with take out the driver on all holes from 180 yards. Yes, even par 3 flat 180 yards. And to tell them to drop that stupid club is making them angry. I even see women on a 110 yard par 3 hit 3 wood of the tee. Which is ridiculus. But it helps not a thing to talk to them about it. Yes, you have 5 sets of tees - that is plenty. Not many golf courses has so many tees in real life. In fact, I think 3 tees are what you will find as common. But ofcourse you want championship tees - and this again is a test for the designer - where should you put your tees? Where should the forward tees be on each hole? Where should the members tee be? etc. This is part of designing a golf course for golf - not a game.
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on Nov 11, 2019 9:44:47 GMT -5
I think I understand all these points. And I agree. We are talking about two things really different. Maybe, the easier solution to challenge and solve all these issues, problems and/or differences, is to create everytime a different kind of course depending what kind of players I want to challenge. I mean..who plays this game with all the aids ON, as we do in TGCT, actually plays a different game from who plays with no aids (or the TST). Is simply impossible for me (at least with the knowledge I have right now, for sure) to offer a course challenging enough for both of them. Of course, I could use different tees, but I think is not enough. At all. Cause is not just a matter of distances. Is the whole architecture that needs a tweak. A lot of tweaks. So I decided to develope (slowly, improving it with time and experience until I'll find a good enough formula to "unify" them) two philosophies. One for those course I'll create for who plays with no aids..one having in mind to challenge the best players on tour. It will be not easy..but it will be fun. Of course, the second kind of courses will require an architecture completely "unfair" for who plays simulating real golf. Is for this reason that two philosophies are needed. And maybe..when and if my knowledge and experience will be enough, maybe I could offer a good compromise for everybody. This challenge sounds really interesting for me. I'll start again from the philosophy. Then I'll try to realize it in practice.
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Nov 11, 2019 10:06:19 GMT -5
Only 5 tees,yikes. Most real courses I've seen only have two , then again these are average golfer courses. I can't say I've ever been to the exclusive courses that I only get to play on TGC. I do find it interesting how long the drive distances are in the game, but I do find the beginner clubs the best. They actually make the courses more difficult, sometime you can't even reach Par 4's with 2 shots, and wind can really just kill the whole round depending on how strong it is. I read this thread with great interest as I am also just getting back into designing. Right now I just got the PC version, yet I find the bigger screen using the PS4 to be much easier to see everything. This may sound strange, but I like taking what the PC spits out with a few parameters and then seeing what I can do with it. Its very similar to a racing sim where you start in the back and see If you can make it all the way to the front by the end of the race. Probably because I'm not very good with the actual designing of the courses. But at least with a visible "plot" of land its easier to "see" different things to try.
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on Nov 12, 2019 9:59:12 GMT -5
I think 3 tees are perfect for the game. One for every kind of clubs. Or, at least, to add one "championship" tee with distances stretched up (if the "master clubs" tee should be not challenging enough). After various reflections, I wrote on paper two different philosophies. But is useless to report both of them cause, after all, the real needed differences are not so much..but they are important. I'll try to explain them here, so if someone will find some erroneous conclusion or if I miss something important, can correct/suggest me. The main point behind this is that I think there are a series of things "unfair", if proposed on a course used by SIM players, but totally fair, if not needed, on a course played with aids, especially if built having in mind (as I have) a tough course for a challenging tournament. 1) Uphill landing zones. As already said, I agree with Nicklaus when he says that, IRL, an uphill fairway or green forces players to have a not enjoyable blind shot. If the landing zone is also tight, the difficulty can be easily too much. But playing with aids, to offer uphill holes can be a very good and fair way to complicate the journey to the pin. Then I'll use a good number of elevated/uphill fairways and greens, on the courses for not SIM players. And elevated tees/downhill holes for SIM players. 2) Trees/Tree lined fairways/Dogleg with trees. While for SIM players a dogleg surrounded by trees means to be forced to a very hard blind shot (in such a way that very often designers avoids to create fairways too much tree lined, also on RCRs) the aim marker makes absolutely doable this kind of shots for who plays with aids. But, being needed almost always a draw/fade shot, these situations are always challenging. Then I think is good to offer a good number of them for NoSIM players..and very few for SIM players. 3) Tight landing zones. For who plays with aids, is quite easy to reach a very tight or tucked spot on fairways. The only important thing I think is to don't make the hole just a penal one, offering always one or two easier possibilities from the tee, in which the only penalty should be to use a longer club and/or a bad angle to reach the pin. And never deny a strip of light rough. Is silly to penalize too much with an awful lie a ball rolled out of fairway just a pair of inches. For SIM players, the too tight zones of fairways should be reduced drastically, if not avoided at all. 4) Greens. I think greens are where the differences between SIM and No SIM players are bigger and most evident. A too tricky green and/or pin position can easily result just in a loss of enjoyment for who plays with no aids. And I don't want to offer frustration to the players. But a tricky one is needed for who plays with aids. I think the only rules to follow constantly should be : - to build a green in such a way to never penalize a good shot. - bigger is the distance required for the approach, less tricky should be the green. And a green should be tricky depending the distance of the approach after a "standard" tee shot, not the distance of an approach required after a well executed riskful tee shot. Cause the prize for that risk should be exactly to have an easier approach. - to offer always a "correct side" of a pin. In such a way that who reaches that spot, will have always an easy putt. Then to create, on the other sides of these pins, various nuances of "wrong spots". But, for who plays with aids, I want to create pin positions that requires always to deal with double direction's breaks (downhill/right or uphill/left, for example), just quite sweet (and uphill) on the "correct" side, while for SIM players the "correct" side of a pin will results in a putt with a sweet, mainly single breaks direction. As already said, right now, with the little knowledge and experience I have, honestly I just can't design or simply imagine a tough course played with aids that plays always challenging no matters the wind. The best I can do, right now, is to imagine a course that offers a very good challenge on every hole, with strategy and risk/reward decisions to make, but only with a determined prevailing wind. With a too different wind, I must admit that the strategic side on certain holes simply dies. Is something that will requires a lot of study and tries and fails to be solved (assuming I actually can solve it, of course). Anyway..these are my conclusions, right now. If I (or someone else, cause I'm ready to stea..ehm..To learn, from anyone ) should think about something else, I'll add here.
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Nov 12, 2019 11:47:26 GMT -5
Personally, I've started to throw in "Sim" tee's based on real life amateur golfer hitting distance. Makes for an interesting set up plus I do get a few sim rounds in myself at my local range.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2019 17:49:46 GMT -5
I think 3 tees are perfect for the game. One for every kind of clubs. Or, at least, to add one "championship" tee with distances stretched up (if the "master clubs" tee should be not challenging enough). 1) Uphill landing zones. As already said, I agree with Nicklaus when he says that, IRL, an uphill fairway or green forces players to have a not enjoyable blind shot. If the landing zone is also tight, the difficulty can be easily too much. But playing with aids, to offer uphill holes can be a very good and fair way to complicate the journey to the pin. Then I'll use a good number of elevated/uphill fairways and greens, on the courses for not SIM players. And elevated tees/downhill holes for SIM players. 2) Trees/Tree lined fairways/Dogleg with trees. While for SIM players a dogleg surrounded by trees means to be forced to a very hard blind shot (in such a way that very often designers avoids to create fairways too much tree lined, also on RCRs) the aim marker makes absolutely doable this kind of shots for who plays with aids. But, being needed almost always a draw/fade shot, these situations are always challenging. Then I think is good to offer a good number of them for NoSIM players..and very few for SIM players. 4) Greens. I think greens are where the differences between SIM and No SIM players are bigger and most evident. Ezzino, I think you are too focused on creating course for the game. I stand by my advice - forget the game, and create for golf. Imo, the course(s) will be better. I know you have played many real courses - so you should know that uphill is perfectly fine as long as you see the pin or the fairway. Blind tee shots are more common than blind approach shots - though they happen - at least if you are out in the rough. So you need to orient yourself with your surroundings - peraps find a good tree to aim at. Now, there is a good idea to avoid blind shots, but not entirely. If you are in the fairway, you should normaly not have a blind shot to the pin - that is imo bad design (and it happens). The same with trees. If you don't cut the dogleg, you get perhaps a longer iron to the green - which is perfectly fine. There are plenty holes in real courses that you can try to fade or draw or even try to hit over trees from the tee. Yes, the shot is blind from the tee, but that is perfectly fine for the straight shot is not so it is optional. You never want to force the golfer to a certain shot. I also want to mention that I do not think courses made so difficult that the tour players will struggle to make par is going to be popular and used. My experience with online golf like this, is that the players want unrealistic low scores - if the players on these tours wanted realistic scores, they would turn off the aids.. also the loft box.
|
|
|
Post by ezzinomilonga on Nov 12, 2019 20:12:13 GMT -5
@andersnm i understand what you say. And I agree about the general lines you explained. What I'm pointing out and talking about, right now is just theory. I need to be at home and actually start to design, to really understand HOW MUCH of uphills, blind shots and..everything in short, is fair and fine..and when it starts to be too much. When is enjoyable and when is not. And how to realize it everytime in the best possible way to offer the best possible challenge. But at the same time I think you are misunderstanding a bit what I have in mind. Cause I don't think i'm too focused on the idea to create courses for the game in such a way that ia in some way at expenses of realism. At all. I want to create, slowly and patiently, examples of BOTH kind of courses. As if I should to build courses for two different games. I thought a lot about this thing. And I think it could be a good plan (the only limit is/will be what actually I'll be good enough to put in practice of what I think and imagine), for various reasons, but the main is that i played a lot of courses. And yes, mainly real courses. Definitely. What I noticed is that is really, really hard to create a very good fictional course having in mind to challenge the best players of this game, without to create a course at some point unfair or boring. I want to try to create challenging but fair and various courses for these kind of players. Is not something I'm too focused on. Is just..a totally different kind of challenge, for me. Just another thing. And I'll try to work on this not at expenses of other projects about more realistic courses, that remains the challenge I want to embrace the most. Consider it just as an experiment to verify my skills and my ability to test the limits of architecture when it works with all the other factors, all of them pushed really far. Far in such a way that a real or realistic course could never do. And to tell you the truth, what you said the first time, about this theme, helped me to draw this line, definite and precise, between the two things. I want to create very realistic courses, trying to develope the better architecture I can for the enjoyment of every player (especially to challenge and amuse who plays golf with no aids), testing all variables I can. AND I want also to create other courses in which architecture and concepts are pushed to their limits, in order to offer a really enjoyable challenge for the better players who uses all the aids. And I want to embrace this double challenge exactly cause I don't want to be too much focused on compromises everytime I create a course. Something that, probably, could results just in a failure, if my plan would be to satisfy both kind of players. Furthermore, i think/hope that, if I learn how to build both kind of courses in the best possible way, this thing could help me a lot to learn how to build better courses in general. And maybe, at some point, I'll learn enough to be able to offer a proper challenge for both kind of players creating a single course, but right now I know I couldn't. I have not enough knowledge to do it. I don't know if what I mean is clear enough..but I can just guarantee these two things are not in conflict, in my mind. Are just..two different worlds, for me. As a final thought, I perfectly agree with your statement about the players. But my "plan" is not to create a course in which is really hard if not impossible to break par. For my little experience, i think is not the high or low score that makes a course great or boring. Is the variety of the challenge it offers. And how much satisfaction it gives to the player when he solve the puzzle offered by every hole. Every shot. I want to offer tough but always fair, interesting, various and nice looking puzzles. Then, if the players are good enough to score -15, I have nothing to complain about.
|
|