Old Faroe Dunes [CC Design Contest]

[Deleted]

OMG....
I'm working on my second course (first original design) for the contest last night and took a look at this course.
I turned off my controller - shut down the computer and just went to bed. The mic just dropped on the contest.

Sindre's creative use of objects and attention to detail makes me feel like I barely understand how to use the course designer.

Very well done sir. Now I sit wondering this morning if I just delete my entry and try something easier than beating Sindre - like launching a rocket into space and landing on a distant planet.

[SindreRev]

May 24, 2020 7:53:47 GMT -5 @greenside said:

OMG....
I'm working on my second course (first original design) for the contest last night and took a look at this course.
I turned off my controller - shut down the computer and just went to bed. The mic just dropped on the contest.

Sindre's creative use of objects and attention to detail makes me feel like I barely understand how to use the course designer.

Very well done sir. Now I sit wondering this morning if I just delete my entry and try something easier than beating Sindre - like launching a rocket into space and landing on a distant planet.

naahh, thank you tho. Only your second course? You should look at some of my first ones haha.. I'll be sure your second is better than my second keep it up

[karma4u]

Well, I wasn't even going to bother commenting on the course it's so damn good. However, just gotta say that the only folks that have the expertise to comment negatively on a quality course such as this are designers who are in the same bracket as Sindre. We have some great designers in this community but there are only a few in this elite bracket, just an observation. 
Anyways, imho, this is your best course to date out of some pretty damn fine ones. Cheers.

[Trusevich]

Fabulous course, great detail and entertaining routing. Enjoyed the whole experience.

Then I saw this - Oh my word. . .

[robn]

May 24, 2020 17:49:47 GMT -5 karma4u said:

Well, I wasn't even going to bother commenting on the course it's so damn good. However, just gotta say that the only folks that have the expertise to comment negatively on a quality course such as this are designers who are in the same bracket as Sindre. We have some great designers in this community but there are only a few in this elite bracket, just an observation. 
Anyways, imho, this is your best course to date out of some pretty damn fine ones. Cheers.

That's a bit of an elitist attitude to have, no? Just because someone may not be an experienced/expert designer themselves, does not necessarily mean they cannot offer what they feel might be a little bit of useful constructive criticism.

As I experienced the course, I felt I got just a few too many blind 2nd shots after good drives and I know enough about the designer to know that this aspect of the course possibly could of been slightly better with a few little tweaks here and there. That was all.

It's a fantastic course/design as I said and I was only trying to be helpful.

I very much doubt I'd ever be able to produce something of this designs quality. That doesnt mean I cant see a couple things about the course that could make it even better.

[Drjones306]

I’m glad you said that, because everyone has an opinion and hopefully this board is about expressing your view and we can all comment on every course as we see it, no matter who has designed it or what level we’re at on the game.

As someone who is new to the game but has been sketching and designing golf courses for years, I’m interested to see how much emphasis is put on visuals and planting in the game sometimes over and above the basics of the golf course, but this may be totally intentional on the designers part.

I was dubious about the route from the 1st green to the 2nd tee, seemed the only way was to walk back down the first fairway. This also happened on the 5th green to 6th tee, the 10th to 11th seems a huge walk, and for the life of me I can’t work out how to get from the 9th to the 10th or the 17th to the 18th. It may all be intentional but I think these basics should be right especially when designing such a high level layout. The golfer may well be too absorbed by the views to care and this may be intentional by the designer but it didn’t seem right to me.

The 5th for a high gamble risk reward hole I felt could have had a wider run in to encourage the golfer to take the risk, in real life that narrow a run up would discourage most from taking on the green in one. On a personal note I’m not keen on bunkers and rocks etc in the middle of fairways, but that seems to be something a lot of courses have, and finally for such an expansive course the 9th and 18th seemed a bit squeezed in. I hit my tee shot into the left rough at 18 and was in the direct line of anyone standing on the 9th tee.

For me this course is incredible visually, way higher level than I could ever hope to get to aesthetically, but when I played it the first time instantly a few things jumped out that I thought didn’t seem right, maybe being new here this sort of thing is overlooked when the course looks so damn good, and to be fair it plays brilliantly too, I just wondered why those issues were there or if it’s not considered that important when designing considering this is basically fantasy anyway.

Ready to get shot down 😆

[SindreRev]

May 25, 2020 12:33:02 GMT -5 Drjones306 said:

I’m glad you said that, because everyone has an opinion and hopefully this board is about expressing your view and we can all comment on every course as we see it, no matter who has designed it or what level we’re at on the game.

As someone who is new to the game but has been sketching and designing golf courses for years, I’m interested to see how much emphasis is put on visuals and planting in the game sometimes over and above the basics of the golf course, but this may be totally intentional on the designers part.

I was dubious about the route from the 1st green to the 2nd tee, seemed the only way was to walk back down the first fairway. This also happened on the 5th green to 6th tee, the 10th to 11th seems a huge walk, and for the life of me I can’t work out how to get from the 9th to the 10th or the 17th to the 18th. It may all be intentional but I think these basics should be right especially when designing such a high level layout. The golfer may well be too absorbed by the views to care and this may be intentional by the designer but it didn’t seem right to me.

The 5th for a high gamble risk reward hole I felt could have had a wider run in to encourage the golfer to take the risk, in real life that narrow a run up would discourage most from taking on the green in one. On a personal note I’m not keen on bunkers and rocks etc in the middle of fairways, but that seems to be something a lot of courses have, and finally for such an expansive course the 9th and 18th seemed a bit squeezed in. I hit my tee shot into the left rough at 18 and was in the direct line of anyone standing on the 9th tee.

For me this course is incredible visually, way higher level than I could ever hope to get to aesthetically, but when I played it the first time instantly a few things jumped out that I thought didn’t seem right, maybe being new here this sort of thing is overlooked when the course looks so damn good, and to be fair it plays brilliantly too, I just wondered why those issues were there or if it’s not considered that important when designing considering this is basically fantasy anyway.

Ready to get shot down 😆

Dude, I respect your opinion. For the routing to work on a fantasy course like this, there has to be some "longer walks". I won't say I disagree with you, although I don't think the walk between 1 & 2 and 5 & 6 is an issue.. Furthermore, I have done fantasy courses that have waaaay worse "walks" (Geiranger, hyshhh)

I guess you can find "something wrong" with all of my courses. I don't blame you.. I know that it's not perfect, and I'll be surprised if you find a course that is.. I tend to mainly focus on the most important parts; playability and aesthetics. As the gamer won't really walk between the holes.. I guess we could stretch it even further; think of maintenance cost and the fact that the tunnel doesn't go anywhere (and a bridge is made out of OB stakes wtf) etc.. 

Sure, in real life it would have been different. After all, this is just a game and it is way easier to score compared to real life. If this course was designed for regular real-life players, guys would have shot -20 in this game.. 

On a side note, I do focus a lot on routing, including pathways, bridges and walk distance. And how to fit them all together - trust me, it's way more difficult that it seems. Be my guest and try it out for yourself on a course like this.

Anyways If you have any critiques on the playability/strategy/technical execution go for it!  After all, this is a game and this course is pure fantasy (with hints of realism)

[15eicheltower9]

Guys, its a video game. You have to take certain liberties. This course is brilliant.

[robn]

May 25, 2020 12:33:02 GMT -5 Drjones306 said:

I’m glad you said that, because everyone has an opinion and hopefully this board is about expressing your view and we can all comment on every course as we see it, no matter who has designed it or what level we’re at on the game.

As someone who is new to the game but has been sketching and designing golf courses for years, I’m interested to see how much emphasis is put on visuals and planting in the game sometimes over and above the basics of the golf course, but this may be totally intentional on the designers part.

I was dubious about the route from the 1st green to the 2nd tee, seemed the only way was to walk back down the first fairway. This also happened on the 5th green to 6th tee, the 10th to 11th seems a huge walk, and for the life of me I can’t work out how to get from the 9th to the 10th or the 17th to the 18th. It may all be intentional but I think these basics should be right especially when designing such a high level layout. The golfer may well be too absorbed by the views to care and this may be intentional by the designer but it didn’t seem right to me.

The 5th for a high gamble risk reward hole I felt could have had a wider run in to encourage the golfer to take the risk, in real life that narrow a run up would discourage most from taking on the green in one. On a personal note I’m not keen on bunkers and rocks etc in the middle of fairways, but that seems to be something a lot of courses have, and finally for such an expansive course the 9th and 18th seemed a bit squeezed in. I hit my tee shot into the left rough at 18 and was in the direct line of anyone standing on the 9th tee.

For me this course is incredible visually, way higher level than I could ever hope to get to aesthetically, but when I played it the first time instantly a few things jumped out that I thought didn’t seem right, maybe being new here this sort of thing is overlooked when the course looks so damn good, and to be fair it plays brilliantly too, I just wondered why those issues were there or if it’s not considered that important when designing considering this is basically fantasy anyway.

Ready to get shot down 😆

Quality post sir.

Personal taste comes in to it. Personally I like a course that's a bit more, hhmm, grounded lets say (I dont say that referring to this course specifically, I just mean that in general terms). The 'fantasy' courses can look very pretty indeed, but I often cant imagine myself playing them irl. It's the really well designed courses that I can imagine myself playing irl that really impress me. But that, of course, is just my own personal taste.

Knowing a little bit about the designer and how it works means I can absolutely appreciate the time/effort/skill/talent, whatever you want to call it, that went in to creating this course. I mean, fair play, I sure as hell, like many, couldnt do it. But to suggest I cant offer a worthy, potentially useful opinion on a certain aspect/s of this design, simply because I'm not known as a great virtual designer myself within the game/community, whilst knowing absolutely nada about me outside of said game/community, is a suspect attitude to have to say the least.

I'm not gonna harp on but I'll simply say this. I would hope that the really good designer users/creators remember not to sacrifice substance over style. Pretty pictures are lovely and all but really, for me, just give me a good golf hole.

But like i said before, that's just my thoughts on it, shared by some no doubt, but not by all.

[meyo]

Well captain, you just keep getting better at this designing thingy, really enjoyed this one, great job

[SindreRev]

Guys, I get it. I know you prefer IRL courses and I totally respect that. Of course you can express your thoughts, although a discussion on fantasy vs IRL can go elsewhere .. I've been really respectful to both of you and please don't continue the discussion here. Like I said, Your free to give me constructive critiques, but indicating that I I sacrifice substance over style is meaningless .. Go and play your IRL/Lidar courses and have fun with that, see ya

[15eicheltower9]

Blind shots: www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/content/when-blind-is-great

Long walks:
www.golfadvisor.com/articles/toughest-walks-in-golf

Routing (also long walks)
thefriedegg.com/golf-course-architecture-101-part-2-routing-variety-naturalness/

Not trying to out anyone. But obviously pm's aren't being read. We are all here to learn. So the above links are to learn. This course is awesome,IMO. If you're looking to critique a fantasy course and say it's not realistic, or question design choices, that's fine. But ask questions as opposed to offering ways to make it better. This thread is to promote a course. A damn fine one. If you question a design choice, do that, question it. If someone says maybe only the best of the best should nitpick a high caliber course like this, it's not elitist, its the truth. Anyway, if you think it's just me here backing a buddy or being an elitist, I'm not good at design on this game and don't know sindre from a hole in the ground.

[robn]

May 25, 2020 14:08:29 GMT -5 SindreRev said:

Guys, I get it. I know you prefer IRL courses and I totally respect that. Of course you can express your thoughts, although a discussion on fantasy vs IRL can go elsewhere .. I've been really respectful to both of you and please don't continue the discussion here. Like I said, Your free to give me constructive critiques, but indicating that I I sacrifice substance over style is meaningless .. Go and play your IRL/Lidar courses and have fun with that, see ya

You're correct. Any furthering of the conversation doesnt belong here.

..but one more thing..

Just to clarify, I wasnt suggesting that you sacrifice style over substance or referring to this course in that way. I was merely suggesting that, generally, this could be a direction that the best designers are going in. Which, if only from my pov, would be a shame.

I just played the course again btw, and ye, I think it's great. Which I'm pretty sure I've said in every post I've posted here.

[SindreRev]

May 25, 2020 15:01:47 GMT -5 robn said:

May 25, 2020 14:08:29 GMT -5 SindreRev said:

Guys, I get it. I know you prefer IRL courses and I totally respect that. Of course you can express your thoughts, although a discussion on fantasy vs IRL can go elsewhere .. I've been really respectful to both of you and please don't continue the discussion here. Like I said, Your free to give me constructive critiques, but indicating that I I sacrifice substance over style is meaningless .. Go and play your IRL/Lidar courses and have fun with that, see ya

You're correct. Any furthering of the conversation doesnt belong here.

..but one more thing..

Just to clarify, I wasnt suggesting that you sacrifice style over substance or referring to this course in that way. I was merely suggesting that, generally, this could be a direction that the best designers are going in. Which, if only from my pov, would be a shame.

I just played the course again btw, and ye, I think it's great. Which I'm pretty sure I've said in every post I've posted here.

No problem, thanks

[robn]

May 25, 2020 14:39:52 GMT -5 15eicheltower9 said:

Blind shots: www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/content/when-blind-is-great

Long walks:
www.golfadvisor.com/articles/toughest-walks-in-golf

Routing (also long walks)
thefriedegg.com/golf-course-architecture-101-part-2-routing-variety-naturalness/

Not trying to out anyone. But obviously pm's aren't being read. We are all here to learn. So the above links are to learn. This course is awesome,IMO. If you're looking to critique a fantasy course and say it's not realistic, or question design choices, that's fine. But ask questions as opposed to offering ways to make it better. This thread is to promote a course. A damn fine one. If you question a design choice, do that, question it. If someone says maybe only the best of the best should nitpick a high caliber course like this, it's not elitist, its the truth. Anyway, if you think it's just me here backing a buddy or being an elitist, I'm not good at design on this game and don't know sindre from a hole in the ground.

I read your message, 'bud'. Didn't learn anything new, but thanks for the consideration regardless.

The convo went on a kinda of IRL vs Fantasy tangent there.....which was never the angle I was coming from, but whatever.

Great course sindre. Look forward to playing your next one. Just be sure to flatten out a couple humps blocking my view of the green from the middle of the fairway next time. Ooops sorry, not my place. I'm joking, I'm joking....chill!