|
Post by sroel908 on Aug 10, 2021 17:51:15 GMT -5
Sorry that this got off track, st6132 . Just played this...your course is excellent. This is another great example of what a LiDAR course can be when done right. So well done. Hole 16 is the obvious highlight. Just spectacular. Was just hoping and praying my PS4 could handle it! Only slight lag on the 9th tee, but otherwise smooth as butter! Heck, I even aced the 3rd hole! Can't wait to see more of what you might have in store in the future (I hope Bel-Air is next)!
|
|
|
Post by blueblood1995 on Aug 10, 2021 20:14:24 GMT -5
Sorry that this got off track, st6132 . Just played this...your course is excellent. This is another great example of what a LiDAR course can be when done right. So well done. Hole 16 is the obvious highlight. Just spectacular. Was just hoping and praying my PS4 could handle it! Only slight lag on the 9th tee, but otherwise smooth as butter! Heck, I even aced the 3rd hole! Can't wait to see more of what you might have in store in the future (I hope Bel-Air is next)! Lovely ace! st6132, oooooh Bel-Air pleeeeease! Cheers
|
|
|
Post by parbuster1962 on Aug 12, 2021 11:44:34 GMT -5
I played the course yesterday and unfortunately I found it wanting in many ways.
I played with on very firm and very fast greens and there were numerous pin settings that were on "red" slopes. The 18th hole with the pin at the position near the front bunker was not playable with balls rolling off the green. These pins would be playable at moderate or lower settings.
The greens, fairways wand rough were all lacking in texture and variations in colour, making it look unrealistic. Also many of the edges between fairways and rough, etc have edges and angles that are too sharp. A good example of a recently published course that you might want to compare Sleepy Hollow to is the revised release of Carnoustie Tour (fix) or Pasatiempo 2021.
The trouble with Lidar is that it does not replicate greens well and designers need to test and adjust the slopes or at least put the pins in flatter areas.
|
|
|
Post by st6132 on Aug 16, 2021 4:40:17 GMT -5
Thanks all for the feedback! Really appreciate it. parbuster1962 - sorry to hear that you were a little disappointed by the course and its playability. Always room for improvement, so thank you for your feedback and comments. I built the course around medium green speeds (6.5) and should have mentioned in my intro that the green settings should be left as default. I could imagine on very firm/very fast that many of the greens would be close to unplayable - particularly number 2, 13 and 18 Re the textures and some of the edges - will bear this in mind for the next project! Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by beamt0wn on Aug 18, 2021 12:21:57 GMT -5
fantastic job on this. you nailed the restoration updates as far as i can tell. sculpting is is already hard enough to do in the designer, and you got it done with a lidar file that makes you wait 3-5 seconds after every change. i'm seriously impressed. I played the course yesterday and unfortunately I found it wanting in many ways. I played with on very firm and very fast greens and there were numerous pin settings that were on "red" slopes. The 18th hole with the pin at the position near the front bunker was not playable with balls rolling off the green. These pins would be playable at moderate or lower settings. The greens, fairways wand rough were all lacking in texture and variations in colour, making it look unrealistic. Also many of the edges between fairways and rough, etc have edges and angles that are too sharp. A good example of a recently published course that you might want to compare Sleepy Hollow to is the revised release of Carnoustie Tour (fix) or Pasatiempo 2021. The trouble with Lidar is that it does not replicate greens well and designers need to test and adjust the slopes or at least put the pins in flatter areas. hard disagree with this take, parbuster1962. you cranked the greens up to 187--way past the default speed set by st6132--and you're complaining about pins on red slopes? do you also like to dump a bunch of salt in your soup before tasting it and then complain to the chef about it being too salty? maybe try playing on the default speeds. as you noted, these are lidar greens, which means the slopes are real life slopes. not many real life greens are rolling 14s on a stimpmeter, and more aggressive contouring is totally playable.
|
|
|
Post by mvpmanatee on Aug 18, 2021 12:27:10 GMT -5
I played with on very firm and very fast greens Enough said
|
|
|
Post by mctrees02 on Aug 19, 2021 5:26:39 GMT -5
I played the course yesterday and unfortunately I found it wanting in many ways. I played with on very firm and very fast greens and there were numerous pin settings that were on "red" slopes. The 18th hole with the pin at the position near the front bunker was not playable with balls rolling off the green. These pins would be playable at moderate or lower settings. The trouble with Lidar is that it does not replicate greens well and designers need to test and adjust the slopes or at least put the pins in flatter areas. When a designer publishes the greens at 144 speed, it's probably for a reason. Not every course is meant to be played on 187 greens. Much like in real golf, the faster you make greens, the less slope you can put into them. This is why you see a lot of Open Championships played on greens at 8-10' on the stimpmeter while the PGA Tour regularly sets up many of its parkland courses (which were built in the 1960s to 1990's) on a 12-13' stimpmeter. Additionally, advances in agronomy have allowed our major championships to push green speeds to, and sometimes over, the edge. In 1982, the US Open at Pebble Beach had green speeds between 9.5' and 10'. In 2019, they had green speeds between 13' to 15' on the same small, relatively flat green complexes. In 1982, Augusta National played on 11' green speeds and today they typically play the Masters at around 12'. As we all know, the greens at ANGC are very undulated and if they were played very firm at 13' to 15' speeds, then the tournament would turn into a Shinnecock US Open with balls running all over the place. Finally, I'm working on a LiDAR of Prairie Dunes (a course I know very well). Here is what the 2nd green looks like in the game. These 3 pictures are green speeds of 121', 155' and 187'. Which ones would you want to play it on? I also have a Stracka greens reading book of the Prairie Dunes greens from the Big XII championship this past spring. I would say the LiDAR data is pretty accurate for how severe the 2nd green is. TL:DR we are used to playing fictional golf courses with 0-1* of slope around the hole at speeds of 163 to 187. When we play well done LiDAR courses where the pinable areas have 2-3* of slope, they simply can't be enjoyably played at the same speeds.
|
|