|
|
Post by sroel908 on Jun 7, 2023 12:22:59 GMT -5
Would like some feedback on Pleasant View GC (Lidar) submitted. Thanks in advance. Just checked this out. Blue tees, Pin 3, default conditions. First, it's only 6,029 yards from the tips. That's super short and likely not going to work for TGCT play (the video in the first post of this thread says that anything that's less than 6,500 yards will be instantly rejected). Hole 1...green is very flat, no interest to it really at all. Hole 2...a par-3 that has trees that block the entire view of the green. And the green itself is almost all flat again. Hole 3...a par-4 that's either drivable or a 3-wood and pitch. These par-4 holes are probably all going to be the same, given the course's yardage. I looked at the scorecard, and yep...the longest par-4 is 408 yards long. At the same time, I see that most par-5s are less than 500 yards long, and one is just 455 yards long. I kept playing and figured I'd mention some other things as they came up, but many of these things repeat. Hole 7...it's a 246-yard par-4 as the crow flies, but the fairway is a 90-degree dogleg right that forces you to hit 5-iron off the tee, then hit a PW pitch to a green with zero undulation on it. I had 160 yards in to reach the green in two on the par-5 Hole 8. I drove the green on 3 or 4 of the front 9 par-4s... Hole 10's fairway is not visible off the tee, due to the sculpting of the tee box. Hole 13 is another 90-degree dogleg right that forces iron off the tee. Only 160 needed again to reach Hole 15 in two, and this one plays a ways uphill. Frankly, this course would never be used in a TGCT event due to the fact that it's too short and has no strategy to it. That's not your fault, since this is a real-life course. But all the par-4s are basically drivable or are 90-degree doglegs that take driver or fairway wood out of your hands. The greens are basically as flat as a tabletop on 90% of the course. This feels like the muni courses I play near my house...which is totally fine in reality, and technically-speaking the work here is done well. But it's not really feasible for a video game golf tour. |
|
|
|
Post by simseva on Jun 7, 2023 14:09:50 GMT -5
Would like some feedback on Pleasant View GC (Lidar) submitted. Thanks in advance. Just checked this out. Blue tees, Pin 3, default conditions. First, it's only 6,029 yards from the tips. That's super short and likely not going to work for TGCT play (the video in the first post of this thread says that anything that's less than 6,500 yards will be instantly rejected). Hole 1...green is very flat, no interest to it really at all. Hole 2...a par-3 that has trees that block the entire view of the green. And the green itself is almost all flat again. Hole 3...a par-4 that's either drivable or a 3-wood and pitch. These par-4 holes are probably all going to be the same, given the course's yardage. I looked at the scorecard, and yep...the longest par-4 is 408 yards long. At the same time, I see that most par-5s are less than 500 yards long, and one is just 455 yards long. I kept playing and figured I'd mention some other things as they came up, but many of these things repeat. Hole 7...it's a 246-yard par-4 as the crow flies, but the fairway is a 90-degree dogleg right that forces you to hit 5-iron off the tee, then hit a PW pitch to a green with zero undulation on it. I had 160 yards in to reach the green in two on the par-5 Hole 8. I drove the green on 3 or 4 of the front 9 par-4s... Hole 10's fairway is not visible off the tee, due to the sculpting of the tee box. Hole 13 is another 90-degree dogleg right that forces iron off the tee. Only 160 needed again to reach Hole 15 in two, and this one plays a ways uphill. Frankly, this course would never be used in a TGCT event due to the fact that it's too short and has no strategy to it. That's not your fault, since this is a real-life course. But all the par-4s are basically drivable or are 90-degree doglegs that take driver or fairway wood out of your hands. The greens are basically as flat as a tabletop on 90% of the course. This feels like the muni courses I play near my house...which is totally fine in reality, and technically-speaking the work here is done well. But it's not really feasible for a video game golf tour. |
|
|
|
Post by simseva on Jun 7, 2023 14:20:05 GMT -5
Thanks sroel908 for the feedback. I know it was a very short course but thought I would submit anyway. It is a very well manicured course IRL. So much so that they will not let you drive your cart in the rough. They also don't have sand traps because of EPA regulations of it being wetlands and farm lands. Some of the holes definelty are a challenge and very short and must use course management. Again thank you for the review.
|
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Jun 7, 2023 14:24:47 GMT -5
Thanks sroel908 for the feedback. I know it was a very short course but thought I would submit anyway. It is a very well manicured course IRL. So much so that they will not let you drive your cart in the rough. They also don't have sand traps because of EPA regulations of it being wetlands and farm lands. Some of the holes definelty are a challenge and very short and must use course management. Again thank you for the review. For sure, happy to help! I could see the course offering challenge in real life, but in the game it's just not long enough to pose any kind of difficulty. No matter what though, it is well done in terms of your work. I wish the greens had some more movement to them, and the shadows across the greens were a bit frustrating in higher winds. But everything else was very neat and tidy. Good work! |
|
|
|
Post by lessangster on Jun 7, 2023 15:04:25 GMT -5
That’s the trouble when you bring many real life courses into this game they don’t play like they do in real life because of how easy it is to hit a long straight ball in this game. I’ve done a course for a friend his home course but won’t put it up for assessment for the game it’s ok on length just but my opinion was it wouldn’t play well in game but it’s quite a nice looking course.
|
|
|
|
Post by odogg37 on Jun 7, 2023 22:05:24 GMT -5
Hello all, Long time TGC member here, Nick Olson. I recently submitted Madden's Turn Golf Course and it was not approved. I feel I checked all of the required boxes and the course has been quite popular in some smaller societies in the community. Obviously TGC is the measuring stick so it would be much appreciated if I could get some feed back on why the course didn't make it. Thanks in advance reviewers! Hi Nick, Just played a round here. Black tees, Pin 4, default conditions. I am not a course reviewer for TGCT, but am a ranger and play most courses that come thru for tour play. Hole 1: I am noticing that bunkers are sculpted a bit strangely. There's even a greenside bunker in front of the green here that has the high side away from the green, hiding it? The green itself is also kind of odd in terms of shape and sloping. There are red slopes just past the hole location that run putts totally off the green, and this is on green speeds of 132. So there would be no way green speeds above the defaults could ever be put in play. That limits the courses flexibility for use in a 4-round event. Hole 2: the blind tee shot here is a bit over the top, IMO. It's 50 feet uphill from tee to green, and you have no view of the fairway at all while standing in the tee box. A low ball flight off the tee would likely hit the hill directly in front of you. Hole 3: this is back-to-back drivable par-4s. This hole is just 262 yards long. No one would ever use that small bit of fairway before the bridge...that brings more water in to play than does going for the green. I was on in one with a hybrid. This should be a par-3. Hole 4: I'm sorry, but Hole 4 is a really odd design that does not work. It's a par-4 that's just 266 yards from tee to green as the crow flies, but the fairway here is at a 90-degree angle from the tee. The fairway runs out 250 yards away from the back tees, so I hit an iron to the fairway, and am left with a 229 yard second shot that is unintentionally blind due to sculpting. And there is also a tree dead straight in front of the green in the line of play. The pin location here is also TGCT illegal at 132 speeds, as there is yellow within the 9-box grid around the cup. This hole itself would be a reason to not approve the course, unfortunately. Hole 5: this one's OK. However, the fairway in front of the green doesn't really make sense, and the green is almost dead flat. Hole 6: another 90-degree dogleg...although this one allows you to cut a huge amount of it down by playing way right. Hole 7: another 90-degree dogleg. One is too many of them, and we are on our third one in the front 9... Hole 8: I have also noticed that many greens so far have been front to back sloped, and here's another. This one is a well downhill par-3. The retaining wall in front of the green is actually higher than the putting surface. The huge red slope that runs front to back here just seems odd and unnatural, since land usually runs toward water, not away from it. Hole 9: this one is OK. Hole 10: another 90-degree dogleg, so I have to admit....I stopped playing here. It continues to seem that the same issues kind of repeat. I would recommend checking out the usual YouTube videos: CrazyCanuck1985's Course Design 101 and b101's How to Build Greens in 2K23 would both be very helpful. Sorry this all sounds harsh, but there needs to be a fair amount of improvement done here in terms of sculpting, strategy, hole design, greens sloping, etc. There were too many of the 90-degree doglegs that were kind of "protecting par" way too much. There were lots of unintentionally blind shots. Green slopes didn't feel natural. Check out those videos and keep practicing...I can see the potential in terms of utilizing the tools to make a solid course. It just seems like some more time might need to be spent on getting technical functions down and strategy figured out. Thank you very much for the feedback, I’ll keep working! |
|
|
|
Post by albinobluesheep on Jun 12, 2023 19:46:23 GMT -5
and what looks like autogen planting left in place. This is a bit of a reach back question but I was reading this thread to get some ideas about what to avoid. I have a LIDAR course that is currently very close to the object limit, and one of the mitigating things I have is leaving a good amount of auto-gen planting between holes. If I filled in every space with spline planting I would have no chance at being under the limit. I'm choosing to only use spline fill in locations were it specifically calls for thicker or sparser trees than the 100% auto-gen. I guess my question is: will having a number of fairways lined with auto-gen trees disqualify my courses or is it only if is is excessive? This is on a 36 hole golf course, with 2 18-hole routings I plan to release at the same time, though I am still undecided if I will submit either for official review. |
|
|
|
Post by b101 on Jun 12, 2023 23:50:45 GMT -5
and what looks like autogen planting left in place. This is a bit of a reach back question but I was reading this thread to get some ideas about what to avoid. I have a LIDAR course that is currently very close to the object limit, and one of the mitigating things I have is leaving a good amount of auto-gen planting between holes. If I filled in every space with spline planting I would have no chance at being under the limit. I'm choosing to only use spline fill in locations were it specifically calls for thicker or sparser trees than the 100% auto-gen. I guess my question is: will having a number of fairways lined with auto-gen trees disqualify my courses or is it only if is is excessive? This is on a 36 hole golf course, with 2 18-hole routings I plan to release at the same time, though I am still undecided if I will submit either for official review. Not a deal breaker on its own but it’s something that we will point out among other issues. Basically, you won’t be rejected for planting unless it is noticeably absent in major areas (check views from all parts of the hole) or encroaching on playable surfaces. |
|
|
|
Post by stealin01 on Jun 13, 2023 12:46:47 GMT -5
Bro Hof Slot - Stadium....not accepted.
If at all possible could I have some feedback regarding the submission. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Jun 13, 2023 13:07:16 GMT -5
Bro Hof Slot - Stadium....not accepted. If at all possible could I have some feedback regarding the submission. Thank you. So, I know you have asked for feedback on previous unapproved courses, as I have offered feedback on some of them. This course has basically the same issues. General: The green speeds here are 134, which is a default speed (Moderate). This limits scheduler flexibility. Hole 1...green is basically all flat, except for some red around the edges of the surface. I had zero movement on my putt here, and I can't imagine this real-life course having a table-top-flat green. Bunker sculpting is OK, but could use some work. Hole 2...fairway bunker not visible from tee. In fact, the bunker seems sculpted backwards, where the high side of it is closer to the tee? Trees planted off to the left of the hole near the road are all the exact same tree - just looks kind of odd. Green has no break. Hole 3...bunker sculpting here is not great, especially near the green. The bunkers look like ice cream, with scoops taken out of the container. And now, the green does have movement to it, but the Pin 1 hole location is set on yellow slopes already at default 134 speeds...they could not handle any higher speeds and it actually doesn't work here in terms of TGCT legality at the default. This would be essentially an immediate rejection, IMO. Hole 4...green is flat pretty much once again. Bunkers need better sculpting. Since these themes were repeating, I figured this would be enough feedback for why this one might not be accepted. Greens have very little interest, and then when they do, the pin was not legal for TGCT use. Green speeds are set on a default setting, limiting setup diversity. Bunkers are not sculpted all that well. There's blindness due to sculpting off the tee. I will say, this one seems better than the previous ones I looked at. So I do see improvement. But the bunkers and greens are still a little ways off, in my opinion. Keep at it! |
|
|
|
Post by axelvonfersen on Jun 13, 2023 13:24:24 GMT -5
Bro Hof Slot - Stadium....not accepted. If at all possible could I have some feedback regarding the submission. Thank you.
Hi.
I reviewed the course and I've also played it a couple of times (the real life course, that is).
Main takeaways were these:
- Greens have very little interest. They're all very flat. The real life course has very intricate greens where missing in the wrong spot is an absolute death sentence - and you'll be happy to three putt from some parts of the green even if you hit a GIR.
- Planting was very basic and nothing like the real course. - Fairways, which are very wide at Bro Hof were super narrow in a lot of places. Scaling was very much off. - Bunkers were all very small and on top of that, poorly sculpted. The Bro Hof bunkers are extremely difficult to pull off well, partly the reason for why I've never bothered myself. - To continue on with the bunkers, most of the bunkers you see from the tee were completely blind. Playing Bro Hof in real life, the bunkers is what dominates the sightlines.
- Pt. 3, some bunkers were just slapped in the middle of a fairway spline.
- Fairway splines were wavy and sloppy - Bro Hof has lots and lots of run-offs which punish any errant approach shots. None of that here. - Also, having Sweden's fastest greens run at this medium-slow pace further lessens the experience.
- Also the usual sculpting and surfacing issues found in other not-approved courses were prevalent (around the greens especially).
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
Post by b101 on Jun 14, 2023 12:09:37 GMT -5
Anchorage Golf Course (L) - The same reasons as all the previous - planting, sculpting, bunkers, sightlines. These lidars just need so much more time and care than you are giving them.
|
|
|
|
Post by aero5k on Jun 20, 2023 15:15:01 GMT -5
Pickens Hills Golf Links (Rejected)
I was wondering if anyone could give me some feedback on why this course was rejected. Probably going to do a new layout on the same lidar so I'm wondering where I went wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Jun 20, 2023 17:47:10 GMT -5
Pickens Hills Golf Links (Rejected) I was wondering if anyone could give me some feedback on why this course was rejected. Probably going to do a new layout on the same lidar so I'm wondering where I went wrong. Hi there, I'm not a reviewer, but I do ranger courses for tour play here. I just played a couple holes at Pickens Hills Golf Links on PS4, Pin 2, default conditions. Hole 1: extremely blinding lighting settings on the first tee. Cannot see really anything down the fairway. When I do zoom in, I see the sculpting of the fairway and around the fairway bunkers is very extreme. The bunkers have large mounds around them in almost every direction, and they are very deep. The green speeds are set to 121, which is quite slow. Even then, the green has lots of red slopes everywhere. I would not imagine these greens could be used at many of the faster settings than default due to this. And because of that, the ability of schedulers to adjust conditions is limited. Hole 2: again, I am blinded by the extreme low sunlight. No view of fairway bunkers off the tee, and some of the bunkers look like blast craters and are way too deep. Also, I can see off to the distance to right of this hole that no work really has been done to plant or cover up land that's not part of the LiDAR. There are just random puddles and ponds that look a little odd, and the sheer drop off from the course to the untouched land is very noticeable. I am glad that you made all that bare area OB, though. I also noticed that there are tall grasses planted on the fairway here on the left side. And lastly, this is not really a useable or acceptable green site/pin location - red within the 9-box grid, and unnatural sculpting all around:  Unfortunately, there is enough in these two holes that would disqualify this course from being Approved. Sculpting needs a lot of work. Planting, lighting, and environment work are not great either. Even if you're using LiDAR for a course, you'll need to work the plot to ensure it can function as a golf course. There were things here that did not work at all, namely this second green and pretty much all of the bunkers I saw. I am sorry to sound so harsh, but this is a long way from Approval, IMO. I would recommend watching CrazyCanuck1985's Course Design 101 tutorials on YouTube, especially ones on greens and sculpting. And please check out the b101 video that's in the very first post of this thread. I would also say it might be worth checking out other courses that are in the database, just to see the areas where those tracks differ from this one. I think there was a course just published a day ago that used real LiDAR data...it's called "Cape Foulwind". It shows how you can incorporate LiDAR into your course, but what you need to do to make it playable and look the way that would be suitable for being in the course listings. I hope this helps! |
|
waldo
Weekend Golfer
Posts: 83
|
Post by waldo on Jun 20, 2023 19:28:39 GMT -5
Hey all!
Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask but what are the differences between approved and tour worthy? Could courses approved be eventually reviewed as tour worthy or is it that decided by the reviewer when it is play tested the first time? How to achieve, design wise, that tour worthy label?
Just wondering about the process not questioning you guys at all. I appreciate all the hard work you guys put into TGC and this board it doesn’t go unnoticed! Thank you for any help you can provide!
All the Best,
Waldo
|
|
