|
|
Post by mattyfromcanada on Jul 7, 2024 17:17:19 GMT -5
I think my recent submission was not actually played or looked at prior to being decided upon. I see the photos posted to my course from the reviewer, but these are not photos from my course. My course is Cedars Pointe Golf Club, but the photos posted to the course by a reviewer are not from my course. I don't know if the refused email was based on my course or the one that they have in the photos. Based on other courses I have that are approved I do not see why Cedars Pointe Golf Club would have been denied for any reason. I am not sure where to post the issue or who to reach out to regarding the possible error. This is the problem with really generic course names, there's a ton of bland names in game so mix ups are easy. Not saying that's what happened here, but it's something to note for future submissions. |
|
|
|
Post by steshan on Jul 7, 2024 17:28:21 GMT -5
I think my recent submission was not actually played or looked at prior to being decided upon. I see the photos posted to my course from the reviewer, but these are not photos from my course. My course is Cedars Pointe Golf Club, but the photos posted to the course by a reviewer are not from my course. I don't know if the refused email was based on my course or the one that they have in the photos. Based on other courses I have that are approved I do not see why Cedars Pointe Golf Club would have been denied for any reason. I am not sure where to post the issue or who to reach out to regarding the possible error. This is the problem with really generic course names, there's a ton of bland names in game so mix ups are easy. Not saying that's what happened here, but it's something to note for future submissions. |
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Jul 7, 2024 17:39:50 GMT -5
I think my recent submission was not actually played or looked at prior to being decided upon. I see the photos posted to my course from the reviewer, but these are not photos from my course. My course is Cedars Pointe Golf Club, but the photos posted to the course by a reviewer are not from my course. I don't know if the refused email was based on my course or the one that they have in the photos. Based on other courses I have that are approved I do not see why Cedars Pointe Golf Club would have been denied for any reason. I am not sure where to post the issue or who to reach out to regarding the possible error. Not sure what happened with your course's pictures, but I did just give your course a run to see if there's any feedback that could be offered. I am not a reviewer, but do ranger and schedule for TGCT. Played Pin 1, black tees, default conditions. Not a deal breaker, but the surfaces here don't work well together in my opinion. The bold mow lines in the greens/tee boxes, the lush green-colored fairways with the burned-out brown rough, etc. Just didn't suit my eye at all. Planting is kind of mediocre here, to be honest. From what I can tell, it looks like multi-planted trees and big rocks dropped down for the most part. No under brush, tall grasses, etc. Light rough surfaces are very wavy and look odd. The right side of Hole 4 is an example of this. The greenside bunker on Hole 4 is also quite bathtub-y, and could be sculpted better. The cart/walking path looks kind of poor on Hole 5, where runs awkwardly along side the fairway for a bit. Just doesn't mesh well with the layout of the course. The cliffs off to the right are also not great - they are just harshly sculpted terrain with heavy rough laid over it. Should be more natural with rocks and plants or something. As it is, it doesn't look realistic at all. Hole 6 is an odd design and has some problems. The fairway bunker makes no real sense, as it's never in play. The sculpting of the fairway section up by the green is too bold, and that fairway and rough there would never exist on a real course because it could not be maintained without a groundskeeper risking his/her life. There's also a random auto-gen bush down near the water off to the right of the green. Stopped playing after Hole 7, as the same issues continue to be present...while the hole has a nice view, it also has very weird looking fences off to the left, extremely bold sculpting of the tee boxes and the cliffs to the left (again, cliffs are just covered in rough-length grass), very strange planting of trees on the coast, etc. While it does seem there was a mix-up with the photos, I would likely say that the status given by the reviewer here is accurate. There's some major sculpting issues, especially along the coast and with some of the bunkers, and planting looks like it's maybe 40% done. Hole designs are "ok", but don't really stand out in any way. Sorry to sound harsh, but there are some things that need some attention here, and I can see why it's Not Approved. |
|
|
|
Post by b101 on Jul 8, 2024 2:09:42 GMT -5
I think my recent submission was not actually played or looked at prior to being decided upon. I see the photos posted to my course from the reviewer, but these are not photos from my course. My course is Cedars Pointe Golf Club, but the photos posted to the course by a reviewer are not from my course. I don't know if the refused email was based on my course or the one that they have in the photos. Based on other courses I have that are approved I do not see why Cedars Pointe Golf Club would have been denied for any reason. I am not sure where to post the issue or who to reach out to regarding the possible error. The pictures and reviewing are totally separate processes, so won’t have anything to do with the review. As Matty said though, avoid the generic course names. Also, sroel’s comments are always great. |
|
|
|
Post by karma4u on Jul 8, 2024 9:38:21 GMT -5
I think my recent submission was not actually played or looked at prior to being decided upon. I see the photos posted to my course from the reviewer, but these are not photos from my course. My course is Cedars Pointe Golf Club, but the photos posted to the course by a reviewer are not from my course. I don't know if the refused email was based on my course or the one that they have in the photos. Based on other courses I have that are approved I do not see why Cedars Pointe Golf Club would have been denied for any reason. I am not sure where to post the issue or who to reach out to regarding the possible error. This is simply a case of the missing "s", I take full responsibility for this obvious error. As pointed out, I take pics for the database and not the reviewer. I have absolutely nothing to do with the review process. The proper pics have now been uploaded to your submission. Cheers. Par 3-11th.
|
|
|
|
Post by win33black on Jul 12, 2024 5:58:06 GMT -5
Is it possible to get some feedback on Gull Point Links please?
|
|
|
|
Post by HoneyBadgerHacker on Jul 12, 2024 16:51:10 GMT -5
Is it possible to get some feedback on Gull Point Links please? I didn't review your course but after playing a couple of holes I can honestly tell you why. Playability issues with unintentional blindness was pretty apparent. I think you are pretty close if you can fix that on your next course. Think your green complexes and planting are not too bad but some of your bunkers are a bit too big and need proper sculpting. I'd suggest doing a lot of play testing on each hole and get a good look at where your golfer has options (if you can see them, if you cant then you either placed a fairway where it probably shouldn't go or you need to sculpt the area in between to where you can see potential landing options to include a good look at hazards. |
|
|
|
Post by win33black on Jul 12, 2024 22:33:28 GMT -5
Thanks for that feedback Honey Badger. I obviously have some work to do on this but will continue to take on people's input.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alec675922 on Aug 12, 2024 8:56:16 GMT -5
Is it possible to get some feed back on my latest course Cleavedell Forest.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Aug 12, 2024 11:49:35 GMT -5
Is it possible to get some feed back on my latest course Cleavedell Forest. Thanks Not a reviewer, but just played the course. Pin 3, blue tees, default conditions. Some odd green sculpting on Hole 1...there's an area in the front left that kind of collects in a bowl. Also, 132 is kind of a slow default speed, and is very close to the Moderate default speed of 134. That kind of limits flexibility for schedulers. The lighting on Hole 3 tee is very harsh. I cannot see the fairway or green off the tee because the sun is so low and bright. The hole itself is a drivable par-4 with basically no danger off the tee. In certain winds, the trees just left off the tee on Hole 4 really come into play. I was faced with a bit of a left to right wind, and the limbs knocked my tee shot down over 230 yards away from the hole, dropping me into heavy rough. Also, there's random tall grass planted on the left side of the fairway here. Hole 6 has another tree that should just be removed. It's to the right, before the fairway, and is only there as an annoyance. The hole also has a very pinched landing zone, which my ball hit, then the sculpting bounced it into heavy rough. The green on Hole 6 is also covered with moving shadows that would likely be frustrating to putt thru in higher winds. Hole 7 is the second drivable par-4 on the front 9. Again, zero danger here. And more moving shadows all over the green. Hole 8 is a very short par-5 (510 yards). Even into the wind, I had just 204 into the green on my second, which was just a 6-iron. And the putting surface has very little movement to it. Hole 9 is another par-5, again quite short at just 539 yards. Only needed 5-iron into this one, and the green again only has some sloping around the edges of it. Hit a dead straight putt from 45 feet and made eagle. Lots of shadows on the green again. Hole 11 is another par-5 that's super short - this one's just 498. With just a 7 mph breeze behind me, I hit a 340-ish yard drive, and had just 164 in. Might sound like a broken record, but shadows on greens are an issue here. Hole 12 is now super narrow at the landing zone and is a 471-yard par-4. Grass planting could be done neater...there's a random grass just hanging out in the middle of the rough left of the fairway. Lots of shadows on the green again. Hole 13 has more tall grass on the fairway. This is another easy par-5, even though it's longer. No danger on the tee shot, and another iron to reach in two. Hole 14 is very different than the rest of the course, in terms of green contours. This one has huge red slopes cutting thru it. I had a putt from above the hole, and it was never staying on the green if I missed it - which I did. Hole 15 has a retaining wall that could use some work. There's a huge gap between land and the upper land surface of the wall at the front left of the green. I know they are really tough to do, but when they aren't done to perfection, the issues can really stand out. Par-5s here are really too short. I had just 178 into the green on my second on Hole 17. I hit thru the green with an 8-iron... Hole 18 is another drivable par-4...there are too many on the course, IMO. Trees here also force a shaped shot, but other than that there's zero concern about going for the green in one. Several things kind of add up on this one...shadows on the greens, multiple drivable par-4s, par-5s that are better suited as par-4s for play in this game, some aggressive lighting, and some issues with planting on playable surfaces. Green sloping could also have been done better and more consistently. Default speeds here at 132 are quite slow, and most putts I had were almost dead straight. The retaining wall on 15 was also problematic. It's not a "bad course", but it does have some issues that would for sure keep it from ever being a tour course, and some other issues are kind of red flags that would keep it from approval, too. Hope this helps! |
|
|
|
Post by patlouvar on Aug 15, 2024 22:03:52 GMT -5
Pine Lake (Tour) - Not Approved
Major sculpting issues (unintentional blindness, unnatural mounding/contouring, greens not sculpted in areas)
Major surfacing issues (overlapping surfaces, surface transitions uneven, inconsistent scale)
Lack of care/consideration with planting
Excessive trees in play (trees in front of tees/green)
Illogical/unplayable hole designs (forced club choices/shot shapes, no consideration for layup options)
|
|
|
|
Post by Alec675922 on Aug 18, 2024 4:41:30 GMT -5
Is it possible to get some feed back on my latest course Cleavedell Forest. Thanks Not a reviewer, but just played the course. Pin 3, blue tees, default conditions. Some odd green sculpting on Hole 1...there's an area in the front left that kind of collects in a bowl. Also, 132 is kind of a slow default speed, and is very close to the Moderate default speed of 134. That kind of limits flexibility for schedulers. The lighting on Hole 3 tee is very harsh. I cannot see the fairway or green off the tee because the sun is so low and bright. The hole itself is a drivable par-4 with basically no danger off the tee. In certain winds, the trees just left off the tee on Hole 4 really come into play. I was faced with a bit of a left to right wind, and the limbs knocked my tee shot down over 230 yards away from the hole, dropping me into heavy rough. Also, there's random tall grass planted on the left side of the fairway here. Hole 6 has another tree that should just be removed. It's to the right, before the fairway, and is only there as an annoyance. The hole also has a very pinched landing zone, which my ball hit, then the sculpting bounced it into heavy rough. The green on Hole 6 is also covered with moving shadows that would likely be frustrating to putt thru in higher winds. Hole 7 is the second drivable par-4 on the front 9. Again, zero danger here. And more moving shadows all over the green. Hole 8 is a very short par-5 (510 yards). Even into the wind, I had just 204 into the green on my second, which was just a 6-iron. And the putting surface has very little movement to it. Hole 9 is another par-5, again quite short at just 539 yards. Only needed 5-iron into this one, and the green again only has some sloping around the edges of it. Hit a dead straight putt from 45 feet and made eagle. Lots of shadows on the green again. Hole 11 is another par-5 that's super short - this one's just 498. With just a 7 mph breeze behind me, I hit a 340-ish yard drive, and had just 164 in. Might sound like a broken record, but shadows on greens are an issue here. Hole 12 is now super narrow at the landing zone and is a 471-yard par-4. Grass planting could be done neater...there's a random grass just hanging out in the middle of the rough left of the fairway. Lots of shadows on the green again. Hole 13 has more tall grass on the fairway. This is another easy par-5, even though it's longer. No danger on the tee shot, and another iron to reach in two. Hole 14 is very different than the rest of the course, in terms of green contours. This one has huge red slopes cutting thru it. I had a putt from above the hole, and it was never staying on the green if I missed it - which I did. Hole 15 has a retaining wall that could use some work. There's a huge gap between land and the upper land surface of the wall at the front left of the green. I know they are really tough to do, but when they aren't done to perfection, the issues can really stand out. Par-5s here are really too short. I had just 178 into the green on my second on Hole 17. I hit thru the green with an 8-iron... Hole 18 is another drivable par-4...there are too many on the course, IMO. Trees here also force a shaped shot, but other than that there's zero concern about going for the green in one. Several things kind of add up on this one...shadows on the greens, multiple drivable par-4s, par-5s that are better suited as par-4s for play in this game, some aggressive lighting, and some issues with planting on playable surfaces. Green sloping could also have been done better and more consistently. Default speeds here at 132 are quite slow, and most putts I had were almost dead straight. The retaining wall on 15 was also problematic. It's not a "bad course", but it does have some issues that would for sure keep it from ever being a tour course, and some other issues are kind of red flags that would keep it from approval, too. Hope this helps! Thanks for taking the time to play and give me your feed back, while I agree with some points, I feel that as a forest course you will get shadows on greens (my local course has 10 greens cut back into tree areas so are always in shadow) I get par 5's in this game can be short but for me have 600 yard holes does not feel right. The retaining wall I missed the section you talk about and will watch for that in the future, the grass you point out I totally agree should not be there and should not be there as I looked at it in the designer and it should not be there as it was supposed to be deleted. Not my best course I agree. The tree you talk about on hole 6 was placed to make you shape your shot but in this game you just hit a driver over the top, that's a fault of sizing in the game as if you tried that at my local course you would one never clear the top and 2nd would probably lose the ball in the rough. with the short 4' I was just looking to give easy chances to score, greens do look a lot different at higher speeds and play a bit harder. Green sculpting is something I am playing around with, some like flat greens and greens with some movement, but the moans I hear when watching streams or in groups not mant like loads of movement, hard to find a happy medium on this topic. Thanks again, you have given me things to ponder on. |
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Aug 18, 2024 10:23:16 GMT -5
Thanks for taking the time to play and give me your feed back, while I agree with some points, I feel that as a forest course you will get shadows on greens (my local course has 10 greens cut back into tree areas so are always in shadow) I get par 5's in this game can be short but for me have 600 yard holes does not feel right. The retaining wall I missed the section you talk about and will watch for that in the future, the grass you point out I totally agree should not be there and should not be there as I looked at it in the designer and it should not be there as it was supposed to be deleted. Not my best course I agree. The tree you talk about on hole 6 was placed to make you shape your shot but in this game you just hit a driver over the top, that's a fault of sizing in the game as if you tried that at my local course you would one never clear the top and 2nd would probably lose the ball in the rough. with the short 4' I was just looking to give easy chances to score, greens do look a lot different at higher speeds and play a bit harder. Green sculpting is something I am playing around with, some like flat greens and greens with some movement, but the moans I hear when watching streams or in groups not mant like loads of movement, hard to find a happy medium on this topic. Thanks again, you have given me things to ponder on. You're welcome! I get where you are coming from and do understand that some things occur on real life courses, as I too have local tracks with shadowed covered greens and odd trees placed about. The issue is...those things can be avoided in a sandbox course designer, and they take away from the user experience when playing in-game. They don't work well for play on tour specifically, hence why I am guessing this one was Not Approved. Things like trees being used to require shaped shots are covered in the video in the OP. The video says that the trees "mustn't feel random or forced". In my opinion (again, not as a reviewer, but I do schedule for 3-click and Plat, and ranger courses for all tours), the tree on Hole 6 is definitely forced and feels out of place. As I mentioned in the feedback, it's only there to annoy the player as it does randomly require someone to use a shaped shot...and then in conjunction with a super tight landing zone, the hole becomes all about protecting par as even well-struck, well-shaped tee shots end up in the heavy rough, as mine did. Shadows on the greens is an issue with playability...when high winds come up, the shadows move aggressively and aiming putts becomes annoying as well as irritating to the eye. And on this specific course, it was on nearly every green. Default lighting could not be used on this course if it were potentially a tour worthy track. Green slopes are a very tough thing to get right. They need to feel natural and consistent...that's honestly more important that if they are "hard" or "easy". Here, the greens are flat in most places, then all of a sudden, there was one par-3 green that had huge red penalizing slopes thru it. Just didn't feel it was connected to the rest of the course, and was done again just to protect par. I know there are tutorials out there from the top designers, and it might be worth checking those out for tips. Again, the course is not bad. But since the goal here is potential tour use, that's where I am coming from with this feedback. And moving shadows on greens, forced/random trees in play, planting on playable surfaces, and inconsistent sculpting and sloping on greens kind of makes tour use for this one a no-go, sorry to say. |
|
|
|
Post by nateypeetersonn on Aug 21, 2024 16:37:46 GMT -5
Hi Everyone,
I'm looking for some feedback on my recent course - Killington Island Club (not approved)
Just hoping to learn as much as possible as this was my first big design project.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Aug 21, 2024 17:33:51 GMT -5
Hi Everyone, I'm looking for some feedback on my recent course - Killington Island Club (not approved) Just hoping to learn as much as possible as this was my first big design project. Thanks! Hi, and congrats on the publish! I just played a round here, using default conditions, red tees, and Pin 4. First off, having the course tip out at over 8,000 yards is doable, but it is something I will be interested to see how it plays out. Hole 1 - right off the bat, this feels like it's going to be much more leaning toward a fantasy style of course. Not a problem at all, but these styles of courses don't typically fit into the TGCTours. Also, the sculpting along the edge of the land is very sharp, dramatic, and kind of unnatural. It just looks like the sculpting brushes were used and the land left as is. Hole 2 - it hit a very slight fast off the tee, and the palm tree that is there knocked my ball down and left me 350 yards away from the hole on my second. In certain winds, and with very small misses, the trees will be very in play. The rest of the hole is pretty straight forward with little strategy involved. Hole 3 - kind of an interesting design here. The fairway runs into a bunker some 350 yards away, so anytime the wind is at your back, you're forced to hit less than driver. There is a yellow-to-orange colored slope in one of the 9 grid boxes around the cup, which is technically not legal, but I still hit one to 11 feet and had a dead-straight birdie putt. Hole 4 - the fairway doesn't start until 270 yards away. Shorter hitters may not be able to reach it unless they have a helping wind or play up a tee or two. Sculpting of the tee boxes makes the bunker on the right of the fairway not visible, making it unintentionally blind. Needed a 5-wood to reach this par-4 in regulation, but did so and had another very straight putt from 6 feet for birdie. Hole 5 - this is OK, but the green is pretty flat again. Hole 6 - so this is where the course ultimately took a huge leap into "fantasy" territory. The first 5 holes of the course are nearly dead flat - save for the drive downhill 70 feet on Hole 1. Hole 6 has you hitting a tee shot up 120 feet, over a waterfall, to a totally blind fairway that starts almost 250 yards away. Anything short will be deader than dead, since there's also OB there? Plus, the fairway narrows considerably, making this a very quirky hole that doesn't work for tour play really at all, I hate to say. The green is totally blind from the middle of the fairway, too, as it's blocked by a 40 foot hill and rocks and such. Hole 7 - and this one lost me a bit, too. A wrap-around par-5 that's 426 yards long as the crow flies. But since there's a mountain in the way, you have to play the hole as a huge half-circle. This hole reminds me of some on the the Treasure Island course in the old Rory McIlroy PGA Tour game. The fairway starts 275 yards from the tee...way too far away. Most greens so far feel like they run front to back, too. And bunkers need some work in terms of sculpting and having them fit into the surfacing. Hole 8 - another dramatic elevation drop on this one. Green is not visible from 175 yards away in the fairway. Hole 9 - this is OK, although maybe the stairs in front of the green take away a bit from the view, and could also come into play if someone hits their tee shot too short. Hole 10 - an odd bit of routing here, hitting your tee shot over the driving range? The extremely massive "church pews" on the right of the fairway look strange. Hole 11 - a target golf short-4 here. Not a bad hole, but I wish there would have maybe been an option to allow the golfer to try to go for it in one here. Instead, it's just "hit the bit of fairway, hit a wedge in, and make birdie". Hole 12 - again, fairway does not start until 250 yards away. Trees could be in the way on your approach, even if you're in the fairway. Hole 13 - the par-3s are all playing about the same yardage. I think this is the 3rd or 4th 240-ish yard par-3 to this point. Hole 14 - and this is at least the 3rd or 4th 600 yard par-5. Hole 15 - this par-3 is fine, although the greens are still quite flat in most places. Hole 16 - another fairway that begins 250 yards from the tee. Hole 17 - I like this par-3 quite a bit, Hole 18 - nice finisher to the round. The sculpting of the land behind the stands is a bit dramatic, but no big deal. Overall, the course definitely is more "fantasy" than TGCTours usually looks for. The back tees are really too long, and would never be useable on tour because certain winds would never be doable, since fairways couldn't even be reached. Planting was a bit one-note...the same palm trees with the same grasses beneath them, except for the really dramatic areas in the middle of the round when things went "fantasy". Sculpting was OK for the most part, but could be refined, especially around bunkers, areas where land meets water and near tee boxes. Greens had some interest, but more often than not, they were very flat. I'd say this is a pretty decent start for a first publish project. It plays fine, captured the environment, and you could see some ideas out there in relation to hole strategy. There were some quirky bits, too, but those quirky parts fit into a more "fantasy" type of course. Just know that, if you're looking to design courses for use on TGCTours at any time in the future, the fantasy elements may need to be toned down a bit. Good job on the course, and best of luck on future builds! |
|
