|
Post by mcbogga on Aug 4, 2015 2:35:18 GMT -5
HB are also saying that it should be active only for devices with reduced x-axis....
But it's probably flawed/bugged. HB are good at getting things almost right.
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Aug 4, 2015 4:57:22 GMT -5
HB are also saying that it should be active only for devices with reduced x-axis.... But it's probably flawed/bugged. HB are good at getting things almost right. Yes, this was the original intention, turns out it happens to everyone.
|
|
|
Post by firstblitzer on Aug 4, 2015 4:58:13 GMT -5
HB are also saying that it should be active only for devices with reduced x-axis.... But it's probably flawed/bugged. HB are good at getting things almost right. Yes, this was the original intention, turns out it happens to everyone, who cheats.
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Aug 4, 2015 7:47:06 GMT -5
Yes, this was the original intention, turns out it happens to everyone. First off I do not appreciate you misquoting me. Second, what you are basically saying while misquoting me is you are saying everyone who experiences ball squirt must cheat. As I stated in my original post here, the original intention of HB was to turn on ball squirt when the game identified a modification of the x-axis. As HB_Anthony and many others have found through extensive testing and scrubbing of data from many golfers (not all from the tours) is that ball squirt exists on every platform, for every player and for every mouse/controller. Ball squirt is working but not as intended. As HB_Anthony stated in the live stream the other day, they are still looking into why this part of the game is not working as intended. Sadly you choose to ignore this little tidbit in order to troll. Your misquote, however it was intended, is calling out pretty much everyone on tour as a cheater. If I remember correctly you have experienced ball squirt, only you called it something like, "naturally deviating within the aiming reticule". You didn't believe ball squirt existed and blasted everyone who said otherwise and then tried to explain it away saying that as long as the ball remained in the aiming reticule, it was a little variation but not ball squirt. Turns out you were wrong and you too have experience it, so by your own misquoting, you too must be a cheater. Bottom line, HB has acknowledged ball squirt, they have acknowledged that it is not working fully as intended and they are NOT calling anyone who experiences it a cheater. It is their game, I think they know their product best and I trust what they have to say on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by Pubknight on Aug 4, 2015 7:59:25 GMT -5
Bottom line, HB has acknowledged ball squirt, they have acknowledged that it is not working fully as intended and they are NOT calling anyone who experiences it a cheater. It is their game, I think they know their product best and I trust what they have to say on the subject. If what they say is consistent. Here's the problem... on the stream, they said what you indicated, (paraphrasing) that it might be getting applied to others unintentionally and be bugged. However, a day or two *after* the stream, in the forums here, Anthony Kyne stated that ball squirt only affects those with reduced x axis. So from HB themselves, it's not as black and white as you are indicating. What they have put out there is conflicting.
|
|
|
Post by boomboom on Aug 4, 2015 8:13:01 GMT -5
On July 31, Anthony clearly stated, "Guys it only adds random when the x axis is reduced on your controller"......
I saw the stream where he stated it might not be working as intended, however later he made the above quote. I interpret that as working as intended.
While they are stopping short of calling anyone a cheater, they are leaving the door open for that interpretation.
I have absolutely no issue with the way the game plays at this very moment. Even if they removed this so called ball squirt, it would be removed for everyone and it would likely only serve to do 2 things, drive scores even lower and 2 provide incentive to reduce the axis. I say leave well enough alone.
Edit, I see great minds think alike, above was posted at same time.
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Aug 4, 2015 8:14:06 GMT -5
Bottom line, HB has acknowledged ball squirt, they have acknowledged that it is not working fully as intended and they are NOT calling anyone who experiences it a cheater. It is their game, I think they know their product best and I trust what they have to say on the subject. If what they say is consistent. Here's the problem... on the stream, they said what you indicated, (paraphrasing) that it might be getting applied to others unintentionally and be bugged. However, a day or two *after* the stream, in the forums here, Anthony Kyne stated that ball squirt only affects those with reduced x axis. So from HB themselves, it's not as black and white as you are indicating. What they have put out there is conflicting. It is conflicting. The HB stream was July 29th and he stated there they were still having issues with it. My last official conversation with him was July 24th when I submitted some data of different DPI rates. I do know that HB for a very long time did not want to acknowledge that it even existed, their reasoning is they wanted to 'make it more difficult for those who reduced the x-axis.' I didn't bring it up for about a month until after the stream where he admitted it was a feature within the game. As an example here is one issue (for mouse) as I can't test controllers. The official DPI suggestion for TGC is 800 DPI. My mouse comes with 3 default settings (1000, 2500, 6000). When talking with him, I asked if I turned DOWN my DPI to 800 DPI (x and y axis) as is the recommended setting for mice, would the game pick this up as an x-axis modification. The answer was "most probably". I asked if there was anything wrong with this considering I owned a mouse that can change DPI and I was bringing it down to the recommendation. He said there was no issue and was NOT what HB had intended. When we last talked I have had people with simple stock controllers, nothing fancy, $30 bux controllers that were experiencing it. I brought up people like Brionne and Bradley Cooper who have seen it, use controllers and I am 100% confident have no x-axis modification software. So at that point it was still happening. At this point there are a couple of possibilities: 1. They fixed it and it is working as intended. 2. It is one of those things that isn't working 100%, they don't know why, so they are saying the standard line...this is what it is intended to do. I was told by HB that issues like these are not mission critical and fall under the lowest level of fixes. At least i know why they never responded to me under the "bug" forum cause it was never a 'bug.'
|
|
|
Post by Pubknight on Aug 4, 2015 8:26:34 GMT -5
It's a timeline issue. Your conversation was July 24th. The stream was the 29th. But the forum quote was the 31st.
If it's fixed, I think he says it's fixed. 'Towing the party line' also doesn't make sense as he discussed it publicly in the stream, and posted in a thread talking about what he said in the stream.
So the definitive 'truth' is very difficult to point to right now. People that want to agree with you will point to the stream. People that want to disagree with you will point to the more recent forum post.
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Aug 4, 2015 9:26:19 GMT -5
The question comes at 48:37
Anthony said that they haven't made changes. He stated what the intention of bringing it in was and that there seems to have been some issues and that they were reviewing it.
Maybe they did and fixed, but I didn't see a patch.
Boom brought up a nice point. There are ways to modify the x-axis that HB could NOT control, using two thumbs, rubber bands, ties and such to help keep the swing straight. These are all non-software ways to mess with the x-axis. I personally believe that there is a randomness put into all shots to better simulate real golf. It may be more exaggerated when people have modified the x-axis, but i think it is there for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Pubknight on Aug 4, 2015 9:42:59 GMT -5
Ok, I give up. Until they clarify the forum post which occurred after the stream, the stream is irrelevant. I almost want to quote my last post and put it back in here in response. I'll just drop it.
|
|
|
Post by boomboom on Aug 4, 2015 10:01:38 GMT -5
Whatever is happening it's likely just throwing in a random dispersion to everybody no matter the distance from the axis you are. They likely have several settings of random and it is likely decided before you even take the shot what kind of dispersion you are going to get and how much of it if any at all. It's not possible to program what they are claiming, there must be literally thousands of ways to reduce the axis. Some of them detectable and some of them not.
Think of like this if the HBS claim of it only happening to reduced axis manipulation were true, how could they possibly know if someone was say using the rubber band method on a perfectly legit controller? They cannot, it would be impossible to do so. That's not to mention someone using cable ties, or opening up the controller and bending some stuff, removing stuff, snipping stuff etc...It's just not possible, to claim they do is, I'm sorry HBS, I love you and all but that claim is total BS.
Every golf game has done exactly what they have done to make the game harder for the better players while making the game continue to be playable by the not so good players, random deviation of golf shots. Google VEM patent and WGT. Could it be possible that HBS does not want to risk legal action by making the claim they have done exactly what the patent incorporates.? Likely not, so they do it anyway, and say it does something completely different. Simple, gives exactly what the game needs while removing any risk of patent problems.
The deviation is barely and mostly unnoticeable anyway and is much better explained with the circle staring you in the face.
|
|
|
Post by CGilb on Aug 4, 2015 10:12:49 GMT -5
I have experienced offline shots from the teebox many times. I thought it was underlying slope that we couldn't see. However, if I am experiencing this "squirt", I shouldn't be because I am using nothing more than a stock Xbox One controller and I have never attempted to modify my controller's x-axis. So in theory, it isn't working as intended.
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Aug 4, 2015 10:19:40 GMT -5
Whatever is happening it's likely just throwing in a random dispersion to everybody no matter the distance from the axis you are. They likely have several settings of random and it is likely decided before you even take the shot what kind of dispersion you are going to get and how much of it if any at all. It's not possible to program what they are claiming, there must be literally thousands of ways to reduce the axis. Some of them detectable and some of them not. Think of like this if the HBS claim of it only happening to reduced axis manipulation were true, how could they possibly know if someone was say using the rubber band method on a perfectly legit controller? They cannot, it would be impossible to do so. That's not to mention someone using cable ties, or opening up the controller and bending some stuff, removing stuff, snipping stuff etc...It's just not possible, to claim they do is, I'm sorry HBS, I love you and all but that claim is total BS. Every golf game has done exactly what they have done to make the game harder for the better players while making the game continue to be playable by the not so good players, random deviation of golf shots. Google VEM patent and WGT. Could it be possible that HBS does not want to risk legal action by making the claim they have done exactly what the patent incorporates.? Likely not, so they do it anyway, and say it does something completely different. Simple, gives exactly what the game needs while removing any risk of patent problems. The deviation is barely and mostly unnoticeable anyway and is much better explained with the circle staring you in the face. I will say that once they introduced the new PC swing a while ago, I found it harder to detect since I use an inverted swing which uses the backswing as well as the foreswing to determine ball path. Drives that I thought were squirt were in fact cause i was using an inside-out swing, which I have more recently started incorporating into my game especially with strong winds. Pub... the reason I'm still open to both the video and the forum post is because HB for the longest time refused to even acknowledge that it existed, for now obvious reasons. Since ball squirt doesn't truly affect the overall game play to the vast majority of players, it is easier to now simply say, "fixed" and move on without actually doing anything with it. Frankly it isn't worth their time or effort to do anything with it other than a simple glance cause the time and resources it would take to drill down to find out in what situations it exists and in what cases it doesn't would be too much. Humor me for a moment but let me explain. Lets say, it is something that most everyone experiences, but each to a lesser degree. To "fix" it they would have to go through tonnes of data to find out that on shot 1, it went 3 degrees, for player 1 but for player 2, it went 10 degrees while player three none existed. Did player three just not have a random at that point or was it turned off. Now multiply all that by thousands of golfers and hundred of thousand shots. For a problem that doesn't effect game play too much, it is a daunting task that they would be silly to give resources towards. It is easier to make sure that the original code installed is working and if there are any unintended side effects, oh well. That is the read I got when I was originally talking to HB. It does exist, not sure why in some cases, but it isn't a priority. Good post Boom.
|
|
|
Post by Pubknight on Aug 4, 2015 10:23:00 GMT -5
I thought it was underlying slope that we couldn't see. That's what I've been inclined to think as well. And it's the 'tee box is always flat' HB-ism that isn't exactly true. So there is x-axis reduction applied ball squirt, and separately, there are bad lie effects. But the bad lie effects aren't random, they are just difficult to predict without better lie information. People call both 'ball squirt', and I'm of the mindset/theory that they are two different things. But, it's all speculation and theorycraft without definitive word from HB. In any event, I've never found it overly troubling. But I play real golf. So I'm not inclined to be surprised or frustrated if the ball doesn't land exactly on the spot I intend it to every single time.
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Aug 4, 2015 10:54:08 GMT -5
I thought it was underlying slope that we couldn't see. That's what I've been inclined to think as well. And it's the 'tee box is always flat' HB-ism that isn't exactly true. So there is x-axis reduction applied ball squirt, and separately, there are bad lie effects. But the bad lie effects aren't random, they are just difficult to predict without better lie information. People call both 'ball squirt', and I'm of the mindset/theory that they are two different things. But, it's all speculation and theorycraft without definitive word from HB. In any event, I've never found it overly troubling. But I play real golf. So I'm not inclined to be surprised or frustrated if the ball doesn't land exactly on the spot I intend it to every single time. Agreed. I've gotten used to it over the last several months and the only time I feel really irked by it is lets say you got a right to left wind. You make your adjustments and hit the ball and it starts right and never goes left and suddenly you find yourself in the thick rough or off the green in some bunker and you are left wondering what just happened?
|
|