tibbets:
I'll tell you the biggest reasons why scoring is lower at TWO. It's a short list.
- The use something called Putt Preview, which I admit is a really bad idea, and most of the top golfers at TWO agree would like it to go away. If you take that away, that will raise scores by 3-5 strokes on its own.
- The Meter is too easy. When using the 3 click method, there's a larger range of "perfect shot" as opposed to the tiny white line used here. If TWO had the same meter system as WGT, scores would go up dramatically. Conversely, if we used the TWO meter system here, scoring would go down dramatically,as most every shot would be a perfect hit. I can count on 1 hand the number of times I've actually missed a "perfect shot" on a putt in TWO. Too easy to hit the perfect shot.
I see the physics engines as being about equal. There are differences in the 2 games however. You have to account for your lie in TWO, while here every shot is considered to be on flat ground, whether you're on the side of a hill or not. You can draw and fade the ball in TWO, while here there is no such option. So while the graphics are worse, the number of variables you have to take into account in TWO far outweigh what you have to consider here at WGT.
Once we get lie adjustments, draw/fade options, and adjustable pin positions here the games will be more similar in their approach. Right now, the WGT approach to the game is quite linear by comparison. It has plenty going for it of course, but it does have quite a ways to go before this Beta phase is over.
I don't see the argument here... as I agree with your points above, tibbets,, you''ll get no fight from me whatsoever..
It only proves my original point.. TWO is cartoon golf, and I am not using that as a pejorative comment...
With the 'putt previews', the laser-like accuracy of the shot when making contact when you miss the mark (by a large margin, imo), the ridiculously long shots (400yd drives!)... make it a golf game for people who want to play games... not necessarily golfers.
Look, bottom line is this... EA knows their target audience. They know what will appeal to their target audience. I would venture a guess that besides "Tiger Woods", 95% of the EA audience couldn't name one other PGA member, what country the R&A is in, or could tell you the difference between a 'chip' and a 'pitch'.
EA has many, many games. (Partial list here.) In May 2008, the company reported net annual revenue of US$4.02 billion in fiscal year 2008. (Source^ EA Reports Fourth Quarter And Fiscal Year 2008 Results (PDF) from Thomson Reuters via Wikipedia here)
Just as Madden 10 is cartoon football, NHL 10 is cartoon Hockey, NBA Live 10 is cartoon Basketball, Command and Conquer is cartoon space colonization and Medal of Honor is cartoon war... TWO is cartoon golf, made for the masses by a VERY large corporation whose main concern is customers and profit first, golf intricacies somewhere around 1,273rd.
WGT, on the other hand, is not so large that it can just stamp out a cartoon golf game... they say they are trying for realism. Is it finished? no. Is it real? no. But, and here is the biggest difference, WGT, imho, IS trying for intricacies and the FEEL of golf (hence 'the beast'), whereas TWO is just another in a long line of a big name endorsed cash cow.
Cartoon golf at its finest.
I enjoy that game, I enjoy this one. When you can tell the difference, there won't be so many arguments about which is best, because in the end this is the classic 'apples to oranges' comparison. The ONLY thing these two games have in common is that they are based on the game of golf.
Here in my house we have a number of games on a variety of platforms... the difference between TWO and WGT is the same as the difference between Mario Kart and Need for Speed on the Wii. While both are racing video games, one is just a bit more serious than the other.
Peace.