Forums

Help › Forums

TWO is cartoon golf...

Tue, Nov 3 2009 4:15 PM (34 replies)
  • Faterson
    2,902 Posts
    Mon, Nov 2 2009 4:00 PM

    Yes, but the feel of realism is communicated by WGT much stronger than by TWO, especially for beginning players. Can't tell you how many players commented to me during our multi-player rounds, "This feels just like real golf I play at the weekends; the same dilemmas, the same decisions..." That realistic feel is rather suppressed by the super-natural ease of play enabled even for absolute beginners over at TWO.

    As to the too-low scores for Masters here at WGT, I'd very much support the proposal already expressed in these forums many times: WGT should radically decrease our Fairways Hit percentages. That will then also take care of the unrealistically low average scores. By all means, let the Starter driver and Tour Starter driver be as forgiving as they are today. But any other upgraded driver's current forgiveness should be drastically reduced by at least 50%. I finish most of my rounds with 100% Fairways Hit, which doesn't make sense.

  • YankeeJim
    25,827 Posts
    Mon, Nov 2 2009 4:25 PM

    Start moving the pins around before you close the case, Tib. You have the course memorized and your club is in your hand for the next shot while your opp is still planning the shot. When you play a round with random pins and shoot a 57 then it's impressive. Until then you're the best because you consistently click the best on every hole that is exactly like it was the last time you played it. 

    I can't comment on TWO because I could only stomach 3 swings there. Links was 10 times the CGI golf that TWO is and neither WGT or TWO will ever come close to the complexity and realism of Links when it comes to golf club physics. Links had it nailed right down to clubface position. I never once thought "cartoon" playing Links. TWO is comically cartoonish.

    I'm not sure if comparing Links to WGT is fair-Links wasn't browser golf but as a standard I think it is the best golf sim you can play. You really need to understand all aspects of golf physics to be good at it. JMO

     

    YJ

     

  • GITrDONE
    701 Posts
    Mon, Nov 2 2009 6:31 PM

    Snaike:
    If I want to feel like Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck playing golf on the moon (with respect to Warner Bros) I will play TWO.

     

    What you got against old Bugs Bunny?

    I'm almost inclined to be offended!

    But since it's you Snaike I guess I'll let it slide. Sneaky 



    Peace Out

  • Snaike
    3,678 Posts
    Mon, Nov 2 2009 11:44 PM

    tibbets:
    Oh yes, and this.  Scoring average for Tiger Woods in 2009?    68.84  Scoring average for me right now?  58.11

    tibbets, my friend, there is one other point I would like to make in regards to your average vs. tiger's, if I may?

    If TW had to play the same course(s) everyday as many times as you have played here, partial and complete rounds, with the exact same pin positions, very minor wind considerations, and a swing that was consistant without everyday real aches and pains of a human body, where do you think his scoring average would lie?

    I really doubt that it would be anywhere near 68.84... I would hazard a guess that if he, in real life, played under the same conditions that you enjoy here it would be much closer to 50 than 60.

    Point is... all virtual golf is cartoon golf.  TWO is just more so.

    Peace

  • andyson
    6,415 Posts
    Tue, Nov 3 2009 5:35 AM

    tibbets:

    So go ahead and poo-poo TWO all you want, but you're not going to get anywhere in a legitimate debate about realism when the entire Master division requires an average lower than every single PGA golfer in history.

    Case Closed.

    That would be closer to a valid point if Master's played the black tees or PGA golfers played from the blue tees.  But they don't.  Throw in the the varied pin placements faced by PGA golfers and set pin placements faced by WGT Masters and the comparison falls apart.

     

  • tibbets
    1,043 Posts
    Tue, Nov 3 2009 6:02 AM

    Actually, the point made by both you and YankeeJim are invalid and I'll tell you why.

    When Bethpage was released in late May, I shot a 64 from the championship tees with Tour Starter clubs on my first day.  I had no idea about the intracasies of the course or the greens, and we didn't have these big bomber drivers that we have now either, nor did we have better putters or wedges with real backspin or special balls.

    Why is this relevant?  Well, the real course record for Bethpage Black is 64, and that was with it playing as a par 71, as opposed to the par 70 that we play it as.  So I actually beat the course record by 1 shot on the very first day of playing it.

    The pin positions that we currently have are some of the hardest offered (see #15 and #17).  If I can break the real course record on the first day, then we're not even close to achieving 'real scores' here.

    64 with Tour Starter clubs.  Do you think Tiger was able to hit his drives a little further than 245 yds in 2002?  Do you think he had some real backspin on his wedge approaches?  Of course.  He was the only player to break par that week in 4 rounds.

    You can go ahead and change the pins all you like on these courses, the point I'm making is that if I can shoot the 'course record' on the very first day with drastically inferior equipment , not knowing the course at all, then measuring this game vs. TWO and calling that one "Cartoonish" and "too easy" is like comparing the nutritional value of McDonalds food to that of Wendys.  Sure, they are both 'food' and one may offer a slightly better menu, but when compared to the real deal...well, there's no comparison.  They both fall far short.

    P.S. to Snaike:  Even on Tigers home course in Florida, he doesn't shoot 58's.  I'm sure he's played numerous courses just as many times as I have played Kiawah here.

  • Faterson
    2,902 Posts
    Tue, Nov 3 2009 6:11 AM

    tibbets:
    They both fall far short.

    Not equally "far" short by any means. To suggest otherwise is absurd. Again, no one is capable of scoring an albatross on his first visit of any WGT course, or any of the myriad of other feats that are an every-day occurrence for beginning players in the TWO environment.

    Finally, comparing the 2 games based on how Tibbets (an elite player) fares in them, is off-base and misleading. One must compare the average players. And in comparing them, it becomes obvious that the realism levels in this game can't be compared to those in TWO. The two games are galaxies apart in this respect.

  • tibbets
    1,043 Posts
    Tue, Nov 3 2009 6:20 AM

    That is specifically why I compared Elite to Elite, Faterson.  The fact remains that my average is 10 strokes better than the best the PGA has to offer.  So if you're talking 'galaxies apart', lets use that phrase for comparing this game to real golf, not WGT to TWO.  In a discussion about realism, the difference between shooting a 52 in TWO and a 58 at WGT is irrelevant when real golf players can barely break 70, and in fact most PGA pros don't even do that.

    Sure, no one shoots an albatross on their first day.  No one shoots a 64 on their first day at Bethpage either.

  • Faterson
    2,902 Posts
    Tue, Nov 3 2009 6:27 AM

    tibbets:
    Sure, no one shoots an albatross on their first day.  No one shoots a 64 on their first day at Bethpage either.

    A round of 64 and an albatross are not events on the same level of extraordinary. And, there is a far greater quantity of such extraordinary events, regularly achieved in TWO, than here in WGT. Very few WGT players have ever scored a round of 64 at Bethpage, whereas I'm sure there are huge numbers of TWO players with albatrosses or who have achieved similarly unrealistic feats, without being elite TWO players.

    Again, comparing Elite to Elite is the wrong approach to take. Elite accounts for perhaps 0.01% of all users. One should compare 90% of users in both games, and when you do that, the 2 games are galaxies apart in terms of realism levels. (That doesn't mean WGT is a better game than TWO; we're only talking about the realism aspect here.)

  • YankeeJim
    25,827 Posts
    Tue, Nov 3 2009 6:37 AM

    What was your first attempt at BPB Tibetts? Don't tell me the 64 was because that is definitely not real on that course with standard clubs, first try,  never having seen the course before.

     

    YJ

RSS