[Dusty Roads]

From a review of PG

But if I had come into PG out of curiosity as a casual golf fan, I think I may also have given up after an hour or two, not realizing that strange ball behavior was due not to bugs but in-built features that I was not aware of.

[DivotMaker]

From a review of PG

But if I had come into PG out of curiosity as a casual golf fan, I think I may also have given up after an hour or two, not realizing that strange ball behavior was due not to bugs but in-built features that I was not aware of.

Not sure how this is relevant to THIS thread.....

[Dusty Roads]

From a review of PG

But if I had come into PG out of curiosity as a casual golf fan, I think I may also have given up after an hour or two, not realizing that strange ball behavior was due not to bugs but in-built features that I was not aware of.

Not sure how this is relevant to THIS thread.....

Maybe you should read the post again and think hard about the word randomness. I know it besmirches PG but oh well.

[DivotMaker]

From a review of PG

But if I had come into PG out of curiosity as a casual golf fan, I think I may also have given up after an hour or two, not realizing that strange ball behavior was due not to bugs but in-built features that I was not aware of.

Not sure how this is relevant to THIS thread.....

Maybe you should read the post again and think hard about the word randomness. I know it besmirches PG but oh well.

Strange ball behavior may not be a bug or it may be. It could be simply one person's opinion which is likely the case. How you draw the comparison to "ball squirt" is a stretch at best. No game is perfect or bug-free and I recall when TGC came out from Early Access, it had its fair share of bugs and negative reviews. PG has its share of issues, but you make it sound like users are defending it as perfect and it is far from that as most Golf games are. I'm sure that most here would prefer to stay on the topic of TGC.....

[Dusty Roads]

Why not stop with your constant negative attitude towards my posts. this is showing that randomness is something inherent to video games. So try to keep up with the topic and keep your personal opinion of me out of the mix. In other words, ignore my posts if you disagree with them or this will end up needing clean up also.

[DivotMaker]

Why not stop with your constant negative attitude towards my posts. this is showing that randomness is something inherent to video games. So try to keep up with the topic and keep your personal opinion of me out of the mix. In other words, ignore my posts if you disagree with them or this will end up needing clean up also.

Goes both ways fella.....and I can't disagree with what you post? Seriously? You disagree with all of mine.

Back to your original comment, how do you know that the "strange ball behavior"  might be a bug in the ball physics and not "randomness"? You don't and you simply took the opportunity to slam PG for something you have no earthly way to document or verify. Most here in this thread could give two craps about PG. I like both games, but somehow you find time to crap on everything I post.

At the end of the day, TGC is a great game that had it's time to clean things up early on. PG is a different Golf game that is more simulation driven and there are a fair number of differences between the two. PG will need time to fix quite a number of issues. Both games have their pluses and minuses.

I prefer not to put someone on Ignore, but I would think two reasonable people could communicate constuctively and drop all the damn drama and sarcastic innuendo...BOTH of us.

[Stan Solo]

Whilst ball squirt does not exist in the real world .. shooting low scores does  ... hence the best of the best
Courses are continually being modified and lengthened to combat the technology that gives longer drives and better spin control.

Tough to find a 'middle ground' in video golf   ... but we can live without ball squirt or any other artificial garbage 

[Dusty Roads]

Why not stop with your constant negative attitude towards my posts. this is showing that randomness is something inherent to video games. So try to keep up with the topic and keep your personal opinion of me out of the mix. In other words, ignore my posts if you disagree with them or this will end up needing clean up also.

Goes both ways fella.....and I can't disagree with what you post? Seriously? You disagree with all of mine.

Back to your original comment, how do you know that the "strange ball behavior"  might be a bug in the ball physics and not "randomness"? You don't and you simply took the opportunity to slam PG for something you have no earthly way to document or verify. Most here in this thread could give two craps about PG. I like both games, but somehow you find time to crap on everything I post.

At the end of the day, TGC is a great game that had it's time to clean things up early on. PG is a different Golf game that is more simulation driven and there are a fair number of differences between the two. PG will need time to fix quite a number of issues. Both games have their pluses and minuses.

I prefer not to put someone on Ignore, but I would think two reasonable people could communicate constuctively and drop all the damn drama and sarcastic innuendo...BOTH of us.

Seeing as that isn't my comment it is Joe Bradleys from the PG forum, here is more of what he said

But if I had come into PG out of curiosity as a casual golf fan, I think I may also have given up after an hour or two, not realising that strange ball behaviour was due not to bugs but in-built features that I was not aware of. I too am surprised the game has gone mainstream before having a progressive tutorial mode in place like most other games. JNPG needs to attract a wide spectrum of players, not just hardcore, so an elitist approach - by intention or omission - could be damaging in the long run.

Again I brought it to this thread to show how even the oh so mighty damn fine PG has a ball randomness to it.

[DivotMaker]

Why not stop with your constant negative attitude towards my posts. this is showing that randomness is something inherent to video games. So try to keep up with the topic and keep your personal opinion of me out of the mix. In other words, ignore my posts if you disagree with them or this will end up needing clean up also.

Goes both ways fella.....and I can't disagree with what you post? Seriously? You disagree with all of mine.

Back to your original comment, how do you know that the "strange ball behavior"  might be a bug in the ball physics and not "randomness"? You don't and you simply took the opportunity to slam PG for something you have no earthly way to document or verify. Most here in this thread could give two craps about PG. I like both games, but somehow you find time to crap on everything I post.

At the end of the day, TGC is a great game that had it's time to clean things up early on. PG is a different Golf game that is more simulation driven and there are a fair number of differences between the two. PG will need time to fix quite a number of issues. Both games have their pluses and minuses.

I prefer not to put someone on Ignore, but I would think two reasonable people could communicate constuctively and drop all the damn drama and sarcastic innuendo...BOTH of us.

Seeing as that isn't my comment it is Joe Bradleys from the PG forum, here is more of what he said

But if I had come into PG out of curiosity as a casual golf fan, I think I may also have given up after an hour or two, not realising that strange ball behaviour was due not to bugs but in-built features that I was not aware of. I too am surprised the game has gone mainstream before having a progressive tutorial mode in place like most other games. JNPG needs to attract a wide spectrum of players, not just hardcore, so an elitist approach - by intention or omission - could be damaging in the long run.

Again I brought it to this thread to show how even the oh so mighty damn fine PG has a ball randomness to it.

Again, no need for this kind of sarcasm......and how do YOU know it is randomness? You don't and neither do I. I do not take posts from users as gospel. But I do take posts from the actual game developers as gospel. If you can show me proof that PG has a randomness factor built in, provide a link.

Back to the topic at hand, agree that random results that are not in line with what the user executes are not needed and obviously not wanted by most.....

[McBogga]

Why does this always spiral into a "hard" versus "easy" discussion? It's not the same as more depth.

The one thing this game cannot reasonably represent is the golf swing - due to the input device. It could pretty much simulate the environment and the relative difficulty of different shots to a fairly accurate level. Certainly more accurate than it does today. This would add depth and complexity for the advanced players without making it "harder" for the casual player.

TGC is already one of the few golf games that focus on the challenge of the environment over swing execution. That's great - but take it all the way.

The difference between crap and world class in golf is not that big in absolute numbers. It's not that hard to learn how to hit the ball fairly straight and consistent in golf. Leading to hit it really straight and consistent is however really difficult.

Making the dispersion a tad bit more on near straight shots while keeping it similar for larger misses together with fixing the short game mechanic such that shortsiding yourself in the heavy rough is not an automatic up and down would balance the game better. Add a deeper more realistic environment and it's complete...

We've been at this before - Smurf. Neither of us want random. The only difference in out arguments are that you are OK with shooting -15 on a regular basis while I despise it.

Why is he shooting -15.

Because he is better at using the shot shaper, judging the effect the wind will have, the effect the lie will have, has practiced and mastered all the shots, makes proper golf management decisions, judges green speed, green break better.

As I said before, most of the fun I have in this game, is figuring out all that stuff.

Add more stuff to figure out, great, but keep random out.

Random just rewards the lazy person who has no interest in figuring all this stuff out.

Exactly

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

Don't disagree with this at all and am all for rewarding skill. Game is more about shot selection and course management and that is great. The issue is that when there is practically no uncertainty in execution it unbalances the course management part.

[Dusty Roads]

Let's try this...the sky is green

[Dusty Roads]

I do not take posts from users as gospel. But I do take posts from the actual game developers as gospel.

Really?

Re Ball Squirt. It's removed and has been for months. If you can show me the shots you've seen it in I'll dissect and tell you what caused it. But it's gone.
Also I think we're the only game in the history of golf games that now doesn't have that bit of random. I haven't seen one without it.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Yet

How many of you have had ball squirt in the last 10 times you played?

Me - never

Every time I play....if you don't hit the ball straight the vast majority of time, it won't affect you......

[DivotMaker]

As with JC in the PG thread, it makes no sense to try to discuss this with you rationally. Carry on.....

[Dusty Roads]

What's irrational about calling you out on something you wrote?

[DivotMaker]

What's irrational about calling you out on something you wrote?

And your point is?

Every time I play....if you don't hit the ball straight the vast majority of time, it won't affect you......

True statement....if you do not hit the ball straight, ball squirt will not affect you. Every time I play, I hit the ball straight. Ball squirt is not there, so I am not affected.