FIR% Incorrectly Calculated

  • 29 Replies
  • 5944 Views

Nightowl

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
« on: January 02, 2015, 01:43:01 PM »
I know this has been mentioned a few times.  Not sure it's been posted in the bug reporting forum.  So, here it is.  The game uses all 18 holes to calculate FIR%.  So, Par 3s are recorded as a missed fairway.  I just played the beta of Magnolia National.  Tough course (in fairly strong winds).  I finished at +9.  I hit all fairways in regulation, however.  My stats show that I missed four fairways (the Par 3s, I presume), so my FIR% is about 77%.  Hope this can be fixed.

Nightowl

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
« Reply #1 on: January 02, 2015, 01:46:42 PM »
This should be posted under PC.  Sorry!   :-[

Acrilix

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2015, 02:52:37 PM »
I reported it here, and you'll be glad to know that it's on the list!

http://www.hb-studios.com/forum/index.php?topic=6839.0

I wouldn't get your hopes up that this will be fixed any time soon though.
My last 7 courses (newest first):
Binyon Peak
McGonagall Golf Club
Lovelace Bay
Swinburne Forest GC
Brackenridge Nine by Acrilix
Drayton Lakes
Chudleigh Golf Club

Nightowl

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
« Reply #3 on: January 03, 2015, 02:59:45 PM »
Believe me, I've learned not to get my hopes up!   :P  Thanks for the link.

Nightowl

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
« Reply #4 on: January 03, 2015, 03:03:01 PM »
My overall FIR% is 65, which in reality is probably 87.  Even then , if I miss a fairway, it's usually not by much.  I get not wanting to replicate the casual golf experience 1:1, but this is kind of ridiculous!   ;)

The shame of it is that it removes some of the drama from the game.  I'm standing on the 17th tee, the wind has kicked up, and the fairway below looks rather narrow.  Should I pull out the driver and risk a bold shot to set myself up for a short approach shot?  Of course, I should!  In TGC, it is hardly ever a tough decision.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2015, 03:11:03 PM by Nightowl »

Acrilix

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
« Reply #5 on: January 03, 2015, 04:49:43 PM »
The ironic thing is that HB used their early data to argue with players who were telling them that hitting fairways was too easy. Real data would show another 20+% of fairways were actually hit and the players were right all along!!
My last 7 courses (newest first):
Binyon Peak
McGonagall Golf Club
Lovelace Bay
Swinburne Forest GC
Brackenridge Nine by Acrilix
Drayton Lakes
Chudleigh Golf Club

Ariel Atom

  • *
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2015, 09:35:07 PM »
The ironic thing is that HB used their early data to argue with players who were telling them that hitting fairways was too easy. Real data would show another 20+% of fairways were actually hit and the players were right all along!!

That is very true! I sit in the high 60s for % fairways hit when it really has to be 90% or even higher. The thing is that if they make the cone smaller I'll (eventually) adjust by learning to swing straighter :D

Nightowl

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2015, 10:28:21 PM »
Surprised it wasn't fixed for the December update.  It really can't be too hard to fix, can it?  If we don't see a fix in the Spring update, then we'll probably have to wait until Summer.  If it takes that long to correct, you'd really have to wonder what's going on.

Acrilix

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
« Reply #8 on: January 05, 2015, 11:35:34 AM »
Surprised it wasn't fixed for the December update.  It really can't be too hard to fix, can it?  If we don't see a fix in the Spring update, then we'll probably have to wait until Summer.  If it takes that long to correct, you'd really have to wonder what's going on.

I don't think they are in any hurry to fix something that will show how unrealistic that stat is compared to real golf!  ;)
« Last Edit: January 05, 2015, 11:38:29 AM by Acrilix »
My last 7 courses (newest first):
Binyon Peak
McGonagall Golf Club
Lovelace Bay
Swinburne Forest GC
Brackenridge Nine by Acrilix
Drayton Lakes
Chudleigh Golf Club

HB_LorinB

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4367
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2015, 12:14:42 PM »
Surprised it wasn't fixed for the December update.  It really can't be too hard to fix, can it?  If we don't see a fix in the Spring update, then we'll probably have to wait until Summer.  If it takes that long to correct, you'd really have to wonder what's going on.

I don't think they are in any hurry to fix something that will show how unrealistic that stat is compared to real golf!  ;)

We do not purposefully leave things inaccurate, Acrillix.

Acrilix

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2015, 02:16:34 PM »
We do not purposefully leave things inaccurate, Acrillix.

This may be so, but fixing this type of inaccuracy is obviously not considered a high priority or it would have been fixed by now.
It does not require complex programming, and has been known about for months, so I think that my last statement was a valid assessment.
My last 7 courses (newest first):
Binyon Peak
McGonagall Golf Club
Lovelace Bay
Swinburne Forest GC
Brackenridge Nine by Acrilix
Drayton Lakes
Chudleigh Golf Club

HB_LorinB

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4367
« Reply #11 on: January 05, 2015, 03:25:44 PM »
I don't think they are in any hurry to fix something that will show how unrealistic that stat is compared to real golf!  ;)

If by your "last statement" you mean the one quoted above then, no, it is not valid assessment.  As we have stated many times, we have a long list of things to focus on and a small team with which to do it.  We simply do what we can when we can.  You are correct that this has clearly not been a high priority item historically.  But to somehow leap from that fact to the notion that either our company and/or employees lacks integrity (which is exactly what you are saying by making the above statement) is not only factually incorrect it is, in my opinion, disrespectful to the men and women who work to bring you this game and to be as open as is possible about all the aspects of its development.

There is nothing so deceitful going on here as your statement would suggest, Acrilix.  It is simply an item on a list that we haven't gotten to yet.  Nothing more.

Furthermore, I would add that everything in game programming requires complex programming, as a game is a complex program.  You learn very quickly in game design, or any software building for that matter, that it is foolish to look at any change to the software as a quick thing.  Everything requires testing and everything has the (great) potential to mess things up in ways one might never have imagined.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2015, 03:55:12 PM by HB_LorinB »

DDawg

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2952
  • My Byte is worse than my Bark ...
« Reply #12 on: January 05, 2015, 03:40:39 PM »
Makes me wish I never got away from 'Programming' ... hell, I would have volunteered to help out with some of the coding ... but, now ... I haven't coded a line in over 10 years ... and probably couldn't even use a compiler ... let alone write a "Hello World" program .... LOL

Thank Gawd for 'retirement' ...  ::)
My most recent course

El Dorado Hills 95762
Calaveras Willow Oak G&CC
San Simoleon Golf Academy


My System:
Asus TUF Z390-PLUS GAMING MB w/32MB
Intel i9-9900KF 3600 MHz
NVidia/Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
MSI Optix MAG321CURV Curved Gaming Monitor

Cheagles

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #13 on: January 06, 2015, 11:06:06 AM »
Hey all, as stated above, it is on our list already!

Nightowl

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
« Reply #14 on: February 11, 2015, 06:35:13 PM »
During the Twitch broadcast today, Mitchell didn't seem to know there was a problem.  Or did I misunderstand him?

 

space-cash