Our Links 2004 Review

**Nivek** · 03-31-2004, 09:42 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
PatsFan said:
No offense, but it's not a good review. Links has a fantastic single player mode? What?! Hell, even the game project leader at the official Links forum admits the single player game is extremely lackluster and that their CPU AI is "embarassing". Links as an online game is a 92 (when XSN actually works), Links as a single player game is a 50. Overall I'd give it an 80 since it set itself apart from Tiger Woods by claiming to be a sim, but turned out itself to be an arcade golf game. What kind of golf sim only has one kind of sand lie? Or has lies in the rough that play as if you're hitting out of the fairway? Links is definitely a good game online, but otherwise it's an extremely lackluster golf title, but a good first effort. A 92 is an outrageously high score, but we're seeing that a lot here lately(check out the score for the extremely flawed MVP).

<hr /></blockquote>

That's the only thing I agree with in your statement. All of the single player skin matches in Career mode are SCRIPTED! The online experience makes this game worth while, but I still would have rated the game a lot lower. (I'd give it an 88)

**PatsFan** · 03-31-2004, 09:54 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
RustedWalleye said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
When MS acquired Access Software, few people doubted that the LINKS franchise would live on in Xbox form. Well, it has, and it’s the game of golf that a gamer will find on any format. A great, yet somewhat short, Career Mode, a bevy of online features, a fantastic Challenge Mode that will drive you crazy with replay factor, great looks, great courses, and the strongest simulation engine that I’ve seen on a console, will keep this title in your Xbox hours and hours per week. LINKS 2004 is far and away the best XSN title and one of the best sports titles that I have ever played on a console.

<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Poster: PatsFan
Subject: Re: Our Links 2004 Review

No offense, but it's not a good review. Links has a fantastic single player mode? What?! Hell, even the game project leader at the official Links forum admits the single player game is extremely lackluster and that their CPU AI is "embarassing". Links as an online game is a 92 (when XSN actually works), Links as a single player game is a 50. Overall I'd give it an 80 since it set itself apart from Tiger Woods by claiming to be a sim, but turned out itself to be an arcade golf game. What kind of golf sim only has one kind of sand lie? Or has lies in the rough that play as if you're hitting out of the fairway? Links is definitely a good game online, but otherwise it's an extremely lackluster golf title, but a good first effort. A 92 is an outrageously high score, but we're seeing that a lot here lately(check out the score for the extremely flawed MVP).

<hr /></blockquote>

If you played the game the way it was meant to be played, not on the easy modes, it is the best console game period. It takes a ton of skill, as well as rewards you for playing on the harder modes. Unlike Tiger Woods where it is not much of a challenge to hit the ball nor is there any reason to play on the higher difficulty levels, since there is no extra reward for doing so.

You cant score -40 a round unless of course your injunwal

, and Live play, regardless of XSN is the best that has been released as cheaters are nearly non existant.

Clay actually gave this review too low of a score as the only game that actually can compete with Links is Tiger Woods on the PC. Console version doesnt have a prayer.

Tiger Woods was a damn good console golf game, until Links came out and I havent looked at Tiger Woods since.

But, thanks for your comments, I just tend to think they suck.

<hr /></blockquote>

I could care less if you think my comments "suck". I happen to be one of the better players online (always in the top 10 Advanced on XBL until the last reset when I stopped playing the game due to how easy it's become). If links was as much a sim as some people would have us believe, it would have been a great game. As it is now, however, it's just a better looking golf game than TW. And that's not really saying much. Both games bore the heck outa me now due to how easy they both are on their most difficult setting.

**PatsFan** · 03-31-2004, 09:54 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
RustedWalleye said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
When MS acquired Access Software, few people doubted that the LINKS franchise would live on in Xbox form. Well, it has, and it’s the game of golf that a gamer will find on any format. A great, yet somewhat short, Career Mode, a bevy of online features, a fantastic Challenge Mode that will drive you crazy with replay factor, great looks, great courses, and the strongest simulation engine that I’ve seen on a console, will keep this title in your Xbox hours and hours per week. LINKS 2004 is far and away the best XSN title and one of the best sports titles that I have ever played on a console.

<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Poster: PatsFan
Subject: Re: Our Links 2004 Review

No offense, but it's not a good review. Links has a fantastic single player mode? What?! Hell, even the game project leader at the official Links forum admits the single player game is extremely lackluster and that their CPU AI is "embarassing". Links as an online game is a 92 (when XSN actually works), Links as a single player game is a 50. Overall I'd give it an 80 since it set itself apart from Tiger Woods by claiming to be a sim, but turned out itself to be an arcade golf game. What kind of golf sim only has one kind of sand lie? Or has lies in the rough that play as if you're hitting out of the fairway? Links is definitely a good game online, but otherwise it's an extremely lackluster golf title, but a good first effort. A 92 is an outrageously high score, but we're seeing that a lot here lately(check out the score for the extremely flawed MVP).

<hr /></blockquote>

If you played the game the way it was meant to be played, not on the easy modes, it is the best console game period. It takes a ton of skill, as well as rewards you for playing on the harder modes. Unlike Tiger Woods where it is not much of a challenge to hit the ball nor is there any reason to play on the higher difficulty levels, since there is no extra reward for doing so.

You cant score -40 a round unless of course your injunwal

, and Live play, regardless of XSN is the best that has been released as cheaters are nearly non existant.

Clay actually gave this review too low of a score as the only game that actually can compete with Links is Tiger Woods on the PC. Console version doesnt have a prayer.

Tiger Woods was a damn good console golf game, until Links came out and I havent looked at Tiger Woods since.

But, thanks for your comments, I just tend to think they suck.

<hr /></blockquote>

I could care less if you think my comments "suck". I happen to be one of the better players online (always in the top 10 Advanced on XBL until the last reset when I stopped playing the game due to how easy it's become). If links was as much a sim as some people would have us believe, it would have been a great game. As it is now, however, it's just a better looking golf game than TW. And that's not really saying much. Both games bore the heck outa me now due to how easy they both are on their most difficult setting.

**PatsFan** · 03-31-2004, 09:54 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
RustedWalleye said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
When MS acquired Access Software, few people doubted that the LINKS franchise would live on in Xbox form. Well, it has, and it’s the game of golf that a gamer will find on any format. A great, yet somewhat short, Career Mode, a bevy of online features, a fantastic Challenge Mode that will drive you crazy with replay factor, great looks, great courses, and the strongest simulation engine that I’ve seen on a console, will keep this title in your Xbox hours and hours per week. LINKS 2004 is far and away the best XSN title and one of the best sports titles that I have ever played on a console.

<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Poster: PatsFan
Subject: Re: Our Links 2004 Review

No offense, but it's not a good review. Links has a fantastic single player mode? What?! Hell, even the game project leader at the official Links forum admits the single player game is extremely lackluster and that their CPU AI is "embarassing". Links as an online game is a 92 (when XSN actually works), Links as a single player game is a 50. Overall I'd give it an 80 since it set itself apart from Tiger Woods by claiming to be a sim, but turned out itself to be an arcade golf game. What kind of golf sim only has one kind of sand lie? Or has lies in the rough that play as if you're hitting out of the fairway? Links is definitely a good game online, but otherwise it's an extremely lackluster golf title, but a good first effort. A 92 is an outrageously high score, but we're seeing that a lot here lately(check out the score for the extremely flawed MVP).

<hr /></blockquote>

If you played the game the way it was meant to be played, not on the easy modes, it is the best console game period. It takes a ton of skill, as well as rewards you for playing on the harder modes. Unlike Tiger Woods where it is not much of a challenge to hit the ball nor is there any reason to play on the higher difficulty levels, since there is no extra reward for doing so.

You cant score -40 a round unless of course your injunwal

, and Live play, regardless of XSN is the best that has been released as cheaters are nearly non existant.

Clay actually gave this review too low of a score as the only game that actually can compete with Links is Tiger Woods on the PC. Console version doesnt have a prayer.

Tiger Woods was a damn good console golf game, until Links came out and I havent looked at Tiger Woods since.

But, thanks for your comments, I just tend to think they suck.

<hr /></blockquote>

I could care less if you think my comments "suck". I happen to be one of the better players online (always in the top 10 Advanced on XBL until the last reset when I stopped playing the game due to how easy it's become). If links was as much a sim as some people would have us believe, it would have been a great game. As it is now, however, it's just a better looking golf game than TW. And that's not really saying much. Both games bore the heck outa me now due to how easy they both are on their most difficult setting.

**Sully** · 03-31-2004, 10:08 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
PatsFan said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
RustedWalleye said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
When MS acquired Access Software, few people doubted that the LINKS franchise would live on in Xbox form. Well, it has, and it’s the game of golf that a gamer will find on any format. A great, yet somewhat short, Career Mode, a bevy of online features, a fantastic Challenge Mode that will drive you crazy with replay factor, great looks, great courses, and the strongest simulation engine that I’ve seen on a console, will keep this title in your Xbox hours and hours per week. LINKS 2004 is far and away the best XSN title and one of the best sports titles that I have ever played on a console.

<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Poster: PatsFan
Subject: Re: Our Links 2004 Review

No offense, but it's not a good review. Links has a fantastic single player mode? What?! Hell, even the game project leader at the official Links forum admits the single player game is extremely lackluster and that their CPU AI is "embarassing". Links as an online game is a 92 (when XSN actually works), Links as a single player game is a 50. Overall I'd give it an 80 since it set itself apart from Tiger Woods by claiming to be a sim, but turned out itself to be an arcade golf game. What kind of golf sim only has one kind of sand lie? Or has lies in the rough that play as if you're hitting out of the fairway? Links is definitely a good game online, but otherwise it's an extremely lackluster golf title, but a good first effort. A 92 is an outrageously high score, but we're seeing that a lot here lately(check out the score for the extremely flawed MVP).

<hr /></blockquote>

If you played the game the way it was meant to be played, not on the easy modes, it is the best console game period. It takes a ton of skill, as well as rewards you for playing on the harder modes. Unlike Tiger Woods where it is not much of a challenge to hit the ball nor is there any reason to play on the higher difficulty levels, since there is no extra reward for doing so.

You cant score -40 a round unless of course your injunwal

, and Live play, regardless of XSN is the best that has been released as cheaters are nearly non existant.

Clay actually gave this review too low of a score as the only game that actually can compete with Links is Tiger Woods on the PC. Console version doesnt have a prayer.

Tiger Woods was a damn good console golf game, until Links came out and I havent looked at Tiger Woods since.

But, thanks for your comments, I just tend to think they suck.

<hr /></blockquote>

I could care less if you think my comments "suck". I happen to be one of the better players online (always in the top 10 Advanced on XBL until the last reset when I stopped playing the game due to how easy it's become). If links was as much a sim as some people would have us believe, it would have been a great game. As it is now, however, it's just a better looking golf game than TW. And that's not really saying much. Both games bore the heck outa me now due to how easy they both are on their most difficult setting.

<hr /></blockquote>

Damn....can I touch you?

**Sully** · 03-31-2004, 10:08 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
PatsFan said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
RustedWalleye said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
When MS acquired Access Software, few people doubted that the LINKS franchise would live on in Xbox form. Well, it has, and it’s the game of golf that a gamer will find on any format. A great, yet somewhat short, Career Mode, a bevy of online features, a fantastic Challenge Mode that will drive you crazy with replay factor, great looks, great courses, and the strongest simulation engine that I’ve seen on a console, will keep this title in your Xbox hours and hours per week. LINKS 2004 is far and away the best XSN title and one of the best sports titles that I have ever played on a console.

<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Poster: PatsFan
Subject: Re: Our Links 2004 Review

No offense, but it's not a good review. Links has a fantastic single player mode? What?! Hell, even the game project leader at the official Links forum admits the single player game is extremely lackluster and that their CPU AI is "embarassing". Links as an online game is a 92 (when XSN actually works), Links as a single player game is a 50. Overall I'd give it an 80 since it set itself apart from Tiger Woods by claiming to be a sim, but turned out itself to be an arcade golf game. What kind of golf sim only has one kind of sand lie? Or has lies in the rough that play as if you're hitting out of the fairway? Links is definitely a good game online, but otherwise it's an extremely lackluster golf title, but a good first effort. A 92 is an outrageously high score, but we're seeing that a lot here lately(check out the score for the extremely flawed MVP).

<hr /></blockquote>

If you played the game the way it was meant to be played, not on the easy modes, it is the best console game period. It takes a ton of skill, as well as rewards you for playing on the harder modes. Unlike Tiger Woods where it is not much of a challenge to hit the ball nor is there any reason to play on the higher difficulty levels, since there is no extra reward for doing so.

You cant score -40 a round unless of course your injunwal

, and Live play, regardless of XSN is the best that has been released as cheaters are nearly non existant.

Clay actually gave this review too low of a score as the only game that actually can compete with Links is Tiger Woods on the PC. Console version doesnt have a prayer.

Tiger Woods was a damn good console golf game, until Links came out and I havent looked at Tiger Woods since.

But, thanks for your comments, I just tend to think they suck.

<hr /></blockquote>

I could care less if you think my comments "suck". I happen to be one of the better players online (always in the top 10 Advanced on XBL until the last reset when I stopped playing the game due to how easy it's become). If links was as much a sim as some people would have us believe, it would have been a great game. As it is now, however, it's just a better looking golf game than TW. And that's not really saying much. Both games bore the heck outa me now due to how easy they both are on their most difficult setting.

<hr /></blockquote>

Damn....can I touch you?

**Sully** · 03-31-2004, 10:08 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
PatsFan said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
RustedWalleye said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
When MS acquired Access Software, few people doubted that the LINKS franchise would live on in Xbox form. Well, it has, and it’s the game of golf that a gamer will find on any format. A great, yet somewhat short, Career Mode, a bevy of online features, a fantastic Challenge Mode that will drive you crazy with replay factor, great looks, great courses, and the strongest simulation engine that I’ve seen on a console, will keep this title in your Xbox hours and hours per week. LINKS 2004 is far and away the best XSN title and one of the best sports titles that I have ever played on a console.

<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
Poster: PatsFan
Subject: Re: Our Links 2004 Review

No offense, but it's not a good review. Links has a fantastic single player mode? What?! Hell, even the game project leader at the official Links forum admits the single player game is extremely lackluster and that their CPU AI is "embarassing". Links as an online game is a 92 (when XSN actually works), Links as a single player game is a 50. Overall I'd give it an 80 since it set itself apart from Tiger Woods by claiming to be a sim, but turned out itself to be an arcade golf game. What kind of golf sim only has one kind of sand lie? Or has lies in the rough that play as if you're hitting out of the fairway? Links is definitely a good game online, but otherwise it's an extremely lackluster golf title, but a good first effort. A 92 is an outrageously high score, but we're seeing that a lot here lately(check out the score for the extremely flawed MVP).

<hr /></blockquote>

If you played the game the way it was meant to be played, not on the easy modes, it is the best console game period. It takes a ton of skill, as well as rewards you for playing on the harder modes. Unlike Tiger Woods where it is not much of a challenge to hit the ball nor is there any reason to play on the higher difficulty levels, since there is no extra reward for doing so.

You cant score -40 a round unless of course your injunwal

, and Live play, regardless of XSN is the best that has been released as cheaters are nearly non existant.

Clay actually gave this review too low of a score as the only game that actually can compete with Links is Tiger Woods on the PC. Console version doesnt have a prayer.

Tiger Woods was a damn good console golf game, until Links came out and I havent looked at Tiger Woods since.

But, thanks for your comments, I just tend to think they suck.

<hr /></blockquote>

I could care less if you think my comments "suck". I happen to be one of the better players online (always in the top 10 Advanced on XBL until the last reset when I stopped playing the game due to how easy it's become). If links was as much a sim as some people would have us believe, it would have been a great game. As it is now, however, it's just a better looking golf game than TW. And that's not really saying much. Both games bore the heck outa me now due to how easy they both are on their most difficult setting.

<hr /></blockquote>

Damn....can I touch you?

**PatsFan** · 03-31-2004, 11:40 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

**PatsFan** · 03-31-2004, 11:40 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

**PatsFan** · 03-31-2004, 11:40 PM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

**taylor34** · 04-01-2004, 12:10 AM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
PatsFan said:
No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

<hr /></blockquote>

All I want to know is, if Links isn't a good sim to you, then what game might you suggest as a better sim golf game on the current consoles?

Taylor34

**taylor34** · 04-01-2004, 12:10 AM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
PatsFan said:
No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

<hr /></blockquote>

All I want to know is, if Links isn't a good sim to you, then what game might you suggest as a better sim golf game on the current consoles?

Taylor34

**taylor34** · 04-01-2004, 12:10 AM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
PatsFan said:
No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

<hr /></blockquote>

All I want to know is, if Links isn't a good sim to you, then what game might you suggest as a better sim golf game on the current consoles?

Taylor34

**RustedWalleye** · 04-01-2004, 12:47 AM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
PatsFan said:
No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

<hr /></blockquote>

Okay so whoopie your one of the best damn players, you want a cookie?

I could care less if you know the Pope. You stated you didnt like the review and I and others have stated we did.

No one is going to change your mind, but why take the fun away from others who could probably care less how much of a sim it is, and just want a fun game? Everyone else cant have your godlike abilites, so us has beens need to play with the other has beens.

Maybe someday Ill see you on a golf course next to the real Tiger Woods.

**RustedWalleye** · 04-01-2004, 12:47 AM

Re: Our Links 2004 Review

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
PatsFan said:
No, but you could learn how to read. He clearly stated I don't know how to play the game the way it was meant to be played (on advanced), and I stated that I in fact do know how, and am one of the better ones at it, and thus am in a position to fairly state how difficult (or in this case, not difficult) the game actually is. If it's intended to be a sim, they did a terrible job of it. Go to the official Links forum at Xbox.com and read the posts by the project leader. They clearly put more time going after the arcade gamer than they did the sim lover. They wanted a piece of TW's market so they made the game accessible to everyone, and when you do that, someone is going to come away unhappy, and in this case it's the sim fans that did.

But I'm not concerned with the opinions of other Links players who think the game is great as it is, because it's not. And I'm heartened to know that the project leader for the game realizes they dropped the ball on the single player mode, and on the AI, and he also realizes the game needs at least one more difficulty setting, needs more realistic play out of the rough and more than one lie in the sand etc etc. And he wouldn't be adding all that to the next iteration of Links Xbox if he didn't agree that the game in its current state wasn't too easy on the most difficult of settings. So yeah, I think the rating of Links by the reviewer is absurdly high, especially considering how much they're going to add to the game next time, which if they do, would truly earn the game a 92.

<hr /></blockquote>

Okay so whoopie your one of the best damn players, you want a cookie?

I could care less if you know the Pope. You stated you didnt like the review and I and others have stated we did.

No one is going to change your mind, but why take the fun away from others who could probably care less how much of a sim it is, and just want a fun game? Everyone else cant have your godlike abilites, so us has beens need to play with the other has beens.

Maybe someday Ill see you on a golf course next to the real Tiger Woods.

Our Links 2004 Review

Recommended Videos

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment