Static vs. Variable Attributes

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • gustavus
    Banned
    • Feb 2015
    • 94

    #1

    Static vs. Variable Attributes

    One of the main differences between TGC and TW is how skill is represented in the game. I don't think either is the right or wrong way to view this issue, but I do take issue with the idea that variable attributes makes a golf game arcadish and takes user skill out of the equation, two comments made in another thread in reference to TW.

    I think this ignores one of the facets of golf, which is recognizing your strengths and weaknesses and playing to them. A golfer that can consistently hit farther than will attack a hole in a different manner because he can lay up in areas I might not be able to reach. That forces me to find other ways to compensate. It's not taking skill out of the equation, it's actually adding a layer of difficulty that adds to the strategy in evolved in playing.

    It also recognizes that as you play more golf and get better, your distances and accuracy do change. Sometimes that is good, but it can be bad if you have not learned to take into account your changing skill set.

    I do think EA should get dinged for not having a simple mode in which we can add or subtract skill points in order to create balanced or unbalanced golfer in regard to skill. They make up for this by shipping the game with an array of golfers with all manner of various skill sets.

    In fact, in one Country Club, we began allowing users to use Pro golfers in tourneys to eliminate any grinding needed to build up a golfer, or worse, have some players use guys that had become too good. I think we could have taken this one more step and eliminated some golfers, like Tiger, or even restricted it to just a few.

    Looking through the available golfers in TW14, it also makes me think there would be a lot of value to playing with only female golfers. There are many ways that you can do this that allows players to find golfer that match their style, or even challenge their style of play.

    But there is something to having one golfer with one set of skills. Everyone would be competing on an even playing field, no one with advantages. You would learn to master a course in the same way you lean to master a track in a racing sim.

    For me, the problem becomes, what then? For many, that is more than enough. But I crave more puzzles to solve. And thats how I view building up my golfer, buying new clubs and balls for little boosts (No, you seriously do not get boosts for dressing in a space suit or like a bunny anymore. That was awful and they finally got rid of it.). It's really cool to build up your golfer through play, and then come back to a course and find new ways to approach the holes.

    I do think it is cool that someone put out a game that matches what many people want in a golf game. And the timing couldn't have been better, with EA Golf on hiatus, TGC got a lot of gamers to try it that may not have.

    And in the end, I think static vs variable skill sets is essentially what separates the two games.
  • AnthonyKyne
    Rookie
    • Nov 2014
    • 162

    #2
    Re: Static vs. Variable Attributes

    Great post, these are the kind of things I love about this forum. I'm not totally against variable stats in games. It's very RPG and as you say a fantastic way to make each course a different puzzle for everyone. What I am against though is people with more time than me getting a double boost from playing the game 1. Learning to play it better. And 2. Building up a great player that I'll never be able to compete with. That's why we went the road we did.
    We have two problems in my mind, how to satisfy people who want structured progression and how do we make, the drive especially, more variable.
    I believe the progression in our game is great, but it's not visible as a stat or bar it's your final score on a course and your ability to play more difficult courses. Just like real golf. Unfortunately that's a little too camouflaged for some people including reviewers.
    Variability off the tee is something I have down to tackle, but don't know how at the moment. It should never have an element of random but it needs something.

    Comment

    • DivotMaker
      MVP
      • Jul 2002
      • 2703

      #3
      Re: Static vs. Variable Attributes

      Originally posted by AnthonyKyne
      Great post, these are the kind of things I love about this forum. I'm not totally against variable stats in games. It's very RPG and as you say a fantastic way to make each course a different puzzle for everyone. What I am against though is people with more time than me getting a double boost from playing the game 1. Learning to play it better. And 2. Building up a great player that I'll never be able to compete with. That's why we went the road we did.
      We have two problems in my mind, how to satisfy people who want structured progression and how do we make, the drive especially, more variable.
      I believe the progression in our game is great, but it's not visible as a stat or bar it's your final score on a course and your ability to play more difficult courses. Just like real golf. Unfortunately that's a little too camouflaged for some people including reviewers.
      Variability off the tee is something I have down to tackle, but don't know how at the moment. It should never have an element of random but it needs something.
      AK,

      Have a look at TrueSwing by Vance Cook and Dale Deputy at Headgate Studios or wherever they may be as they were bought and set up as EA Salt Lake City. TrueSwing in PGA Championship 2000 by Sierra and Tiger Woods 2002-2008 both for PC would be the best mouse swing I have ever played and I have played them all. Great Tempo and mis-hit properties that make the user feel like they are challenged, but not frustrated, IMO.....
      PC / Xbox One X

      Xbox One Elite Controller

      The Golf Club 2

      Comment

      • woodjer
        MVP
        • Mar 2003
        • 1196

        #4
        Re: Static vs. Variable Attributes

        Well said, gustavus. Since I likely made one of the posts that you took as insulting the TW series or calling it arcadey, I'll say that I do appreciate your view and completely agree with it. As I mentioned in the other thread, I wasn't insulting the game so much as making sure that the person who asked about season mode understood one of the biggest differences in the two games. Perhaps my reference to buying clothes to upgrade stats was dated but the general point remains the same...in the TW series, it is (or has been) possible to purchase in-game items (usually with XP, I assume...but perhaps with real $, too) to boost abilities. I have nothing against that at all for the same reasons that you mention. However...

        Originally posted by AnthonyKyne
        What I am against though is people with more time than me getting a double boost from playing the game 1. Learning to play it better. And 2. Building up a great player that I'll never be able to compete with. That's why we went the road we did.
        THIS is why I enjoy TGC. While I do get a 4-round tourney in each week, I also try to get a few other practice rounds in. However, if I happen to miss out on a chance to get those practice rounds in, I don't start the next tourney at a disadvantage because of that. I may not play well due to being unfamiliar with the course or just being a little rusty in general but that's completely on me. In my last TW experience, if I didn't play as much, I might find myself even further behind others because, in addition to those two things, I hadn't put in the time to build my stats up like others did. In TGC, I find that it's very possible for people to have unique skill sets as well but it's because of what they're doing rather than what they're choosing to upgrade (again, if this has changed, I apologize). For example, I am pretty bad at putting in TGC so I have to work extra hard on my approach shots to minimize that weakness.

        I also like TGC because they have essentially built the game to have nearly unlimited replayability. I haven't checked the total number of courses but on the TGCTours website, there are hundreds of courses listed and more are added almost daily. Sure, not all of them are great courses but I've yet to play a course that I thought was just terrible. I'll admit that the screenshots I've seen of the new EA game blow it away in terms of the visuals but I'm not as bothered by it as I thought I might be.

        In the end, I think TGC is a fantastic game of golf for my tastes. I've played several EA golf games over the years but none have held my interest anywhere near as much as TGC. That doesn't make them bad games in the least...it just means that TGC is the better choice for me. I have no interest in engaging in a "TGC beats EA Golf" war so I hope that this conversation can continue in the productive compare/contrast manner with which I intended it.
        PSN: JWGoND

        Comment

        • Hutton
          Banned
          • Aug 2008
          • 832

          #5
          Re: Static vs. Variable Attributes

          I understand the appeal of the RPG type way of building & customizing your own golfer, and that I would enjoy in an offline "career" type mode, but the path that TGC decided to go where everyone is on the same playing field really works well. Any newcomer can pickup the game & and an equal opportunity to contend, but people who play more often can still be rewarded through practice rounds and note taking.

          The only way I could see a "variable" ratings system work in TGC is if there were a few predefined types of golfers to choose from, each offering positives & negatives such as:
          1. Balanced golfer (current default setup)
          2. Power (a slight increase in driver distance but a decrease in driver accuracy [smaller cone])
          3. Accurate (less power but a more forgiving cone)

          Even with that said, I would guess nearly everyone would select the power golfer, unless the hit in accuracy was enough to make it very difficult to hit fairways with ease.

          Comment

          • gustavus
            Banned
            • Feb 2015
            • 94

            #6
            Re: Static vs. Variable Attributes

            I do get why folks are turned off by competing in a more RPG like system, where some players, either by having more time to grind or by paying for boosts, have an advantage. It's one o of the reasons I kind of hate the EASHL in the NHL series. You are pretty obligated to get your player up to speed, or you are hurting the team.

            I think the RPG element really is best served in single player. It's why I mentioned that at one point in our CC we encouraged the use of Pro Golfers over created golfers. You were always free to use your created guy, but most of us were far less interested in winning because we grinder longer.

            One way of handling this is to group online tourneys by ratings. It's kind of how the Ultimate Team modes work. You play your way into higher leagues, and then have to win a minimum to avoid demotion, and you try to hit a high point to get promoted. In the end, you are facing teams that are a good balance for where you are.

            I think if anything like variable skill was included in TGC, and I'm not saying it should, then self selecting where you want to add a set number of skill points might makes sense. You wouldn't have enough to max out everything, and it would force you to leave weaknesses. But seriously, I don't think that is necessary. different games appeal to different people for specific reasons. And many people will want both types of games to play.

            I would say that the devs should just keep on perfecting the physics, which is pretty much what every sports game needs. There is no, "And now it's done" moment. You just find ways to improve it, or ways to add variables that users cannot perfect.

            Comment

            • TheBrew101
              Rookie
              • Mar 2003
              • 309

              #7
              Re: Static vs. Variable Attributes

              Interesting topic and I see both sides.

              I think what I'd like to see is variable skill sets but limitations so that you don't have super golfers. In real life, golfers have different skills. Lee Trevino and Ben Hogan were considered the some of the best ball strikers of all time. Nicklaus was known for his power. Johnny Miller was known for his iron play. Tiger Woods was known for his power and putting. Mickelson for his wedge prowess. Some players recover out of the rough better. Some recover out of sand better.

              The point is even the best of all time had strengths and weaknesses. It would be nice to see this somehow incorporated into the game while still having people on a somewhat level playing field.

              Maybe say you have 100 points total allocation.

              Driver power 1-50 points (1 could equal 260 yard average and 50 could equal 310 yard average)

              Iron power 0-20 points (think of the 20 points adding 1 yard per point for irons. For example normal sand wedge goes 100 and if you allocate 20 you can hit this club 120)

              Wedge spin 0-10 points (think 0 as your normal shot and 20 as a Mickelson hit spinner pulling back 3 yards).

              Driver Accuracy (ball striking) 0-20 points (think 20 as most forgiving and 0 for a mi**** causing a shot 20 yards off line)

              Iron Accuracy (ball striking) 0-20 points (think 20 as most forgiving and 0 for a mi**** causing a shot 20 yards off line)

              Workability (ability to draw/fade) 0-20 points (try hitting a draw with 0 and chances are you will have big hook and vice versa)

              Putter consistency 0-50 (affects how accurate your putting stroke is)

              Sand accuracy 0-30 (ability to recover from bunkers)

              Rough accuracy 0-30 (ability to hit it cleanly out of rough).


              Obviously those are just some super quick thoughts. The actual numbers and how they worked would have to be thoughtfully applied. But the summary of what I wrote is that I think it would be cool to have golfers have to choose their strengths and weaknesses at the start. Maybe have an RPG element in that you can gain an additional 10 points through meeting practice games (something like when Madden used to have the "drills" to compete in to give players some categorical small progression boosts).

              You'd want to keep it enough in line where a person just starting wasn't at a disadvantage in overall skill to someone playing everyday. But if you had a system similar to what I was dreaming up you'd have a set amount of "skill" to choose from. It is just how it is applied to the different categories that separates individual golfers. You could choose to be Johnny Miller type player sticking his irons in his prime or you could choose to be Dustin Johnson of today hitting his driver 320+. But you couldn't choose to be 100% great in all areas.

              Comment

              • woodjer
                MVP
                • Mar 2003
                • 1196

                #8
                Re: Static vs. Variable Attributes

                I just have to add that in any other sports game, I actually really like the RPG element for offline modes. It feels kinda weird to be on the TGC one-size-fits-all side of this discussion.

                Like Hutton said, I like that anyone can pick up TGC and, with the right approach, compete well in tournaments from day one. Since I'm not really into real golf, I usually wait to see feedback and stuff before purchasing a used copy once prices drop far enough. In the RPG-style game, that leaves me so far behind that multi-player isn't even really an option unless I dedicate every free minute to leveling up or spend real money to do it.

                While I'd like some more customization in TGC (a VERY minor thing, IMO), I just wouldn't want it to lose the pick-up-and-play aspect. I guess I could see maybe 3-5 generic play styles that people could pick from but make it a one-and-done pick, meaning you pick it and that's what you go with for eternity. Maybe you have until you get your handicap to decide...I could see allowing switches until then so someone could try the different types to get the right fit. Better yet, have some type of algorithm that looks at my pre-handicap rounds and assigns me a type. That way, my style really is MY style and I learn to use it or adjust to it.

                My styles would be something like:
                1) Balanced...basically exactly what it is now.
                2) Driver...Drive distance and accuracy increase
                3) Irons...Fairway shots increase in distance and accuracy
                4) Putter...The "hole radius" is increased when putting (basically, you don't see it but if your putt ends up within 1 ft, it's in or something)
                5) Hazards...Shots from the rough and bunkers are more accurate/powerful

                In a perfect system, there would have to be trade-offs though. For example, maybe a Driver has a smaller "hole radius" for putts and an Irons would have less accuracy out of hazards. Or maybe if you pick option 2-5, you have to pick another one as a weakness. Again, it would have to be really simple and balanced so no one type outplays the others. If it can't be balanced perfectly, don't touch a thing.

                Maybe it already does this but I'd love to see PGA use a system where better drives increase your driving ratings only (and so on). If you continue to hit solid drives, it makes sense that your rating goes up there. What has always seemed strange is that, in the past versions I played, I could increase whatever I wanted. So if I get tons of XP for drives but stink at putting, I could take all of those XP and apply them to putting skills. What ends up happening, in my head anyway, is that I don't practice my putting to get better, I keep practicing what I'm already good at (driving) and that eventually makes it easier to putt. Instead, if I'm ignoring my putting, it should get more difficult. In other words, I can determine where I want to be weak/strong rather than having my actual play determine that. Again, I think 11 was the last one I played so maybe it's changed since then.

                The bottom line, as many others have mentioned, is that we're fortunate to have two solid golf games (giving PGA the benefit of the doubt) and people can choose the one that fits their interests best...or pick both!
                PSN: JWGoND

                Comment

                Working...