The Masters

my humble suggestion

kill boost, spin and zoom leave wind
plug in your own personal swingspeed
stop adjusting attributes so much shooting 65 and losing in all attributes is ridiculous

power - no wind make it not possible to hit it farther than tiger
accuracy - no wind make circle equal to pga tour at best ie. 100 yards 15 foot circle 200 yards 35 foot circle
short game - no change
putting - eliminate wristshots

other suggestions

when fairways are hard and rough is short let ball trundle farther in rough and vice versa when fairways are soft no bounce or roll period fairway or rough give lies in rough u cant hit out with nothing but sand wedge

and most of all

let player drop according to rules
when ball out of bounds make player wait until group has hit
no chipping on greens

if you want to introduce randomness eliminate luck attribute
let perfectly struck putts lip out an increasing percentage for an increase in distance ie, 10% for 3 to 6 feet 33% for 6 - 12 feet however limiting putting attribute will probably cover this tired of watching opponents rifle in 35 footers based on luck attribute lip outs happen far more than lip ins

thanks for the forum and i appreciate responses of all kinds

id like to add a few points

the overwhelming problem with the game is this
losing money to the guy at your house who has the straightest and most direct view of the tv most of the time

also his 2 iron circle is like 2 feet , y'all know what im sayin
i seriously want us to go to 3 click cuz its tough to hit it straight when u arent facing the tv
if u play anything for money all u ask is a fair fight

ok so now all our attributes are approx the same all 10's and for some reason all his circles are half the rest of ours

we set the game as tough as u can play except for green grid is on
i put up a 63 a 64 and a 76 in the last 3 times
guy with straight on view shoots 59 59 59
the 76 is obviously a direct result of his 59's and my attributes get killed therefore i will never win
the betting ceases and game is a waste of time
this is why there is handicaps in golf u throw out ur worst 10
golf is a great game because ur previous performance is in no way relative to your next performance
in real golf ive shot 43 29 ive shot 86 69 76 74 all kinds of scores without affecting my skill
this is the nature of the game not humans
if tiger shoots a 74 does this in turn destroy his skill NO
does tiger have a 2 foot circle of accuracy on his 2 iron i think not
has anyone ever shot 59 59 59 on 3 different courses in 3 different conditions impossible

do i think there needs to be a game where this is possible definitely not
do i think that most people playing this game have 2 feet of snow on the ground and cant golf Yes
do i believe they have the technology to make this game the greatest sim ever Yes

i say make this game a true sim and make the guys at 21 under eat it
want to know how i defend any bet on this game from now on
ill play them for whatever they want but when the real game starts again the same bet is on
u know what they ask for? 24 strokes

Make their shirts get wet!!!Make Realer Club Sounds!!!!Tournament grafics!!!!watch the CPU put while you are on the side lines!! after the CPU puts let him wave at the crowd like in real life,Take out the Cutscenes its getting old,And Plz update the crowds they are wayyyy outdated. have a caddy with you 2 carrying your club bag!! PLZ get the word out 2 !!EA I will always Buy Tiger woods tho

Matrixgenius - buy a plasma HDTV. Wide viewing angle.

I love the random landing area idea! Variable wind, too. But I do think there will be guys who figure out a way to score low. Doesn't matter to me, because I'd rather build my own circle of friends/players who like playing conditions so challenging that par is a good score.

If anything is locked though, EA owes it to us to provide an unlock code! (I paid over $60 for unlocking and courses with TW10, and I've had ENOUGH of that!)

Pete

Why don't they blow this current engine up, start from scratch and reinvent the swing mechanic. Other games have gotten it right in the past, they just didn't have TW's name and face plastered on the cover, and that's why they failed.

cem_ea_id.jaybiv wrote:Why don't they blow this current engine up, start from scratch and reinvent the swing mechanic. Other games have gotten it right in the past, they just didn't have TW's name and face plastered on the cover, and that's why they failed.

They failed because they did not cater to the widest audience possible.

cem_ea_id.EAcom Golf Tim wrote:

cem_ea_id.jaybiv wrote:Why don't they blow this current engine up, start from scratch and reinvent the swing mechanic. Other games have gotten it right in the past, they just didn't have TW's name and face plastered on the cover, and that's why they failed.

They failed because they did not cater to the widest audience possible.

Is that a fact?

Yes.

Do you have data to back that?

Do you have any data?

It is common sense that other games appealed to a wider audience and if other games "truly got it right", they would still be selling and producing Golf games, wouldn't they? Go find the Lead developer for each game you think "got it right" and ask them why they aren't producing Golf games any longer. Go find the sales statistics for each game you think "got it right" and compare them to TW sales over the years. For example, Links 2004 for XBox sold less than 100,000 copies when they stopped development on Links 2006. Wonder why? TW09 sold in excess of 4 Million copies across all platforms. Not sure what TW10's results are, but I am betting it did as good or better than 09. If TW did not play a decent to good game of Golf and "get more things right than they get wrong", EA would not be producing IT any longer.....

That is speculation. Not fact. There is a difference. You gave us sales numbers which tells us that it wasn't successful but that doesn't tell us why it failed.

ps3.Polar___Ice wrote: That is speculation. Not fact. There is a difference. You gave us sales numbers which tells us that it wasn't successful but that doesn't tell us why it failed.

No they don't, but go ask the developers of those games why they failed. I know Daryl Welsh who was the Sr. Producer for Links 2004 and he told me exactly what I posted here as to why Links for consoles is no longer produced. It does not take much to figure out why these games are no longer produced. You are asking for "facts" when the only thing you will ever get are "opinions" as to why these games are no longer produced even if you ask each developer.

cem_ea_id.EAcom Golf Tim wrote:

ps3.Polar___Ice wrote: That is speculation. Not fact. There is a difference. You gave us sales numbers which tells us that it wasn't successful but that doesn't tell us why it failed.

No they don't, but go ask the developers of those games why they failed. I know Daryl Welsh who was the Sr. Producer for Links 2004 and he told me exactly what I posted here as to why Links for consoles is no longer produced. It does not take much to figure out why these games are no longer produced. You are asking for "facts" when the only thing you will ever get are "opinions" as to why these games are no longer produced even if you ask each developer.

I take it you include yourself in that statement and you are correct, opinions are not factual,but if you trust and respect the source of the opinion IMO it can still be usefull

MAIN.MikeeWeird wrote:

cem_ea_id.EAcom Golf Tim wrote:

ps3.Polar___Ice wrote: That is speculation. Not fact. There is a difference. You gave us sales numbers which tells us that it wasn't successful but that doesn't tell us why it failed.

No they don't, but go ask the developers of those games why they failed. I know Daryl Welsh who was the Sr. Producer for Links 2004 and he told me exactly what I posted here as to why Links for consoles is no longer produced. It does not take much to figure out why these games are no longer produced. You are asking for "facts" when the only thing you will ever get are "opinions" as to why these games are no longer produced even if you ask each developer.

I take it you include yourself in that statement and you are correct, opinions are not factual,but if you trust and respect the source of the opinion IMO it can still be usefull

Yes, I include myself in that statement...

Well an opinion isn't a fact. I'm not saying I disagree with your opinion though.