Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

TW 2004: An Observation

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Alan Bernardo

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 12:47:47 PM9/28/03
to
I wonder if anyone has seen this with TW 2004.

Using the TrueSwing, wind and lie have no affect on the ball. I hit a
straight shot, according to the analyzer, and the ball goes straight, no
matter the lie or the wind.

But then I go to the 3-click method. I hit a straight shot, hitting the top
and bottom marks perfectly, and wind and lie DO have an affect.

Could someone try this? I'm on Expert mode.

If I decide to play this game at all, it will be using the 3-click method.

One more thing-- has anyone seen the St. Andrews' course in TW 2004? My
god, it is ugly!

Comments are welcomed.

Alanb


Bill Harris

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 1:31:15 PM9/28/03
to
Alan,
Wind does have an effect, and I'm not even playing on Expert level. I played
a round in a mile an hour wind and the adjustment I had to make was about
seven ticks. I agree that lie doesn't have the effect I'd like to see, but
wind certainly does, at least in my experience.

"Alan Bernardo" <mas...@oforion.net> wrote in message
news:TgEdb.360730$2x.1...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...

Alan Bernardo

unread,
Sep 30, 2003, 3:36:49 PM9/30/03
to

"Bill Harris" <billh...@nospam.austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:DVEdb.131283$KW1....@twister.austin.rr.com...

Having played TW 2003 a little more now, with the TrueSwing, I am noticing a
lie influence on the ball. This is encouraging. However, I still think,
objectively, that Links 2003 is the better golf game, regarding realism and
replayability.

Alanb


Brett Todd

unread,
Sep 30, 2003, 5:14:35 PM9/30/03
to

"Alan Bernardo" <mas...@oforion.net> wrote in message
news:lXkeb.191239$mp.1...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...

> Having played TW 2003 a little more now, with the TrueSwing, I am noticing
a
> lie influence on the ball. This is encouraging. However, I still think,
> objectively, that Links 2003 is the better golf game, regarding realism
and
> replayability.

Objectively, huh? ;-)

Brett


Dan S.

unread,
Sep 30, 2003, 6:04:04 PM9/30/03
to

> Having played TW 2003 a little more now, with the TrueSwing, I am noticing a
> lie influence on the ball. This is encouraging. However, I still think,
> objectively, that Links 2003 is the better golf game, regarding realism and
> replayability.
>
> Alanb
>

Well here are my .02 cents,

Links is no more a realstic sim of playing golf then TW. It may have
tighter physics, but it is not realism. I am a single digit handicaper
in RL, and anyone who tells me playing Links (or any golf game) feels
like being on the course is full of poo-poo IMO.

Before passing final judgement I will wait for this years Links version,
I am excited about it being on the Xbox. But to it's credit at least TW
has gone away from the stale formula of load up a course, play a round,
rinse, repeat. The unlockables, and the additicing career mode make the
game more fun to play for the casual fan.

Also no offense but for you to use the word "objectively" in anything
regarding the Link / TW debate is laughable. In another thread you said
that TW graphics weren't impressive, you can claim a lot of things about
TW, but I don't think you could objectively say the graphics are bad. I
realize everyone is entitle to their own opinion, but I have a feeling
you would be in the minority on this one.

If you want realism Alan, get your ass on a course and shoot your 104
from the whites <G>. However if you want to play a fun game (GAME being
the key word) of golf on the PC then you can't go wrong with either TW
or Links in my opinion.


Alan Bernardo

unread,
Sep 30, 2003, 7:31:11 PM9/30/03
to
> Also no offense but for you to use the word "objectively" in anything
> regarding the Link / TW debate is laughable. In another thread you said
> that TW graphics weren't impressive, you can claim a lot of things about
> TW, but I don't think you could objectively say the graphics are bad.

Have you looked at St. Andrews yet? Tell me that looks pleasing and I'd
think your eye for the beautiful is somewhat blinded.

> If you want realism Alan, get your ass on a course and shoot your 104
> from the whites <G>.

For sure. What I'm saying is that IMHO (objectivity :)), Links comes
closer.

>However if you want to play a fun game (GAME being
> the key word) of golf on the PC then you can't go wrong with either TW
> or Links in my opinion.

I'd have to agree. TW 2004 certainly is a much improved game compared to
last year's version.

So if any of you TWers are looking for an IP-to-IP game, look me up on ICQ
at 4046944.

Alanb


javajeff

unread,
Oct 1, 2003, 12:21:35 PM10/1/03
to
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 23:31:11 GMT, "Alan Bernardo" <mas...@oforion.net>
wrote:

>>However if you want to play a fun game (GAME being
>> the key word) of golf on the PC then you can't go wrong with either TW
>> or Links in my opinion.
>
>I'd have to agree. TW 2004 certainly is a much improved game compared to
>last year's version.
>

I just got the game from the EA Store, and played my first round on
Intermediate. So far I like what I see. I need to play with the game
more, but it looks like a lot of fun. The game seems more difficult
than last year, and that was my main complaint of the 2003 series.
PGA 2000 Trueswing seemed a little hard at times, and TW 2004
Trueswing seems more forgiving to me. There may not be a huge factor
for lie, but wind and missed swings are play a big role in where the
shot ends up. I have seen some shots where the lie did not matter,
and some shots where it did.

Dan S.

unread,
Oct 2, 2003, 1:05:23 PM10/2/03
to
Alan Bernardo wrote:

>>Also no offense but for you to use the word "objectively" in anything
>>regarding the Link / TW debate is laughable. In another thread you said
>>that TW graphics weren't impressive, you can claim a lot of things about
>>TW, but I don't think you could objectively say the graphics are bad.
>
>
> Have you looked at St. Andrews yet? Tell me that looks pleasing and I'd
> think your eye for the beautiful is somewhat blinded.
>
>

No, I haven't looked ta St. Andrews. But IMO that course is ugly in
person (as all Links courses are) anyway.

>>If you want realism Alan, get your ass on a course and shoot your 104
>>from the whites <G>.
>
>
> For sure. What I'm saying is that IMHO (objectivity :)), Links comes
> closer.
>

I don't think I would dispute your opinion on that basis, TW does have
some arcady feel to it in some spots.

>>However if you want to play a fun game (GAME being
>>the key word) of golf on the PC then you can't go wrong with either TW
>>or Links in my opinion.
>
>
> I'd have to agree. TW 2004 certainly is a much improved game compared to
> last year's version.
>

Like I said TW makes a PC golf game enjoyable for me. Personally I don't
like playing too much PC golf as it reminds me that it's cold and I am
not on the real course.

javajeff

unread,
Oct 2, 2003, 3:28:39 PM10/2/03
to
On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 12:05:23 -0500, "Dan S." <d...@work.com> wrote:

>
>Like I said TW makes a PC golf game enjoyable for me. Personally I don't
>like playing too much PC golf as it reminds me that it's cold and I am
>not on the real course.
>

I play PC golf in the winter because it reminds me of the warm
weather. :-)

0 new messages