Forums

Pebble Beach back 9

• daveparr 1,175 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 8:50 AM

   Quote Alosso:

   Which was the hole (dogleg left IIRC) on TW where you had to pass an enormous tree line? I don't seem to find these trees here. In my memory it was on the back nine but it might also have been #3(?)

  Those old TW Courses were all just cartoony not like real pictures wgt use, so lol  l think they did make it up a bit as they went along Putting Trees, Structures where none actualy exist in the real life course l suppose it was more about  looks.

                                                               Dave

• TracyMax 2,361 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 9:16 AM

  daveparr:

  l played T.W online right up to its demise and Pebble beach was always one of my favourite courses,  wgt course mapping and graphics are far superior to that old T.W course l have played a few practise games on the new pebble back9 and like the front 9 is stunningly Awesome 

                                                           in my opinion

                                                                 Dave

  Agreed!

• YankeeJim 25,827 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 9:38 AM

  K7JBQ:

  Andreas,

  I must have a poor quality 24" monitor. The course looks great to me.

   

  Heh, I have an even poorer quality 17" laptop screen and the HD look is magnificent.

  I might suggest Andreas see an optometrist as his eye sight is clearly failing.  :-I

• AndreasHelke 676 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 9:48 AM

  .

  K7JBQ:

  Andreas,

  I must have a poor quality 24" monitor. The course looks great to me.

  With my 20 year old 21" crt monitor the flaws where less noticeable especially the smudges on boundaries. But you could still easily see that the photos looked very poor compared to good quality photos seen on the same monitor. With my new 27" 4k monitor I see the deficits in their full glory so they are now much more annoying.

  Take a look at the tress on the left of the fairway of hole 1 of Pinehurst No. 2. They remind me more on the graphics from a computer game created in the nineties than of what I expect to see with a landscape photo.

   

  Andreas

• AndreasHelke 676 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 10:07 AM

  YankeeJim:

  K7JBQ:

  Andreas,

  I must have a poor quality 24" monitor. The course looks great to me.

   

  Heh, I have an even poorer quality 17" laptop screen and the HD look is magnificent.

  I might suggest Andreas see an optometrist as his eye sight is clearly failing.  :-I

  I think most people with good eyesight stopped playing after a few days. So most of the current players must bee those that have problems with their eyes or don´t use the proper glasses. I seem to be one of the few who continued playing despite of good eyesight  and poor image quality presented by WGT.

   

  If you don´t believe me take a screenshot of the game and than view it at 200% magnification. And then do the same with a good landscpape photo like you can find on flickr.

  Andreas

• andyson 6,415 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 10:51 AM

  AndreasHelke:

  Most noticeable are smudges around the edges especially at the horizon and around trees.

  That's because they photoshop a sky image on every photo to provide the experience of playing on a partly cloudy day for all 18 holes.  Its necessary because the photo shoot spans several days and that means different weather/sky conditions.

  AndreasHelke:

  I don´t understand that WGT is still using the same  absurdly poor quality with Pebble Beach they used when WGT started their service. And I don´t even understand why they used it back then.

  I also wish they used better quality images on PB.  But loading time would suffer immensely if they went to larger, higher definition images.  They send 1012x828 and 72px/inch to our PCs.  Those are stored on my hard drive as 200Kb to 300Kb files.  You get 20 or so images sent on each hole! 

  A full hi-def 1920x1080 file size would be 4 times that size.  Downloading times would be higher and cache usage greater so cache get full sooner.

  More discussion on this thread.

  AndreasHelke:

  And I think the poor image quality is costing WGT a lot of potential customers.  Many of them register take a look at what is offered and then either never play or abandon the game after a short time.

  I disagree.  Poor image quality in your eyes.  PaulTon's analogy above is perfect IMO!

• Yiannis1970 3,320 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 10:55 AM

  AndreasHelke:

  .

  K7JBQ:

  Andreas,

  I must have a poor quality 24" monitor. The course looks great to me.

  With my 20 year old 21" crt monitor the flaws where less noticeable especially the smudges on boundaries. But you could still easily see that the photos looked very poor compared to good quality photos seen on the same monitor. With my new 27" 4k monitor I see the deficits in their full glory so they are now much more annoying.

  Take a look at the tress on the left of the fairway of hole 1 of Pinehurst No. 2. They remind me more on the graphics from a computer game created in the nineties than of what I expect to see with a landscape photo.

   

  Andreas

   

  The resolution of the pics is just standard (low). We don't have pixel mapping 1:1 and you still talking about a 4K monitor? The artifacts could be the result of poor upscale process and not necessarily from a bad compression. I won't exclude it either but i am not so sure.

   

• YankeeJim 25,827 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 11:33 AM

  AndreasHelke:

  If you don´t believe me take a screenshot of the game and than view it at 200% magnification

  But I don't play with 200% magnification and how edges of trees blend with skylines doesn't take away from the primary view. IMO, that's a bit picky to expect perfect.

• daveparr 1,175 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 11:41 AM

  Andreas, l have played a few golf sims over the years and without a doubt the one big outstanding feature that blew my mind when l first joined wgt, was how light years they were ahead of any other golf game out there RE:  Mapping a Course and the Graphics Quality

                      jes l played some you could almost count the Pixels

                                                            Dave

• AndreasHelke 676 Posts

  Fri, Apr 1 2016 11:53 AM

  Yiannis1970:

  The resolution of the pics is just standard (low). We don't have pixel mapping 1:1 and you still talking about a 4K monitor? The artifacts could be the result of poor upscale process and not necessarily from a bad compression. I won't exclude it either but i am not so sure.

   

  Yiannis1960, the smudges I mentioned are there too when I play the game on a laptop with an 1366x786 screen.

  andyson:

  AndreasHelke:

  Most noticeable are smudges around the edges especially at the horizon and around trees.

  That's because they photoshop a sky image on every photo to provide the experience of playing on a partly cloudy day for all 18 holes.  Its necessary because the photo shoot spans several days and that means different weather/sky conditions.

  They are typical compression artifacts and not the imperfections you get when you photoshop a different sky into an image.

  Regarding the network and server load and loading times, WGT should offer us the option to store the necessary images on our own computer. This would reduce loading times and operating costs and WGT would not have to use such poor images.