Tiger Woods PGA Tour 12: The Masters Initial Impressions

Feature Article

Submitted on: 03/30/2011 by Chris Sanner

I fulfilled one of the many things on my sports gaming bucket list today by golfing a round at Augusta National, thanks to Tiger Woods PGA Tour 12: The Masters.

It was everything that I had always hoped it would be.

Of course, if you happen to be someone who has a personal vendetta against the prestigious club because of their membership policies or some other reason, you might find yourself ready to throw your console through the window. Nevertheless, Augusta National IS this year's game as the entire presentation is built around the lore and lure of Augusta National.

But is Tiger Woods PGA Tour 12: The Masters a one-trick pony? Read on to read my initial thoughts on the game.

Initial Gameplay Thoughts

I have yet to delve into the Move functionality of the game (look for that article later this week), but the standard console version is a good and logical continuation of the series from the past couple of years. You can see where some aspects are really starting to tighten up (putting) while other new areas are quite rough around the edges (your new caddy).

I only casually played Tiger Woods 11 so my last real deep playthrough in the Tiger Woods series was Tiger Woods 10. I can honestly say the game feels almost completely different after just taking a year off -- and that's a compliment to the progression of the series.

Drives and approach shots can be ho-hum if you just use your caddy, or they can be challenging and rewarding if you choose to go it alone. Even still, you can't completely turn the caddy function off, which is just a bad design decision. To me, it feels like a developer deciding what you want and forcing it down your throat, which is rather insulting to consumers like myself. Hopefully they patch it, because otherwise it really hampers the fun, challenge and imagination of the game of golf because it almost feels cheap and a little too easy with the caddy on.

Putting, while difficult on the higher settings, is very rewarding once you get a feel for it. But getting a consistent feel for it isn't easy, which is probably a good thing. There should be a range where putts should be basically automatic, but no one should be able to consistently sink 30 to 40 foot putts. Depending on your skill, you might still be draining those long putts, but for the average gamer the putting will offer a consistent challenge.

Initial Thoughts on Presentation

As I alluded to at the onset of this piece, the entire presentation was built around the fame of Augusta National and the Masters -- a logical decision since the game's name would imply such a move.

I think the biggest problem with Tiger Woods PGA Tour 12 is the combination of the in-game presentation and the overall look of the game.

The in-game presentation seems to have a hard time simulating a round of golf from the golfer's perspective and a TV broadcast of a round of golf. Tiger is in the same sort of middle ground other EA games have found themselves in, and it hurts the quality of the game because the little touches you could go with from either perspective just can't fit in. I feel very underwhelmed with the in-game presentation thus far.

As far as the look of the game, it just looks weird. Some of the golfers, including Tiger, look weird to me. And the game itself is not jaw-dropping, but it is not bad looking either, with the exception being the plasticy looking ground. If there is a sport where graphics matter more than most, I would say it's golf because the courses themselves need a unique and beautiful look that shows off the character of the course

Some courses just look the same as others, and anyone who has golfed several locations knows that each course has its own unique flavor and flair. While there are notable differences, some of the courses just seem to run together; and being someone who loves the look of a well trimmed golf course, some of the grass textures are just awful. It's a minor gripe, but from a personal standpoint it's hard for me to overlook that.

Where To From Here?

I will be taking a look at the PS3 Move functionality of the game later this week and then you can expect a full review from me by early next week.

Tiger Woods PGA TOUR 12: The Masters Videos

Member Comments

# 1 MHammer113 @ 03/30/11 08:44 PM

This game still needs some emotion I mean if you win the Masters there should be some kind of excitement dont ya think?

# 2 shon @ 03/30/11 09:01 PM

I mentioned this in another thread but in the Tiger franchise you really feel like you are just playing individual holes instead of an full golf course. You don't see or can't hit the ball into another holes fairway so I've never felt like I was on the course and that could help each course feel different as you could see how all the holes fit together instead of being separate entities.

# 3 pietasterp @ 03/30/11 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shon


	I mentioned this in another thread but in the Tiger franchise you really feel like you are just playing individual holes instead of an full golf course. You don't see or can't hit the ball into another holes fairway so I've never felt like I was on the course and that could help each course feel different as you could see how all the holes fit together instead of being separate entities.

This is an excellent point, and one that (I assume) only a real-world golfer would bother to bring up. I also have thought that in this day and age, with how far basketball and hockey and soccer gaming has come, that golf games would be leaps-and-bounds ahead of where they are now. I mean, other than just sheer graphical prowess (and I would argue that the last generations of Links on the PC looked as good, if not better, than any TW game...yes, I know they were not polygon-based, but it's friggin' 2011, polys have caught up/surpassed sprites in almost every other genre), the games have really not made that much progress in terms of immersion in the sport. Anyone that's ever played golf knows that not only does each course have a very distinctive feel and look (as MMChris rightly noted in his impressions), but the layouts make a big difference in your overall play and experience. Especially the little things - the way the grass looks at a particular course (i.e. southern California courses have a semi-dried firm "turf" grass look to them, whereas midwestern courses have a more lush, green carpet look, and there's everything in between...), the way the water on some courses is muddy/full of weeds and others it's crystal clear with a rocky bottom, the color/texture of the sand in the traps....it all matters.

But re: the rendering of a course vs individual holes, by way of example if you are playing a desert/mountain resort-type course where anything off the fairway is in the desert brush (and you're pretty much not finding that ball), because it's in the hills/mountains the holes are usually pretty spaced out and, more-or-less, individual entities (a-la Tiger Woods). On the other hand, if you're playing a more standard midwest-style parkland muni course with tightly packed-in holes (to conserve acreage), if you slice it 30-40 yards off the center cut, you know you'll be sheepishly waiting on the guys 2 holes ahead of you to hit their drives so you can scurry into their fairway and hack a safety back to your proper hole. And there's everything in between - those are just 2 examples.

The point is that shon is dead-on w/ my experience with the TW series - there's no sense that you're a on an active course, there's just the feeling that you're playing individual holes in a vacuum. Now, I'm not saying they have to get the game like "Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge" where you can hit it into the parking lot (although that'd be awesome), but even the pro's will pull-hook a drive into the next fairway over once in a while, and if you hit a bad enough shot, you can end up in bizarre places on most courses. But in TW, it's either center-cut, rough, or OB. I've been playing golf for a pretty long time, and I can say that the entire look and feel of a course is dictated by the whole layout, not just the individual holes...

Also, I agree with MHammer - context is everything in sports (and by extension, sports gaming)....if you win a title or do something dramatic, the game should react appropriately.

# 4 rolltide1017 @ 03/30/11 10:42 PM

I don't think you realize how much detail is actually in each hole. These consoles may be very powerful compared but they are not powerful enough to render the entire course at the same level of detail you currently see on each hole. Sorry if you don't believe that but it is the truth. If these consoles were powerful enough, I think they would do this for all the reason you mention. You can't compare these courses to basketball, hockey and soccer arenas and stadiums; these courses are much bigger in file size per course compared to each stadium or arena. I bet there is far more detail per hole then in even the biggest stadium from any of EAs other games. If you want an example of the sacrifices that would have to be made for this to work, take a look at the graphics for that John Daly golf game.

The celebration for wins thing has been a big problem in all EA Sports games IMO, they haven't gotten the feel right in any game. NCAA may have come close this year but something still feels off.

# 5 Triggerfish @ 03/30/11 10:46 PM

Nice writeup! This game is not meant for people who play golf..it's meant for people who play video game golf...its not a sim.The glaring issues with the caddy is proof enough where they are and have always been heading. If there was a golfer among the developers he would have probably said something while they were going in this direction...at least to save the higher levels... or the EA suits put out the word on where to take this.

# 6 pietasterp @ 03/31/11 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rolltide1017


	I don't think you realize how much detail is actually in each hole. These consoles may be very powerful compared but they are not powerful enough to render the entire course at the same level of detail you currently see on each hole. Sorry if you don't believe that but it is the truth. If these consoles were powerful enough, I think they would do this for all the reason you mention. You can't compare these courses to basketball, hockey and soccer arenas and stadiums; these courses are much bigger in file size per course compared to each stadium or arena. I bet there is far more detail per hole then in even the biggest stadium from any of EAs other games. If you want an example of the sacrifices that would have to be made for this to work, take a look at the graphics for that John Daly golf game. The celebration for wins thing has been a big problem in all EA Sports games IMO, they haven't gotten the feel right in any game. NCAA may have come close this year but something still feels off.

I get that it takes a lot more to render a golf course, what with all the myriad objects, textures, etc. involved with a single hole, but you don't have to render the entire 18-holes and environs in the same detail at all times. For example, you could have the rest of the course be low-res on the fly-overs or zoomed-out views, but maybe have higher textures on the immediate neighboring holes if the ball actually travels in that direction. Palatte-swap for zoom-ins, hell, pop-in if need be, but just something to show there is an actual environment rather than a hole in a vacuum.

I have no idea what is and isn't possible with enough effort, since I'm not a programmer, but I just thought it'd be nice (if it's possible) to at least make an attempt to give you the impression that you're on an actual course.

# 7 rangerrick012 @ 03/31/11 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rolltide1017


	I don't think you realize how much detail is actually in each hole. These consoles may be very powerful compared but they are not powerful enough to render the entire course at the same level of detail you currently see on each hole. Sorry if you don't believe that but it is the truth. If these consoles were powerful enough, I think they would do this for all the reason you mention. You can't compare these courses to basketball, hockey and soccer arenas and stadiums; these courses are much bigger in file size per course compared to each stadium or arena. I bet there is far more detail per hole then in even the biggest stadium from any of EAs other games. If you want an example of the sacrifices that would have to be made for this to work, take a look at the graphics for that John Daly golf game. The celebration for wins thing has been a big problem in all EA Sports games IMO, they haven't gotten the feel right in any game. NCAA may have come close this year but something still feels off.

Fifa World Cup 10 nailed the celebration aspects, among other things. That was such a great game, why did I sell it....

I haven't won the Masters yet so I don't know if there's anything as far as the jacket ceremony, etc, but would hope that it is in here.

On Topic - RE: Load time between holes - it's not a big deal to me. It's funny that golf is a game of patience, yet people apparently can't wait 15 seconds between holes if it means better graphics in the end.

# 8 ExtremeGamer @ 03/31/11 05:07 AM

Read a rumor on Twitter that in your career mode that no matter what difficulty you're using, to qualify for the Masters, you have to use the hardest difficulty. Can anyone confirm that?

# 9 DivotMaker @ 03/31/11 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExtremeGamer


	Read a rumor on Twitter that in your career mode that no matter what difficulty you're using, to qualify for the Masters, you have to use the hardest difficulty. Can anyone confirm that?

Not true. My understanding is every difficulty level from Amateur through Tournament qualifies for the Masters.

# 10 ExtremeGamer @ 03/31/11 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DivotMaker


	Not true. My understanding is every difficulty level from Amateur through Tournament qualifies for the Masters.

Whew, thanks man.

# 11 Dazraz @ 03/31/11 09:53 AM

Just received my copy of TW12 & spent some time with the game. My initial impression is one of disappointment. After being so pleased with the demo I really thought this years game would be a big upgrade. Sadly not.
Outside of the well presented Masters mode the game is poorly presented. You don't even get the Hole Fly by's prior to each hole anymore & player cut scenes have all but been eliminated by the caddy popping up prior to each shot. The option not to switch the caddy off permanently is an odd one. Like EA are forcing us to use an option they have decided to include.
Commentary is, as always, bad. Unless of course you are playing at Augusta.
Graphically the game is very inconsistent with some poor frame rates at times. Hard to compare player models because you only ever see their back end due to the aforementioned removal of player cut scenes.
EA have taken out the broadcast presentation elements in an effort to give the player the feeling of actually playing the round from the players perspective. It doesn't really succeed & you now appear to get less of a feel for the hole/course that you are playing.

# 12 DivotMaker @ 03/31/11 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peigone


	Fabulous post pietasterp. I've been PC golfing since the early 1990's, and your post strikes a real chord with me. Years ago -- sometime around the demise of the golf sim era (Links and FPS Golf) I recall going into an electronics store and watching one of the store's salespeople playing a golf game that was being shown on their wall of televisions. At first I thought it was a TV broadcast of a live PGA tournament. It was photo-realistic, and the commentary and applause sounded like a live broadcast crew and gallery. (Never did find out what that game was BTW.) Anyway, THAT'S where I expected golf sims to be several years down the road. But something happened in between then and now -- the game console took over. Funny, this morning I was just reading a "Developer's Diary" article about MLB 2K9. In it, the fellow was waxing philosophical about the need to remove (dumb down) certain features that were in MLB 2K8 because "pickup and play users struggled with figuring it out." That's the gaming era we're in now. Basically, if young people aren't interested, then developers have little or no motivation to add it to the game. And young people would not think twice about the fact that when they hit a ball 40 yards left of the fairway, that the ball is magically respawned back on the fairway with a stroke penalty. If anything, that's what they want in a game because it speeds things up and keeps it simple. It's also why past features like course creation tools were removed, why the ability to edit and add PGA pros was removed, why the ability to create your own custom season was removed, etc. and so forth. I also be believe it's why photo-realism has never been introduced into this series. The look of the game, and the bright color palettes they use, have been kept cartoon-like for the same reasons -- it all appeals to young people.

While one PC Golf game could be considered "photo-realistic", it was hampered by a 2D non-dynamic nor 3D environment which is certainly easier to render than what is rendered in TW12...by a LARGE MARGIN. Playing Links 2003 was like playing in a vacuum postcard environment, IMO. Zero animation of anything on the course other than the golfer, ball, and flag. EVERYTHING in TW12 is animated and the environments are dynamic with changing weather and lighting that changes as the day progresses. Huge difference from Links 2003....

Consoles have NEVER had a true course architect for various reasons, but the biggest reasons are:

1) Lack of harddrive for ALL consoles (360 is not standard, Wii has none)

2) No real way for most users to use a mouse and keyboard to design courses. No way could you design a course with a gamepad with any sort of quality.

3) The software tools to create courses (3D programs and tools) are extremely expensive and cumbersome for most users to use effectively.

There are various other reasons, but those are the biggest.

# 13 pietasterp @ 03/31/11 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peigone


	I recall going into an electronics store and watching one of the store's salespeople playing a golf game that was being shown on their wall of televisions. At first I thought it was a TV broadcast of a live PGA tournament. It was photo-realistic, and the commentary and applause sounded like a live broadcast crew and gallery. (Never did find out what that game was BTW.)

Was that a Babbages or Electronics Boutique, by any chance? I seem to remember walking into one of the old gamestores (before evil empire Gamestop took them all over...) and having a similar experience, but I also never figured out what game it was they were showing...maybe something for the 3DO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by peigone


	That's the gaming era we're in now. Basically, if young people aren't interested, then developers have little or no motivation to add it to the game. And young people would not think twice about the fact that when they hit a ball 40 yards left of the fairway, that the ball is magically respawned back on the fairway with a stroke penalty. If anything, that's what they want in a game because it speeds things up and keeps it simple. It's also why past features like course creation tools were removed, why the ability to edit and add PGA pros was removed, why the ability to create your own custom season was removed, etc. and so forth. I also be believe it's why photo-realism has never been introduced into this series. The look of the game, and the bright color palettes they use, have been kept cartoon-like for the same reasons -- it all appeals to young people.

It all goes back to the hegemony of EA being the dominant sports game publisher...there used to be an option between Links, PGA Championship Golf, Jack Nickaluas golf, PGA Tour Golf (Tiger Woods' predecessor, that was actually a decent sim golf game), and others - but when EA became the sole player, the writing was on the wall. I said back in '99 when the first PGA-exclusive license newly-branded EA Tiger Woods game came out (I may be off by a year or so on the date) and it had lightning strikes on drives and all this other nonsense, that it was going to spell the beginning of the end for golf games. Not sure I was wrong about that one...

Quote:

Originally Posted by DivotMaker


	While one PC Golf game could be considered "photo-realistic", it was hampered by a 2D non-dynamic nor 3D environment which is certainly easier to render than what is rendered in TW12...by a LARGE MARGIN. Playing Links 2003 was like playing in a vacuum postcard environment, IMO. Zero animation of anything on the course other than the golfer, ball, and flag. EVERYTHING in TW12 is animated and the environments are dynamic with changing weather and lighting that changes as the day progresses. Huge difference from Links 2003....

No doubt it's harder with polys...but is it really not possible to approach that level of detail, now almost a decade out from the last generation of PC golf games? I'm not disagreeing with you per se, but I'm wondering if it really is the case that it's not possible or that it just hasn't been attempted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DivotMaker


	Consoles have NEVER had a true course architect for various reasons, but the biggest reasons are: 1) Lack of harddrive for ALL consoles (360 is not standard, Wii has none) 2) No real way for most users to use a mouse and keyboard to design courses. No way could you design a course with a gamepad with any sort of quality. 3) The software tools to create courses (3D programs and tools) are extremely expensive and cumbersome for most users to use effectively. There are various other reasons, but those are the biggest.

All good points...particularly the interface issues. But course creators used to be a traditional part of a good number of PC golf games...didn't Sierra's PGA Championship game from early 2000's have a course-creator that used polys (3d) and was actually really robust? I thought a late-edition Jack Nicklaus had a similar tool as well (also 3d). And honestly, I'm not sure Tiger looks that much better than some of those later PC poly-based games. So I'm not totally convinced the lack of a course creator (at least for PC-versions) is based on the lack of tech or ease of use (people can do amazing things with any semi-intelligently designed creation system...just surf the 'net for user-created PGA Championship or Jack Nicklaus courses).

# 14 pietasterp @ 03/31/11 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peigone


	Yeah, that's the game I was trying to think of. Still to this day, it remains the only sports game I ever beat to become the overall champion at the end of the season!

You never beat Tyson in "Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!"???

# 15 WeimaBrewer @ 04/01/11 05:12 PM

EA's graphics department/player models have always been lacking to me. This game is a prime example of this. Sony is the best IMO.

# 16 ven0m43 @ 04/01/11 10:22 PM

I like how it costs $60 for the game and about $52 for the rest of the courses through DLC. They need to release all of the courses and then add more through DLC and not the other way around.

# 17 supermanemblem @ 04/02/11 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DivotMaker


	While one PC Golf game could be considered "photo-realistic", it was hampered by a 2D non-dynamic nor 3D environment which is certainly easier to render than what is rendered in TW12...by a LARGE MARGIN. Playing Links 2003 was like playing in a vacuum postcard environment, IMO. Zero animation of anything on the course other than the golfer, ball, and flag. EVERYTHING in TW12 is animated and the environments are dynamic with changing weather and lighting that changes as the day progresses. Huge difference from Links 2003.... Consoles have NEVER had a true course architect for various reasons, but the biggest reasons are: 1) Lack of harddrive for ALL consoles (360 is not standard, Wii has none) 2) No real way for most users to use a mouse and keyboard to design courses. No way could you design a course with a gamepad with any sort of quality. 3) The software tools to create courses (3D programs and tools) are extremely expensive and cumbersome for most users to use effectively. There are various other reasons, but those are the biggest.

Sony's play, create and share movement is proof positive that a course editor could be successfully employed. EA does not want to bring these to life because it may hurt DLC sales. A course editor with the option to share would bring the innovation most people clamor for. Not a caddy features that takes away from the experience. I don't think the lack of harddrives is the reason. EA is scared if cannibalizing their cash cow in DLC.

# 18 T3B0W @ 04/03/11 06:16 AM

Got it. Another solid title in this series. I missed 11, though this is a good game for the golf enthusisast. I am loving the Masters mode.

# 19 kerosene31 @ 04/03/11 08:47 PM

No offense, but your lack of experience with TW11 is a big problem. TW11 was a massive step forward in realism, and to many TW12 is a big step back. True aim on the hardest difficulty was a major step forward which was removed completely from this year's game.

# 20 DivotMaker @ 04/04/11 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by supermanemblem


	Sony's play, create and share movement is proof positive that a course editor could be successfully employed. EA does not want to bring these to life because it may hurt DLC sales. A course editor with the option to share would bring the innovation most people clamor for. Not a caddy features that takes away from the experience. I don't think the lack of harddrives is the reason. EA is scared if cannibalizing their cash cow in DLC.

If you knew anything at all about what it takes to create a Golf course for a Golf game, you would realize that Sony's feature is not a factor in this ever coming to the TW series. And show me ANY major franchise that is not selling DLC.....

« Previous12 Next »

More Links