|
Angland Challenge/Castle of Doom
by Mike Savicki
| Links Corner Course Database ID Number - 988 |
Release Date |
CRZ Filesize |
Par |
Course Length |
| 2002-07-28 |
44,979,810 bytes |
72 |
6603 yards |
| Type |
Style |
CRZ Filename |
|
IMAGINARY |
UNCLASSIFIED |
Angland Challenge.crz |
| Course ID |
Course Key |
| adf940c5e7c54548a73ed705acca3a70 |
54c1f99ba70e553da6686b43d8149ed8 |
|
LINKS CORNER REVIEW |
Reviewed by
Mike Nifong
September 2002
Course type: Rather than a single course, Angland Challenge/Castle of Doom could more appropriately be considered as two separate nine-hole imaginary/fantasy courses that share nothing other than geographical proximity - a parkland setting along what is presumably the English coast (or at the very least a really wide river, as water stretches to the horizon, and there is no pano).
Historical perspective: Released on July 28, 2002, Angland Challenge/Castle of Doom is Mike's sixth course. The first three (Damaze Falls, Mukes Lexington, and Damaze Jurassic) were all released in January 2001 to little acclaim and are no longer available. But the introduction of Mike's next two courses - Space Adventure (July 2001) and A Wacky World of Golf (November 2001) established his reputation as the APCD's most uncompromisingly original designer (I would be willing to bet that, as a child, he always colored outside the lines). Unfortunately, their reception also established that the immense gap between critical appraisal and mass acceptance that has often disadvantaged the truly innovative practitioners of other art forms also applies to computer golf course design: while they received LC scores of 75 and 85, respectively, the corresponding user ratings were 50-59 for Space Adventure and <50 for Wacky World.
Against that backdrop comes Mike's strange new hybrid of a more-or-less conventional front nine, albeit with a fantasy theme, coupled with another roller coaster ride of a back nine very much in the Wacky World tradition with an overlay of high-camp Gothic. Neither quite fish, then, nor fowl, and appealing to whom? From the early returns, it would appear that the answer is more people than liked his previous courses, as AC/CD (for purposes of this abbreviation, I surely wish he had named the back nine 'Deadly Castle' instead) currently enjoys a user rating of three stars. My recollection, however, is that that rating has been subject to a good bit of fluctuation, so my suspicion is that many of the votes it has received fall on one extreme or the other, and that AC/CD, like the rest of Mike's courses, is not a course about which many people will be neutral in their views.
What is included: In this 40.3MB file, quite large by his standards, Mike has given us all the expected accoutrements - a read-me file containing (importantly) some playing hints for the back nine, cameo and splash screen images, and hole previews very much in keeping with the spirit of the course - and the bonus of a recorded round (PSpro, nonetheless). There is no tournament option, but I cannot imagine that anyone would miss it.
A brief note before we go any further: When I learned that I had been assigned this review, I got an uncomfortable feeling in the pit of my stomach. Not because I do not like Mike's courses - I am awed by the prodigious ness of his imagination, and I have enjoyed both Space Adventure and A Wacky World of Golf - but because I question whether the review process itself is capable of evaluating anything so far outside the mainstream. For this reason, I have reviewed each half of the course separately, the front nine according to my usual criteria and the back nine according to a different set of standards I believe are more appropriate to its circumstances.
Angland Challenge (par 36; 3 sets of tees; 3717 yards from back tees)
Technical merit:
Not that it was exactly the point, but few people would have suggested that pristine mesh or a high degree of polish were hallmarks of Mike's earlier, pure-flight-of-fancy designs. With the layout here approaching fictional, however, a significantly higher degree of realism was clearly called for, and I am happy to report that his APCD skills seem to have advanced considerably. The course is not perfect in this regard, but the most noticeable shortcomings in the main view are simply a few objects that seem to be scaled a bit too large: the two figures doing battle on the bridge on #6, the bridge on #8, and some of the grasses behind the #8 green come to mind. The extrusions around the tees occasionally seem a little extreme, and they cause some bad shadows in the top view (especially on #5), but they are not really objectionable elsewhere.
Artistic achievement:
The first things that need to be mentioned here are the various structures that Mike has built out of the terrain. You will notice them right off the bat, and in virtually every view. The Thames-style bridge that commands the view from the first tee is an excellent example, but only the first of many. It is apparent that a lot of hours went into these structures, and into the stone walls, footbridges, and fences as well. Somewhat less successful are the 2D objects, whose resolution makes them look rather blurry in the closer views; there is also the occasional white-line halo around them, although this might well be merely an artifact of my video card (NVIDIA GeForce3).
With the exception of the previously mentioned scaling issue, planting is generally very good: relatively sparse and consisting primarily of individual trees along the grassy areas, becoming more lush and varied where the course approaches the water. The water treatments are also good on the interior of the plot, with well-planted beds on the smaller streams and stone bulwarks along the navigable portions, although there is some tiling apparent in the bigger waters (labeled 'atlantic'). Grass textures tend to be disappointingly bland (the rough, in particular, is not one of my favorites). The fairway mow lines go all the way to the sand of the bunkers - not a big deal on a fantasy course, but a step removed from reality.
The bunkers are generally well done and nicely varied in size and shape; some of those shapes, like the spiral bunker in the #9 fairway, are a little unlikely, but nonetheless attractive. Occasionally, a feature of the layout seems a little odd. #3, for example, features a nicely mown, tree-lined fairway that curves in a C shape around a pond - but the hole is actually a straight ahead 179-yard par-3, so all of the groundskeeper's work was apparently just for visual effect.
Play value:
If I told you in a word, that word would not be 'scintillating.' At more than 3700 yards on flat terrain, the most noticeable characteristic is that it plays a little longer than average. None of the three par-5's are reachable, but by way of partial compensation the 300-yard par-4 #7 is drivable. With the exception of #2 (a 540-yard par-4!), which features an island fairway and a peninsular green, water cannot be said to be much in play despite its relative ubiquitous ness. The bunkers are another story, however, often well placed to catch a shot that goes too long (on the backside of the greens on #3 and #5, for example, and at the end of the second island fairway on #8) or comes up short (the deep bunker in front of the green on #5 comes to mind). I would venture to say that you will play relatively few rounds here that are completely sand free. But the greens are very forgiving - generally large and relatively flat - so on the whole the course plays slightly easier than average. There are no holes that I would consider difficult, but the two best eagle opportunities come back to back on #6 and #7. As you might imagine, risk/reward is not a big part of course strategy here.
The computer foursome also found it to be just on the easy side of average. In b/m/m/m conditions, they totalled -19 (-4 to -6), hitting 91% (83-100%) of the fairways and 85% (77-88%) of the greens.
Under w/f/f/d conditions, they were -11 (E to -5), hitting 75% (50-100%) of the fairways and 63% (55-77%) of the greens.
Castle of Doom (par 36; one set of tees; 2886 yards)
Originality of concept:
I am not going to go into much in the way of description here, and I have even chosen screenshots that do not give too much of the macabre humour of this course away, but suffice it to say that I was reminded of a post made by someone else in response to one of Mike's earlier courses: he has more imagination in his little finger than most of the rest of us have in our whole bodies.
Design execution:
The problem with having a vision that is so far out of the mainstream is the fact that the designers of the playing field could not possibly have anticipated where Mike was going, so they did not give him the tools he needed to get there. Nowhere is that more evident than in the weather effects, which cry out for animation that is not available. As a result, the storm clouds with their lightning bolts look like the cardboard cutouts that they, in effect, are, making their effect more cheesy than menacing - think of those 1950-era sci-fi movies (of course, in other places this 'low budget' sort of cheesiness seems to be intentional, so it is not inconceivable that Mike wanted it that way). This is not the fault of either 'Mike' (Savicki or '.rosoft'), but it is a fact of life.
The necessity of building so many unusual structures from the terrain takes its toll to some extent as well. I cannot imagine how long it took to do this, and the attempt is an admirable one, but many of the interior walls, whose purpose is often to cause the ball to rebound in a particular way, appear to suffer from some blurring and overstretching of textures. The many interior walls and chambers also contribute to the nearly total ineffectiveness of the dyna-cam, which rarely provides anything of value and might as well be turned off for this course.
There also seem to be a few APCD issues as well: some bad shadows (especially on #11), and hole placements that do not always show up in the main view (this happened on #11 and #12). None of these can be said to detract significantly from the experience however.
Play value:
Probably nothing I could tell you about this course would be more revealing than this fact: not only are both par-5's reachable in two, but also each of the five par-4's is drivable. That means that, in theory at least, you could have seven eagle putts in your round; of course, as those diet ads say, 'your results may vary,' and I was never able to reach every green in any round. The flip side, however, is that there is rarely more than one option of how to play any of the holes if you want to be close to the pin. Castle of Doom, in other words, is target golf taken to the max; the twist here is that exactly what your target is may not be apparent until you have played the course a few times and learned its secrets. For that reason, I would strongly suggest that you play it initially (and perhaps thenceforth as well) in practice mode to avoid permanent damage to your statistics. Once you figure out what each hole is really about, the play is not especially difficult. That fact and the lack of potentially successful alternative approaches may not bode to well for replay value.
I almost did not try the computer foursome on this course, figuring that the game AI would not have a prayer when pitted against the likes of Michael Savicki. That ultimately did turn out to be the case, but it was interesting to watch the computer players try to play this as if it were a real course. They actually got through the first four holes, although their scores on all but #13 made it clear that none of them really 'got it.' The wheels came off on #14, however, when three of the four drove into an area from which there was no hope of recovery, and I abandoned the experiment. But the lesson is clear: if you approach Castle of Doom as though it were a golf course, as opposed to a golf maze or a golf obstacle course, you will just wind up frustrated. This factor is what distinguishes this course from what I consider the truly great imaginary/fantasy courses - Rivendell, Midnight Golf Club, and Piazza Metallica - and I suspect that it will also be the factor that for many of you will make this one not a keeper.
The bottom line: As the user ratings would suggest, Angland Challenge/Castle of Doom is Mike's best course, and not by a small margin. Whether it is for you, however, is not a question I can answer confidently, but I suspect that your reaction to AC/CD will be similar to your reaction to A Wacky World of Golf. This is certainly not simulated golf as that term would normally be understood, but that does not mean it cannot be lots of fun. I am of the opinion that everyone should give at least one of Mike's courses a try, and if you have not already done so, this is your best opportunity to date. His uniquely creative (and slightly twisted) vision is certainly not for all tastes, but you will never know if it is for yours unless you give it a try.
Filesize - 40MB
Course statistics: Par 72; 3/1 sets of tees; 6603 yards from back tees; holes are not handicapped. |
|
CLIPNOTES by Ben Bateson (ousgg) |
Description
Imaginary, concept course |
Location
TBA |
Conditions
TBA |
Concept 6/10
Not content with hitting us with original concept after original concept,
Michael Savicki decided to thrown two at us in one course. Angland
Challenge is allegedly an English parkside course, and Castle Of Doom is
played in and around an impressive 'haunted' castle just off the coast.
While the second half surpasses anything Savicki has ever done in terms
of original golf, the first half - sadly - is a serious drag, and offers very
little. The parkland holes do not have the fine touch of the best designers;
there is way too much target golf, and more than one hole appears to be an unconstructed mess. |
Appearance 5/10
Generally very average. Even in the castle, textures are blurred an
d distorted and on occasion it becomes hard to see what you are
doing (the 10th and 15th holes being the most notable examples). Stock textures on Angland Challenge make it appear an afterthought.
To compensate for this, the terrain structuring (the bridge and castle, especially) are diverting and much better to look at than anything
in Wacky World. Custom objects are used much better than in Savicki's other creations, and the 16th is worth looking out for as he
thanks all his Beta testers by putting their heads on spikes around the green! |
Playability 6/10
The course of two halves sadly plays the same way too. Angland Challenge
is dull, dull, dull. There is little risk-reward; the greens are
flat and boring and never has nine holes gone so slowly. The castle is a completely different beast, and from the second you tee off
from a giant skeletal hand, you know you are in for an utter, utter treat. Wall banks, massive flop shots, and one utter surprise (the
inimitable 17th) keep you riveted to the very best in problem-solving golf. Some will turn their noses up, but most people will have a
great time. |
Challenge 3/10
Again, Angland Challenge lets the course down. There is no excuse for 500-yard Par 4s and 600-yard Par 5s, and these holes present a slog-fest with no discernible challenge. The lack of strategic Par 4s is annoying, and the Par 3s do not present much in the way of originality. To be honest, the Castle is not much better: once you have solved the puzzles, then there is no alternative way to play the holes, and the re-playability factor diminishes accordingly. |
Technical 5/10
Michael Savicki has done wonders making huge bridges, castle wall
s, and even Big Ben out of the terrain, but stock textures and the
occasional extruded tee box let him down. Some course sounds are poorly placed. Like Wacky World, flat green syndrome rears its
ugly head, and makes putting a boring and soulless experience. |
| Overall |
Pair a poor first half with a stunning conceptual second, and sadly you find that people will only remember the second half. So much more could have been made out of the castle. |
25/50 |
Please remember that Clipnote reviews are the opinion of one person and do not constitute an 'Official' Links Corner review of the course. |
This course is available as a FREE download.
|
|
Download course
|
Please support Links Corner
|
|
|
