Links Corner Forum

I've been messing with mapping multiple 1024x1024 textures from satellite imagery (tiling) to a DEM in the APCD so that the imagery works with the Links game. I didn't think it would work initially but I am now convinced it can be done. Mapping the satellite imagery in the APCD improves the game visually but playability is limited when the imagery is used for the fairways, sand, and rough. The best thing about this is the huge time savings when compared to adding verts and mapping the fairways, sand, and rough, etc. (I started this course this week and only worked on it in the evenings).

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... sp=sharing

I think this technique works best for areas outside of mowed rough areas of a golf hole and is best for visual quality areas. Ocean front courses look great when doing this! I am interested in what everyone thinks about this course file and what would be the areas of usage were satellite imagery would work well in the game. Has anyone maxed out the number of textures used in a course file?

I mean, I can see the appeal, but only if you dont mind the very blurry close-up visuals and if you dont care about playability. Even if painting in verts for the sand areas, Fairway and rough playing the same still takes away the whole strategy and challenge of the game if you ask me. And if not caring about playability, wouldnt it be simpler to just switch to one of the modern golf games instead?

I agree that the far away areas look really nice, but I dont like it if I ever end up close enough to see how blurry they are. I dont know if Amsterdam International GC by Golfgraffix was the first course to use satellite/GE textures for surroundings, but it is the first one I know of. I always thought it was kinda pretty and liked it, because as far as I remember, it is only used for areas that you never risk coming close enough to get a close-up view of, but I spoke to a friend who hated the look of them on that same course, so it comes down to personal taste... I know that both Dan DeShaney and Ian Wells have used a similar mix of regular and satellite textures on for example Wakonda, Peachtree and Pasatiempo. I liked it in some cases, but not so much in others when the blurry textures are too close to play areas so that you can sometimes see the stark contrast between the regular and the blurry.

How wide area did you make each 1024 texture cover in this case? I see that the course file is only 236 MB which isnt crazy high after all.

Thanks for the feed back Adelade. I can't argue with anything you said about a course done this way.

The point I want to emphasize is that I have only put about 25 hours into the course so far. For someone (like me) who is interested in how a course looks at the players perspective rather than playing a proper simulated round, this could be an acceptable trade-off. But if most don't like this sort of design and prefer the usual course playability and quality I am fine with that.

Each 1024x1024 texture covers a square area of 150m x 150m. That gives a pixel size of about 0.15m. It took 80 textures to cover the DEM of Le Golf National. The best possible image quality out of Google Earth is a little under 0.1m per pixel, but not all images are of that quality. I have done some courses at 200m and 300m squares and then even tried some at 100m squares but it doesn't get much better in quality due to the limitations of the satellite imagery.

I was surprised at how good the graphics were, especially considering the number of hours spent, it is amazing.
As I don't play Links, except for testing, I will leave the playability issues to those who do play regularly.

On courses that I have rendered in APCD, I have always found it difficult to decide what to do with the non-playing areas on a course.
In the areas where housing is build within the course, the best way, in my opinion, would be to build in APCD the actual roads, gardens, paths etc., and plant accordingly, but that would be extremely time consuming. As Adelade mentioned, on Pasatiempo and Peachtree I used the Google download to save time. It is far from perfect, as are all my courses , but I believe it was the best solution.

I am working on TPC Sugarloaf and there are vast areas of housing which I am again minded to use the Google overhead for. If anybody has any ideas on what to do with these areas, please let them be heard.

This shows the area of housing between holes 3 through 7 on the Stables nine, (ignore the file name ): Linkster, please keep pushing the boundaries of APCD/Links. I, for one, am very grateful.

Ian