Design acumen and the design-minded - Page 3

Dave242 · #21 08-15-2012, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradharris

I really like the concept of using game design. Although I've never had the opportunity to design a course myself, I have thought of courses in comparison to video games. In video gaming, games that are too easy and don't present a consistent challenge get boring very quickly. Likewise, games that seem unnecessarily difficult and present seemingly insurmountable challenges to advancement can turn a player off. A good balance of challenge, attainable obstacles and a sense of achievement keeps players coming back.

The most important concept which translates best to course design, is you want the player to feel in control of his own outcome. A player will become frustrated by a game if there is seemingly know way to defeat an obstacle other than sheer luck and timing (ie, maybe the guard will have his back turned when I come around the corner this time. Nope, I'm dead again). In terms of course design, placing trees or OB in the throwing line takes the control out of the players hands and lets the course dictate score (ie, well, I missed that tree this morning, hopefully I'll sneak by in the afternoon round too!).

While it may seem like an easy concept to grasp, it's very difficult to put into practice, especially over 18 holes.

Yes! This is the main reason why courses should be designed for specific skill levels. What is a captivating challenge for a beginner is boring for someone with more skills. Even Angry Birds understands this precept.

Multiple tees can accomplish this on many par-3 (one throw) holes but they cannot do so on many multi-throw holes.

sidewinder22 · #22 08-15-2012, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by New013

so we're bashing people with a background in architecture and applauding people with a background in drafting and CAD?

sorry, i must be confusing architects for people who draft and use CAD.

The problem with architects typically is that they begin a design from a blank canvas and don't have to incorporate the existing features of like what a park or piece of land already has. They leave the part of how stuff in the building works up to other people. My job is always having to design/engineer a system with what the architect left me, which is typically some stupid vanity vs function.

I view the park/land before any work has been done for a course as having been architected already by nature. The course designer is more like the system designer/engineer. You fix/modify what was left from the architect and make it work or function the best.

Cgkdisc · #23 08-15-2012, 12:56 PM

The DG designer is more of a sculptor than painter on canvas. The sculptor only takes away what is not part of the finished work. Contrast this with ball golf course design which can sometimes be almost completely painting on canvas when they start with open fields to build a course.

New013 · #24 08-15-2012, 01:06 PM

now you're lumping every architect in to one big bin. there are architects that base their designs on the environment. one problem with that industry is that they take one design and flip it a couple of times and use that same design all over the place to save cost.

the point of the discussion was who would have a background that would help with dg course design, i don't see how your argument has a solid basis that an architect wouldn't have a favorable background. unless you're saying that an architect would design the course before he ever walked around the land... which is a ridiculous assertion.

sidewinder22 · #25 08-15-2012, 01:28 PM

Sorry I deal with their stupidity about everyday. I said typically, and I'm mostly referring to building architects, although software architects ain't much better.

These architectural death rays always makes me lol:

bradharris · #26 08-15-2012, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sidewinder22

although software architects ain't much better.

Hey!

AndyJB · #27 08-15-2012, 06:07 PM

Not to toot my own horn (toot, toot) but I'm an Eagle Scout as well as having served over 8 years in the infantry, and I think that has helped me immensley. Currently I'm helping my aunt's sister-in-law add 18 holes of disc golf onto her ball golf course. I'm making an initial design with arial topography and blueprints, then I'll hand that over to some local clubs so they can go get the lay of the land and make corrections/changes/suggestions to my design.

Having a formal education in this kind of stuff, I think I would be able to do it myself. But I think it will be awesome when finished, as well as a big boost to the local clubs. Can't wait!

denny ritner · #28 08-15-2012, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave242

Yes! This is the main reason why courses should be designed for specific skill levels. What is a captivating challenge for a beginner is boring for someone with more skills. Even Angry Birds understands this precept.

Multiple tees can accomplish this on many par-3 (one throw) holes but they cannot do so on many multi-throw holes.

disagree.