The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Tiger woods PGA Tour 2003'.
Had this for a week or so now, the latest one. Not sure what year it is to be honest and can't be arsed to go downstairs and look.
Superb. Best golf game I've played on any system.
Doesn't have that stupid "press button to start swing. Press button to stop swing, try and not send it veering left or righ OH TOO BAD IT'S DONE JUST THAT!!!" control mechanism.
Only problem is I rule, have all the sponsorship I need, completed the world tour so have about $2,000,000 to spend on crap like earrings and wristbands.
Well worth getting, even if you don't like golf.
It's just a bloody good game.
Superb. Best golf game I've played on any system.
Doesn't have that stupid "press button to start swing. Press button to stop swing, try and not send it veering left or righ OH TOO BAD IT'S DONE JUST THAT!!!" control mechanism.
Only problem is I rule, have all the sponsorship I need, completed the world tour so have about $2,000,000 to spend on crap like earrings and wristbands.
Well worth getting, even if you don't like golf.
It's just a bloody good game.
Page:
Goatboy wrote:
> Which is handy, because that's exactly what I do want.
Tiger Woods for you.
Tiger Woods not for me.
Fair enough.
> Which is handy, because that's exactly what I do want.
Tiger Woods for you.
Tiger Woods not for me.
Fair enough.
ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> It uses analog controls for the swing and each review I have read so far
> says that the aiming and swing system is superior to that of Tiger
> Woods 2004.
That's good news. The button pressing method is a bit old.
> It uses analog controls for the swing and each review I have read so far
> says that the aiming and swing system is superior to that of Tiger
> Woods 2004.
That's good news. The button pressing method is a bit old.
ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> Shows how much you know about the Xbox version then doesn't it. It
> uses analog controls for the swing and each review I have read so far
> says that the aiming and swing system is superior to that of Tiger
> Woods 2004.
---
*shrugs*
I don't read magazines or reviews unless it's a game I'm interested in.
I've played and had the Links series for years on the PC. Graphically nice but the control system just ruined it for me.
I like golf, I play. Ok, I suck but I enjoy it. But if I'm going to play a videogame version, I want something a bit extra.
I'm not looking for spot-on simulation, and Tiger Woods works for me because of the unrealistic aspects like the extra power boost (accompanied with tastefully restrained pyrotechnics).
The Links series and the Actua-Golf were enjoyable to an extent, as was Leaderboard on the Amiga - but something just felt too serious about it.
Tiger Woods gives me all the seriousness I want, but also allows me to play better than I can with actual clubs and whatnot out there on a course.
It works for me, doesn't work for Black Glove.
And that's what makes the world go round.
> Shows how much you know about the Xbox version then doesn't it. It
> uses analog controls for the swing and each review I have read so far
> says that the aiming and swing system is superior to that of Tiger
> Woods 2004.
---
*shrugs*
I don't read magazines or reviews unless it's a game I'm interested in.
I've played and had the Links series for years on the PC. Graphically nice but the control system just ruined it for me.
I like golf, I play. Ok, I suck but I enjoy it. But if I'm going to play a videogame version, I want something a bit extra.
I'm not looking for spot-on simulation, and Tiger Woods works for me because of the unrealistic aspects like the extra power boost (accompanied with tastefully restrained pyrotechnics).
The Links series and the Actua-Golf were enjoyable to an extent, as was Leaderboard on the Amiga - but something just felt too serious about it.
Tiger Woods gives me all the seriousness I want, but also allows me to play better than I can with actual clubs and whatnot out there on a course.
It works for me, doesn't work for Black Glove.
And that's what makes the world go round.
Tiger Woods 2004 is a great game been playin Links 2004 this week and I think its too easy and becomes boring after a while
Ok links 2004 is more realistic the controls are virtually the same as tiger woods but without the power shot but within 20mins I was hitting birdy after birdy
Ok links 2004 is more realistic the controls are virtually the same as tiger woods but without the power shot but within 20mins I was hitting birdy after birdy
jayos wrote:
> been playin Links 2004 this week and I think its too easy
I've been playing Tiger 2004 at a friends and the structure of the Tour is a big improvement on 2003. Having read a few luke warm reviews of Links 2004 I'm beginning to think Tiger is the way to go.
Anyone played both?
I need a comparison.
> been playin Links 2004 this week and I think its too easy
I've been playing Tiger 2004 at a friends and the structure of the Tour is a big improvement on 2003. Having read a few luke warm reviews of Links 2004 I'm beginning to think Tiger is the way to go.
Anyone played both?
I need a comparison.
One has live the other doesn't, I think thats what most reviews have said, if you like live, go for links, if not stick with Tiger Woods.
I'm not signed up for LIVE so that doesn't concern me.
Tiger seems more dynamic. Links more realistic.
Dynamic versus realistic... Hmm, I'll just buy Links and if it doesn't shape up I'll swap it for Tiger.
Tiger seems more dynamic. Links more realistic.
Dynamic versus realistic... Hmm, I'll just buy Links and if it doesn't shape up I'll swap it for Tiger.
Page: