Jump to content

PGA Golf——Intellivision Open


Recommended Posts

First round score: 44
Not bad, haven't played in a very long time.


edit: It takes some practice to judge distances and know what your clubs can do. The computer doesn't calculate your distance to the hole for you. I played this game quite a bit; it's amazing how much you can remember. Once you get good you can take chances and hit over the trees and over the big pond. Par is 38 and scores as low as 33 are possible.


Edited by mr_me
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the stretched 16x9 aspect ratio your east-west shots will appear to go further then north-south shots. That might make it difficult to judge distance, power, etc.


I've played it on an HD TV and it's actually easier to judge those shots thanks to the much sharper image! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sad i missed this competition, but show me one who scores 33, i never reached such a low score (and i'm the one who rebuilded the course layout for twpga2k).


theoretically possible to make 9 birdies, practically due to the random, wind, trees (heights) and greens surface it's impossible to reach that.

the reason (and i certainly wrote this once) why i like the PGA Golf so much. it is unpredictable, each round is somewhat different, even if you know all the clubs (and i do know them by the heart),

you will miss often. to play 2 or three strokes under par is very good, to reach par is already good.


missed it, but i hope we have such a small competition again, i'm unfortunately in the near future not often online thus i missed this.

damned i realy love to play golf, it was my very first game for the intellivision along with soccer which was sold here with the console.


golf stayed for many years a favorite game for me and my buddy back then, form intellivision, over sega to finally PS1 (twpga) we competed in many golf games.

1$ per stroke you lead.



i wouldn't say that the "stretching" to 16/10 makes judging more difficult, vice versa i would say, you see, but yes on a 16:10 tv try not to stretch a 3/4 relation.

however, as long as one pixel (the hole itself as example) is exact cubic, it's the better proportion.


mr-me's image is 3/4 and you can see it's the wrong aspect.

jointfilm.com's image is overstreched to 16/10 and it's also the wrong aspect ratio.


unfortunately i moved my inty to my home and thus i can't show what i think is the proper aspect.


golf can be helpful, but best to check the aspect ratio is "astrosmash".

the extra ships on the bottom give you a good reference for this, each gun has to appear the same, the hole in the middle of the gun has to be exactly cubic on all reserve guns,

tv or computer, if this is reached the aspect equals to the pixels and because of this distances in a game like golf will be proper.


do not input on a tv the signal as 4/3 on a 16/10 widescreen, it will overstrech the image (jointfilm's example).

neither input it as 4/3 and set your 16/10 tv to 4/3 to reproduce the old 4/3 aspect, the display will be exactly like on a old 4/3 tv, but this aspect is wrong even if nothing else was possible back then.


imho, the best is to handle the intellivisions output as 16/10, the tv won't strech the image neither to 16/10 nor to 4/3 and the aspect will be proper (even when it was displayed back in the 80's as 4/3, we had only such tv's, and i assume the aspect was on a PAL tv even worse as on a ntsc with a few less lines)


besides, yes i remember well when i was young and we measured the centimeters on the screen to get a idea of the yardage, lol.


another hint i can give is, that if you input it as 16/10 the playfield is quite small ( a lot of border) thus us a a zoom, but one who didn't changes the aspect.

don't strech to 16/10 it is already very close to this aspect with 159 / 100 pixels (well that IS 16/10).


to repeat what we had on our tv's back in the 80's wasn't the proper aspect ratio, the image was like in mr_me's image streched vertically, unfortunately and not to change.


ok if you truthfully like to get a image like in the 80's use it as 4/3 aspect and don't strech it.


if you like a close to pixel aspect, use the inty's output as 16/10 and don't strech it.


(on jointfilm.com's, example, one can see very well the input is handled like a 4/3 aspect but the output is streched then to 16/10)


at least this is what i recommend.


handle the inty as 16/10, and the aspect will equal the pixel aspect.


it's (unfortunately) NOT golf, bu a example how the aspect looks on my mom's tv (it's zoomed but the signal is handled as 16/10 aspect).


a "bad shot", but it shows how it looks like (i didn't found recently a better one)



signal is handled as 16/10 aspect.




"for some reason" i always liked Golf.




off topic.

not to long ago i've read som e debatet about that 16/10 or widescreen at all doesn't fits to the human field of view and that the 4/3 aspect was closer to our field of view.

i like the 16/10 widescreen format, but what do you think?


do you even think that 4/3 reproduced better the human field of view (i don't think so)?

Edited by Gernot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about nine birdies but some eagles are possible. If you're fortunate with tree placement hole nine can be four shots, three with luck. Hole one can be done in two shots if you're lucky. Like I said with some holes you'll have to hit over trees for lower score. I said 33 is possible because I know this first hand.


The 4:3 aspect ratio is what the programmers of all the original games used. The original Intellivision pixel is not square. If today someone wants to program an Intellivision game they can certainly do it for a 16:9 aspect ratio. At 16:9 intellivision pixels will be close to square. So 16:9 might actually be better for Intellivision but unfortunately the original games weren't programmed that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

right, this is taken to account, the aspect was 4:3, obviousely this was respected when they programmed the games.

while i'm really not sure for golf, because respecting a 4:3 aspect would have ment to make shots in vertical direction of a different length (disrespecting the pixel aspect) of which i think this is hardly possible. a 100 yards shot is a 100 yards, but in 4:3 the distance it makes it's in vertical direction looks longer (on the screen) as in horizontal, else you would have to change the length (shorten distance for the streched vertical, i guess hardly this has been made).


nonetheless i prefere a 16:10 relation, to me it looks better and i even feel the distances are proper for golf, but

however it's somewhat a matter of choice, some prefere a truthful 4:3 some a close to pixel aspect 16:10.


my statement wasn't ment to criticize your choice.


right yes it's possible to make eagles on hole 9, with a cool shot over that tree and positioning the ball right on front of the lake, a wood three will reach then over the pit and you're already in a good position to hole in.

but usually if i play well on the last hole (or any) i finished two other holes as bogey (or even dbl bogey).

i'm really satisfied with par or two under.


(it's possible to play a 9 stroke game ;), 255 is the max. count for a hole, position in front of the hole on the green, smash the ball out of bounds from there (it will return to the position and count a penalty) when you reach 255 put in, a hole in one on every hole!)


out of competition but not cheated my best result this year:



lucky me, no tree in front of the tee on hole 9

Edited by Gernot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we'll have to measure the shots to know for sure.


But having played Intellivision PGA Golf so many times back in the 1980s the stretched 16:9 aspect ratio looks completely wrong. Now if you played it on a PAL intellivision you might not think the same way. Pal intellivisions vertically compress the picture changing the aspect ratio as well. Maybe somewhere between 16:9 and 4:3.


Edit:. Not only no trees in front of the tee but no trees on the other side of the pond.

Edited by mr_me
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, it's a lucky layout.


no we wouldn't have to measure them, i guess because i had a very long pause of playing on a intellivision, from mid 80's to late 90's i feel more comfortable with the aspect ratio of a 16:10 display.

but i guess if would have played continuosely i would say the same as you, 4:3 is better - i'm used to.

especially for golf where your experience plays a big role, i assume you are used to judge distances in a 4:3 aspect anything else will mislead you.

due to my long pause i'm used to play in 16:10 (16:9? i haven't) i judge the distance in this way and yes playing on my old tube confuses me a little, of course i know which club i like to use, still i misjudge distances.


measuring, reminds me really of the old days and makes me laugh, i said i remember that well, we swiss "cowboys" had really no idea about golf, i guess back in the early eighties we had one parcour in whole switzerland and it was in the french speaking part (at least i only can remeber this one because i visited my sister who was working as au pair in the french part).

it has changed and we have now many small country ciubs even migros (which is a supermarket chain) has it's own golf parcours, not for the employees, for the customers.

"duttweiler" the founder back in the 30's was convinced that a part of the money should be payed back to the customers in form of such things like "culture for everyone".


we play soccer (i don't have to tell that) and soccer and maybe soccer.


of course we have other sports like tennis (was in my intention reserved for the wealthy), and some very swiss like, like throwing a large piece of rock (Unspunnenstein) or "Hornussen",

which i can't compare to anything else, you hit a small ball like in baseball but use a sort of whip to drive the ball from a ramp, the opponent team has a sort of shuffles to catch the ball.


but well - soccer.

i never was good in real soccer, i was always standing aside thus i never get good and because of this i never liked the sport when i was a child.

but skiing, that's my sport, it belongs to the alps (has belonged, the snow is gone).

i wasn't bad and 53 as i am i look back and think i was a idiot.

i had the chance to become a downhiller, but i didn't liked to training hard and to give up my friends for this.

(playing golf on a console is far less stressing, even when that was 6 or 7 years before and the only videogame i knew was daddy's pong.

i had later a handheld, remembering this i wonder now if i find out which one it was, a sort of missile defense and "everybody" judged me as "brutal" and "violent".

besides "violent" i watched the commercial for "B-17" and now i know why this game was on the blacklist, we still had big problems with WW2 in the 80's, it was a sort of tabu.

not to imagine such a commercial would have been broadcasted in europe, never!

me i always liked my tanks, airplanes, soldiers, but was always judged as "violent" for this, hm yes but if i look at the world i still have to say it's far better to melt down some plastic soldiers as to send real men to war)


to be honest, i also guess i never would have become a star rather someone who's in the team but never reaches a top score.


i'm a egoist


in sport ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...