Rock Creek is certainly an expansive place and it can be visually overwhelming, although in all honesty the location is very nice but nothing out of the ordinary for that part of the world. The "scale" issue is one thing I was very curious about when I first heard the location of the course and when I first walked the site. You've heard of Big Sky Country, but really it is Big Everything country. Four or five hundred yards doesn't look like much when you are staring out over miles by miles, and it is easy for details to get lost among the everything. I was curious as to how Tom, Eric, and his crew would deal with this. In my opinion they did so wonderfully by creating extremely wide fairways, by utilizing a mix of concave and convex features for green sites, and by really going with the flow of the land (and by hiding their handiwork in the places where they didn't quite go with the flow).
I might have preferred darker sand in the bunkers, and perhaps some bunkers that more closely tracked the type of erosion that one finds in that type of ranch land, but overall I think they did a tremendous job of creating a course that actually fits on what seems like an infinitely wide landscape. But I grew up on land very similar, so perhaps for me it is easier to stay focused on the course and not get quite so easily distracted. Overall, I'd say it fits the landscape better than any other supposed Mountain course I have played. And it is a terrific rebuttal to anyone who insists that courses on tough terrain need to be disjointed cart ball monstrosities.
The reason I asked if you walked is that, to me, the course presents much better on foot than in a cart. Tom and his crew do a tremendous job of hiding cart traffic which I like, but the side effect is that sometimes the cart ride takes you a roundabout, disjointed path between the holes, and the course loses a bit of the cohesive feel one gets from walking.
Just my opinion of course.