I'm definitely on the other side of the coin from John. Ideally, with all the time in the world, we would rate courses after a dozen rounds with different pin locations and weather conditions. I find it very difficult to appreciate a course's greens after one play. I most likely won't see all of the character that surrounds a green and makes recovery shots interesting and tough. On a particularly strategic hole, I may be able to "analyze" my way to the best route, but that is not the same as playing the hole different ways and seeing how each path works. Good golf courses are infinitely complicated and challenging in ways that are hidden on the first few rounds (probably even more).
That being said, I partially agree with John that you can usually tell if a courses is bad, OK, good, or great after the first round. But with courses worth rating, we are really splitting hairs anyways and for me it takes many rounds to see this. We all have been driving home from work one day when we see a house/store/sign we had never noticed before even though it has been there every day. Good courses have features we won't notice for years.
Tying back to Niall's question, players will probably notice the view the first time around and this will skew their impression of the course if the point is to only rate the course. But if we are rating the "experience" it may not be a bad thing. The tricky part might be that the "experience" is different for different people and the types of golf courses. If we are truly trying to identify the best courses strictly in terms if golfing, I agree with the intimation in Niall's question that they would be overrated.