I think the average golfer's limitations are why "presentation" and "aesthetics" can go hand-in-hand with strategy and options (and are not, on good courses at least, merely eye candy). Effectively blurring the fairway/rough lines, for example, or integrating the greens seamlessly into the surrounds, are symbolic (for lack of a better word) of a broader and more nuanced measuring stick, one that allows for/reflects the average golfer's limitations but more importantly offer opportunities for some golfers to make up for their (usual) average/poor shots with (rarer) excellent and imaginative shots -- with most of those shots being recoveries in one form or another.
At one end of the design spectrum, you have the presentation and aesthetics of naturalism, which seems to say: "There is no architect here to punish and mock your average play, but if Nature herself is telling you to avoid that one dense stand of trees or that cliff edge down to the rocks you'd be well served to pay attention and act accordingly."
Peter