I’ve played about a half dozen courses (none of them well-known) that were largely manufactured. I suppose that, like Tim, I ‘don’t mind’ — but I can see & feel the difference, and it’s not the ideal for me. The truth is, I’d gladly trade-off some of the supposed ‘fun’ and ‘choices’ of these manufactured courses for a lengthy break from the architect’s constant ‘presence’, ie from an ever-present awareness of the architect’s ‘thinking’. By the 2nd hole such courses start to feel to me like a derivative paint-by-number movie instead of an original art-house film — every twist & turn clearly ‘signalled’, everything neatly in its (expected) place, including the ‘unexpected’. I come away wanting to remind architects that, like the rest of us, they actually aren’t all that ‘interesting’, and not quite as ‘clever’ as they’d like to think; like me and many others I know, they’d probably make a better impression by ‘saying’ less. My favourite of the half dozen manufactured courses I’ve played is one that used to be a farmer’s cornfield, and that as a golf course looks and plays like it once was a farmer’s cornfield! Not coincidentally, it's the only one of the six where the green-to-tee walks aren't lengthy, lousy, or awkward (probably because the architect didn't fall victim to the 'rule' that says if you're going to manufacture the golf holes you'd better manufacture 18 really good ones).