1822 replies to this topic

[AnthonyKyne]

I have to agree.

In general, depending upon how involved they get in actual gameplay decisions over time, this might up the chance of me giving it a run honestly.

 

I've always thought HB needed a higher level "editor" to oversee things from a bigger picture and make better, but difficult, gameplay and interaction decisions.  

 

For the true evangelists in the TGC world, Anthony was a god.  To many of us not under that spell though, TGC has always had these weird ass quirks that he (and subsequent people once he left) seemed to think were "amazing decisions and/or innovations".  It was just a good example of needing a presence or influence not so intimately involved to run a pass over everything from a wider gaming lens I always thought.

 

My one main, and pretty legitimate, fear is if 2k tries to turn the game into a micro-transaction hell hole.

I'd be interested to hear you  expand on this Buck. I think, from my point of view, I understood all the quirks with the game and I had a clear vision of where I wanted to take it, which definitely was more towards golfers and less towards gamers. The issue is, as the PP guys will agree, is that when you have an indie budget your restrained from doing everything you want all in one go. So you have to tackle one thing at a time while making the whole game appealing enough to sell and allow you to move on to the next version. So overtime you can reach your goals. 2k won't bring anything to the table creatively that isn't in the team already, and wasn't there before, but it will bring the financial muscle to be able to realise majority of what TGC was aiming to be over 10-15 year period in 2 to 3 years.

 

I don't think anyone thought I was god, I just think that some understood the reason I made some decisions at the start of the journey whereas some wanted everything at once - which just isn't possible without the multi-millions you get at 2k or EA 

[Buck]

There’s no real point in expanding on it AK.
You and I will always have different views on the situation.

(Honestly just saving us both the keystrokes we already each spent 2 years ago)

Hopefully the series continues to evolve.

[AnthonyKyne]

You can't allude to something, say you know better but not expand on it though. Especially when you stat that you think other people doing my job could do a better job than me and the rest of HB Team. Myself or the rest of the HB team were never given multi-millions of dollars - so we did what we did with the budget we had. Knocked EA off of their perch, became the No1 golf game and won the PGA licence and it now seems got a major publishing deal with one of the biggest sports games publishers in the industry.

2k wouldn't have touched HB before TGC1 was release, the PGA wouldn't, none of the major brands wanted to be part of it either. So when you start in a negative place, with a small budget and the game gets where it is now - surely you have to give a bit of credit to the team that created it and say to yourself "maybe I don't agree with those guys about everything, but maybe they were right" 

[Buck]

You can't allude to something, say you know better but not expand on it though.

Anthony -

Debating your role and vision and how TGC evolved is all totally off topic of this specific thread honestly.
I apologize for even mentioning you.

If you'd care to continue, I'm happy to by PM.

[DoGgs]

Either way you slice it, 2019 is a triple "A" price bracket for what is no more than DLC.   People will buy it for fear of being left behind, this kind of greed and acting on consumer psyche does nothing for the gaming industry long term, it just encourages others to follow suit and the only ones who get shafted are Joe public.  Not this time HB, if i see it in the xmas sale 66% or better off,  i would prob pick it up, providing of course it plays better than the last two.

[Buck]

Either way you slice it, 2019 is a triple "A" price bracket for what is no more than DLC.   People will buy it for fear of being left behind, this kind of greed and acting on consumer psyche does nothing for the gaming industry long term, it just encourages others to follow suit and the only ones who get shafted are Joe public.  Not this time HB, if i see it in the xmas sale 66% or better off,  i would prob pick it up, providing of course it plays better than the last two.

I'm interested to see some early Twitch's from those that can get it right now due to the timezones.

I've watched the video again (that was pulled and is now back) and I'm skeptical that much changed from the release that got out from MS, beyond online/branding/PGA Tour stuff of course - which wasn't accessible to that user.

I think Alan (I think it was - might have been Keith) was mainly protecting their announcement and partnership and not wanting negative buzz before launch.

That ship had gotten a bit out to sea thanks to HB being so so quiet in July/August.

This explains the forum shut down over the weekend as well.

Notice they didn't relaunch some re-branded forum or anything?

They just didn't want a full weekend of speculation and wondering and no information and the narrative further getting out of control.

 

I am a little surprised so many of the questions are still going somewhat unanswered over there.  

I would have thought they'd been hashing out a lot of the PR stuff this weekend and getting everyone on the same page.

[AnthonyKyne]

Either way you slice it, 2019 is a triple "A" price bracket for what is no more than DLC.   People will buy it for fear of being left behind, this kind of greed and acting on consumer psyche does nothing for the gaming industry long term, it just encourages others to follow suit and the only ones who get shafted are Joe public.  Not this time HB, if i see it in the xmas sale 66% or better off,  i would prob pick it up, providing of course it plays better than the last two.

How do you see all the new features as DLC? I'd estimate this years version cost more than TGC1 and 2 individually and not much less than the two combined. The fact that you don't think 30 hours or more of gaming time and 20-30 guys working a year normally 12 to 14 hour days is worth £45, or whatever the cost is, isn't a greed an issue more that you don't understand the value and work that goes into making these things.

[Buck]

How do you see all the new features as DLC? I'd estimate this years version cost more than TGC1 and 2 individually and not much less than the two combined. The fact that you don't think 30 hours or more of gaming time and 20-30 guys working a year normally 12 to 14 hour days is worth £45, or whatever the cost is, isn't a greed an issue more that you don't understand the value and work that goes into making these things.

 

 

What it takes to accomplish updates and features is beyond the purview or concern of customers Anthony.

 

The released results are what are relevant.

 

Many saw TGC2 as broken and feature incomplete and a ton of what looks to be in TGC 2019 should have been in TGC2 for money that was already outlaid by customers.

[AnthonyKyne]

What it takes to accomplish updates and features is beyond the purview or concern of customers Anthony.

 

The released results are what are relevant.

 

Many saw TGC2 as broken and feature incomplete and a ton of what looks to be in TGC 2019 should have been in TGC2 for money that was already outlaid by customers.

But when you compare to other sports title iterations - I think HB have got a hugely different game than last year. You're just paying for roster updates most of the time - HB don't have that luxury

[Buck]

I think HB have got a hugely different game than last year. You're just paying for roster updates most of the time - HB don't have that luxury

 

HB also didn't have any rosters to update so that's kind of an odd point of comparison to choose.

 

We'll see how "hugely different" it is.

I would echo thoughts and hopes that it is indeed much improved.

 

I don't wish for TGC to fail or anything - not at all - hell, I still wish Rory was being worked on!

The more great golf games the better!

[mebby]

Anthony - just curious as to whether you think 2K will bring any resources to the table on the game development front or do you think this is essentially just a publishing/marketing collaboration?

 

So far it's unclear what any of this really means to the people playing the game.  

[Buck]

Do we have a confirmed price?

The Sony store New Zealand page had it at around 90 which translates to around 60 US.
There must be some additional taxes or fees there right?

I can’t imagine they would launch this game at $60 US (yikes)

[GoldenBear]

But when you compare to other sports title iterations - I think HB have got a hugely different game than last year. You're just paying for roster updates most of the time - HB don't have that luxury

 

No one cares about having a "hugely different" game.  We want realism.  We have realism already and it is JNPG.  HB Studios missed the boat long ago.

[AnthonyKyne]

Anthony - just curious as to whether you think 2K will bring any resources to the table on the game development front or do you think this is essentially just a publishing/marketing collaboration?

 

So far it's unclear what any of this really means to the people playing the game.  

I don't know - I'm not even sure if that's a thing now. I read it somewhere and now I can't find an official statement anywhere.

But if they do get on board - I'm sure it'll be from a publishing side. But who can tell. From my point of view, I'd like to stay in control of development but get them to help massively increase the budget so we could really make a dent into all the things you want to do. It's a tough balance though, because when you're using others money, they want an input and you can't make the game you want to make. It'll definitely be an interesting next 18 months if the rumours are true

[AnthonyKyne]

No one cares about having a "hugely different" game.  We want realism.  We have realism already and it is JNPG.  HB Studios missed the boat long ago.

Hahaha - your relentless pursuit for realism has me picturing you play the game in a room with fake lawn as carpet and you sitting on it when you're on the fairway "in-game" or going behind the plants next to the sofa when you're in the rough

 

But my question is what is so realistic about JNPG? Unless you're playing it on a simulator or at least with a real motion swing in VR you can't get the minutious of a real life swing into a video game. My aim was always to create the same thought processes and same emotional reactions I get on a course. I think we achieved that - it's disappointing that people how low people can score but what you can you do without making it falsly difficult.

 

How far do you want to take realism? JNPG lets you choose your weather and wind type - you can't do that in real life. Do you want it to actually cost you millions of pounds to design a course? No - of course not. So it's not realism you're looking for - you just want the score at the end of the round to represent what you'd shoot in real life. If that was the case for majority of video golf gamers they'd all be on a 28 handicap and be just as miserable as they would be on a real life course. There has to be an element of fantasy about the whole thing.

In Madden - I want to play for the Steelers I don't want to be in the Lunenburg over 40s touch football league - i could have done that on Wednesdays while I lived there - so you have to be careful what you wish for

[Buck]

[mebby]

I don't know - I'm not even sure if that's a thing now. I read it somewhere and now I can't find an official statement anywhere.

But if they do get on board - I'm sure it'll be from a publishing side. But who can tell. From my point of view, I'd like to stay in control of development but get them to help massively increase the budget so we could really make a dent into all the things you want to do. It's a tough balance though, because when you're using others money, they want an input and you can't make the game you want to make. It'll definitely be an interesting next 18 months if the rumours are true

Helpful insight.  Thanks for the response.  

[mebby]

Hahaha - your relentless pursuit for realism has me picturing you play the game in a room with fake lawn as carpet and you sitting on it when you're on the fairway "in-game" or going behind the plants next to the sofa when you're in the rough

 

But my question is what is so realistic about JNPG? Unless you're playing it on a simulator or at least with a real motion swing in VR you can't get the minutious of a real life swing into a video game. My aim was always to create the same thought processes and same emotional reactions I get on a course. I think we achieved that - it's disappointing that people how low people can score but what you can you do without making it falsly difficult.

 

How far do you want to take realism? JNPG lets you choose your weather and wind type - you can't do that in real life. Do you want it to actually cost you millions of pounds to design a course? No - of course not. So it's not realism you're looking for - you just want the score at the end of the round to represent what you'd shoot in real life. If that was the case for majority of video golf gamers they'd all be on a 28 handicap and be just as miserable as they would be on a real life course. There has to be an element of fantasy about the whole thing.

In Madden - I want to play for the Steelers I don't want to be in the Lunenburg over 40s touch football league - i could have done that on Wednesdays while I lived there - so you have to be careful what you wish for

LOL!  Trust me on this.  I'd rather shit a pineapple than agree with Goldenbear so this is coming from a place of good intentions.

 

My issue with your statement like the one in your response to him is that you take it as your job to listen to what the gamer wants, and then tell them what they REALLY want.  While I understand that approach I personally think it's very flawed.  I know you're being sarcastic with him (he usually deserves that) but you full well know what he means when he says he's looking for realism.  The problem is that you always seem to turn that into your personal view of realism and then project that back on the user by telling them what they REALLY want when in fact it's not what they want at all.

 

You don't always have to go to extremes to debate a topic.  TGC has gotten much better at being realistic but it until certain things happen (like address the dial-a-distance loft box as a prime example) it will always lean towards arcade.  It's close enough for me to enjoy it for what it is but I do understand GB's point.

[AnthonyKyne]

LOL!  Trust me on this.  I'd rather shit a pineapple than agree with Goldenbear so this is coming from a place of good intentions.

 

My issue with your statement like the one in your response to him is that you take it as your job to listen to what the gamer wants, and then tell them what they REALLY want.  While I understand that approach I personally think it's very flawed.  I know you're being sarcastic with him (he usually deserves that) but you full well know what he means when he says he's looking for realism.  The problem is that you always seem to turn that into your personal view of realism and then project that back on the user by telling them what they REALLY want when in fact it's not what they want at all.

 

You don't always have to go to extremes to debate a topic.  TGC has gotten much better at being realistic but it until certain things happen (like address the dial-a-distance loft box as a prime example) it will always lean towards arcade.  It's close enough for me to enjoy it for what it is but I do understand GB's point.

I disagree - because my point is always "I don't know what you want" just saying this is "arcade" or this is "realistic" doesn't give any description to what you want so how can a developer create that. My argument has always been 2 tier'd 1) "Tell me exactly what you want without dumbing it down to simple words that could mean anything" and 2) As a game developer my job is to take what you've asked for and translate that into a game in a usable, understandable and fun way which the result is the same. Not implement in exactly the way you want because it has to suit more people than you, that's not me being ignorant - it's just that we can't cater for just the few. And I'll go for a third - and this is the one that I think me and you argued about before - it's to take all the feedback and come up with something unique and creative that no ones thought of. Because you're not really a good game designer if you only develop what the forums tell you to do. You have to be creative and groundbreaking

The problem is - it's very hard to understand what people want when they just use sweeping statements. Because you could make a golf game so realistic that no one - not even the hardest of hardcore would want to play it. So be descriptive and then the developers can work with that

[Buck]

I disagree 

 

Stunning..  lol  

 

This suddenly feels like a high school reunion and we are re-living "3 years ago on the HB forum" and re-litigating all of the exact same old topics.