Jump to content


Photo

Latest News from Steam


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
241 replies to this topic

#181 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,554 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 02:08 AM

Acrilix, on 25 May 2016 - 01:56 AM, said:

Yes, let's bring in subscriptions!! .... and watch the current number of players drop to 30% of what it is now, overnight.
Let's completely kill the game by bringing in subscriptions.
:wacko:
 
I'm going to bed.
Hopefully I'll wake up to find that this was all just part of some crazy dream.


One way or another they have to make money or the game dies.


I think TGC's nonsense of "pay once and get more stuff continually" has derided people's thinking and reasoning.

I want PG to be developed MUCH more completely and continually than has happened in TGC.
  • Vernon520 likes this

#182 Sup?

Sup?

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 249 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 02:45 AM

Greensboronclion, on 25 May 2016 - 12:30 AM, said:

Yes I do know it was a 12 year old game as I was there those years.

As was I.



#183 jt83

jt83

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 03:11 AM

This is getting messy.  Amongst all these motives, stakes, opinions and desires there's gotta be a solution...

 

...doesn't there?  :unsure:



#184 theclubpro

theclubpro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • LocationSouth Carolina

Posted 25 May 2016 - 03:14 AM

i was a paying member of  t.w.o. i didn't do the monthly thing as i got the yearly membership(was cheaper ,i think i paid $25 or $35 on sale).come january or when the next milestone update will be, i think i see no issue of charging $35 like this release or if they had in mind of a $20 update.Or offer the season pass for $35 a year, around january of next year.offer the $5.00 monthly as a option.to me that is very fair for getting  eveything in the game.



#185 sirputterman

sirputterman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 03:20 AM

Obviously this is not an easy situation to handle and make the majority of users happy.  I don't think anyone is in favor of the game being a micro transaction based game. PP needs though a guaranteed income which is understandable. Many feel that what they have paid for they should be able to keep and continue playing even if they decide not to update any further.

May I just offer this as a solution that while not everyone will be happy with hopefully the majority would be. 1) Once a year update that will cost 50 bucks with that you get the game, CF and of course the ability to design and play user made courses. You could also buy additional content such as certain PP released courses balls or whatever. 2) There could also be "Gold edition" for 60 bucks with  this you get all the base stuff but you also get any released balls, shafts, courses the whole ball of wax. In other words whatever is made available for that year is automatically yours for free. It would be yours to keep forever and ever amen. Now while you get to keep all the user made courses for both additions  that you have acquired in that year time frame after that time period it would not be use able online. You could still play it offline but that is it. If you want to continue playing online then you must renew at the end of the year time period. 

People that are only casual may get the first update and be happy to leave it at that but at least they get to keep what they have paid for all ready. The more serious or those that like what was offered in the first release will most likely renew and of course again can go base or gold edition. PP gets the revenue stream they are needing while not micro transaction people to death. The causal user gets to keep and play to their hearts content whatever they acquired in the year but again would not be able  to play it online after the year is up . The more hard core supporters most likely buy the  gold edition and won't have  to worry about missing out on anything for the year as I stated they would automatically have the option to download anything that is made available. 

Again I'm not saying this is 100% guarantee that everyone will be happy but I think most would think its a fair and reasonable solution.

Now I'm certainly not a programming savvy person but I think PP could get around the whole user made courses being played online from year to year without buying a new subscription would be solvable by Steam just validating which version you are using.


  • axe360, Tresclub, J_Schollmeyer and 2 others like this

#186 sirputterman

sirputterman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 03:46 AM

Oh and I will add this as a side note if PP decides to go to a subscription based model for the love of god please please please do not make it and automatic renewal scheme. I hate when you have to advise a month ahead that you decide to not renew and if you forget then BAM too bad so sad your dinged with another subscription. Again I think when you log into Steam it should be able to tell when your subscription is coming to an end and could notify you of the fact. It's up to you to then renew or not. At the very least make it an option to have automatic renewals or not but the user would have to specify at the time of buying the subscription which they would prefer and not just have the automatic renew as the default. Again it come across to me as the seller is hoping you forget and they get to nail you for another year whether you want it or not .          


  • Crusher likes this

#187 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,554 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 03:59 AM

sirputterman, on 25 May 2016 - 03:46 AM, said:

Oh and I will add this as a side note if PP decides to go to a subscription based model for the love of god please please please do not make it and automatic renewal scheme. 

 

Yes - And please consider an Annual option.  

Even if it's not discounted at all - I just prefer to pay once and worry about it again in a year.


  • Tresclub and Mulligan like this

#188 sirputterman

sirputterman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 04:13 AM

Buck, on 25 May 2016 - 03:59 AM, said:

Yes - And please consider an Annual option.  

Even if it's not discounted at all - I just prefer to pay once and worry about it again in a year.

Buck as I mentioned in post 185, 50 bucks as year base edition 60 bucks a year gold edition. I'm not sure if a monthly plan would be  feasible with the lay out I'm suggesting unless it was a payment would be taken out every month  but you would still have to sign up for a year. If they are only going to come out with a updated version once a year I think it would be very hard to incorporate that you can buy less then one years playing time. I mean that would negate my suggestion of what you buy you get to keep  and  either renew or its not available for online play.They would have to come out with a new version every month in this case.  Again I may be wrong but I think it would complicate things further.       



#189 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,554 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 04:17 AM

sirputterman, on 25 May 2016 - 04:13 AM, said:

If they are only going to come out with a updated version once a year I think it would be very hard to incorporate that you can buy less then one years playing time.    

 

Why?  If I sign up @ $5/mo (as an example) in October, I'm simply paying as I go as opposed to perhaps a slight discount for pre-paying for a year, thus giving the Devs some guaranteed revenue information to plan around.  The "new version" stuff just wouldn't really matter to the monthly paying crowd, right?

 

I'm honestly not sure about the "Gold" versions and all that - It's all just adding complexity and uncertainty about what your status is and what you can/can't do/play/use, etc.

 

To my eyes - The model that's really required here is essentially "rent forever" and perhaps if they want, they can let you have a given "version" once you've paid for X amount of months.

 

But ultimately the reality of the world right now is that Software as a Service is the most sustainable model and is being implemented across the industry.



#190 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 04:24 AM

The problem with all of this is that they are putting the cart before the horse.

 

Honestly, they have no business demanding any fees, at the current beta state of the game.

 

We've all made the initial Early Access investment.

 

Yet, anyone can see that the game is still not anywhere near ready for prime-time.

 

Whose fault is it that the game isn't up to snuff, after all this time?

 

Frankly, they need to ask the Jack Nicklaus team for support, to get the game in better working order. After all, now that Jack's name is on it... he would most likely do whatever it takes to ensure it isn't an instant failure.

 

Then... when the game actually works, without fail after fail... then, we can talk about additional costs.

 

I think we all are more than capable of paying whatever amount the game decides to charge. There are also plenty of DLC ideas that they can sell, without making the game pay-to-win.

 

But, this whole, "just trust us," mantra, is well past due. Time for them to actually deliver a quality production.

 

I mean, I can hardly get through 9 holes anymore, without something game-breaking occurring.

 

For the love of all humanity... the game really needs to be cleaned up from all of the incessant bugs, first and foremost.

 

I can list all of the unresolved issues... but, then we would be here all night.


  • axe360, LeazesNDR, Parboy and 5 others like this

#191 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,554 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 04:26 AM

tlvx, on 25 May 2016 - 04:24 AM, said:

the game really needs to be cleaned up from all of the incessant bugs, first and foremost.

 

I agree about the bugs...

 

But I also feel like I've already gotten my full value out of the Early Access $ honestly.  

I'm sort of fine with wherever we go from here, but I just want it to be concise, coherent and simple.


  • Stephen Sullivan likes this

#192 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 04:36 AM

Buck, on 25 May 2016 - 04:26 AM, said:

I agree about the bugs...

 

But I also feel like I've already gotten my full value out of the Early Access $ honestly.  

I'm sort of fine with wherever we go from here, but I just want it to be concise, coherent and simple.

 

I agree. But, when you go to sell a product, the goal is to figure out how to deliver a quality product, that people want... first and foremost.

 

The monetary end becomes elementary, at that point.

 

We're at a point where, we have no evidence, that they can actually finish and polish up a completed golf simulation... after well over a year of development. -- No matter how much we've hoped, and rooted for that job to get done... it just hasn't happened yet.

 

We're also at a point where they haven't figured out how to market the game to the casual pick-up player.

 

The money is not the issue. The unfinished product and the lack of sufficient marketing are the issue.

 

Also, the fact that we're all in here "playing CEO" instead of this project having a clear vision for pricing - at this late state of development - is beyond troubling.

 

It appears that this project is losing the plot.


  • Stephen Sullivan, LeazesNDR and nightowl like this

#193 sirputterman

sirputterman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 04:36 AM

The reason I suggested a gold edition is when PP does come out with more stuff like irons drivers etc rather then buying just a piece here or a course there etc with the slightly higher 60 bucks you get it all balls clubs shoes gloves courses the full meal deal. This may be more appealing to the more hardcore and as I suggested they wouldn't have to download everything but it would certainly be there for them to do so if they wanted it. This is one thing I liked about TW 08 and prior. When you bought the game you got all the equipment and brands with the game. You could then match a Big Bertha driver with a  Titlest golf ball and Cleveland wedges or what ever. Point is you didn't have to pay extra for them. Again though the base edition would have the option to buy those items from the proshop. Again just a thought.       



#194 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,554 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 04:38 AM

@tlvx:  I hear ya' man - I know there's lots of frustration with many of us that still have niggling issues, etc.  Hopefully the next big update with the all new MoCap Avatar & GUI will really show us they have the chops to get the details nailed down!

 

@sirputterman:  Gotcha now - Thx for clarifying 



#195 Ted_Ball

Ted_Ball

    RTS-H Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,602 posts
  • LocationWest End, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Posted 25 May 2016 - 04:47 AM

You've hit the nail on the head tlvx. I was going to say the same thing as an adjunct to my earlier post asking when the new model will be starting. The game is not a finished product. 



#196 Volker

Volker

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 180 posts
  • LocationSehnde, Germany

Posted 25 May 2016 - 05:20 AM

Thanks for your post, Andrew. I hope the community will support you and Mike. The discussion going on here is just painful.


  • Greensboronclion and zmax - sim like this

#197 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,554 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 05:22 AM

Volker, on 25 May 2016 - 05:20 AM, said:

Thanks for your post, Andrew. I hope the community will support you and Mike. The discussion going on here is just painful.


No disrespect...but what is "painful" about folks airing legitimate concerns and ideas in a respectful manner?
We all want the game to succeed!
  • Parboy and Perculator like this

#198 nightowl

nightowl

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 426 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 05:39 AM

tlvx, on 25 May 2016 - 04:36 AM, said:

I agree. But, when you go to sell a product, the goal is to figure out how to deliver a quality product, that people want... first and foremost.
 
The monetary end becomes elementary, at that point.
 
We're at a point where, we have no evidence, that they can actually finish and polish up a completed golf simulation... after well over a year of development. -- No matter how much we've hoped, and rooted for that job to get done... it just hasn't happened yet.
 
We're also at a point where they haven't figured out how to market the game to the casual pick-up player.
 
The money is not the issue. The unfinished product and the lack of sufficient marketing are the issue.
 
Also, the fact that we're all in here "playing CEO" instead of this project having a clear vision for pricing - at this late state of development - is beyond troubling.
 
It appears that this project is losing the plot.

I think you nailed it. Choosing one revenue model over another is the least of their problems. They need to polish the game and market the heck out of it to attract more than just us hardcore supporters. If not, then it won't matter which revenue model they choose.
  • MERACE and Acrilix like this

#199 Crusher

Crusher

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,164 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 06:04 AM

Thank goodness that the presumptions here and at Steam/JNPG Discussions are limited to just a couple dozen people.

 

A tip to anyone fairly new to this forum.  WE who enjoy posting in here represent a tiny percentage of JNPG game owners.  The rest are out there playing online with friends or solo having a great time.

 

WE represent less than 1% of all the golfers.  So no matter the good, the bad or the ugly - what you read here is irrelevant to those who are playing the game on a regular basis.  ;)


⛳                          🏌️‍♂️                             🏌️‍♀️                              ⛳

xqc8g0-2.png

 

🏌️‍♂️                                                       🏌️‍♀️
Userbenchmarks:
Custom Build 2019

 

⛳                          🏌️‍♂️                             🏌️‍♀️                              ⛳

51049423131_98884de356_w.jpg


#200 Vernon520

Vernon520

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 689 posts
  • LocationWestcliff-on-Sea, Essex. U.K

Posted 25 May 2016 - 06:45 AM

RobV, on 25 May 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

With this attitude, this game will only have a handful of diehards left to support it...  its bad enough that there are a minimal amount of people playing the game... go check the Steam stats, they are not that pretty.  

This attitude is a reality and yes you are right about us die hard's.

I am well aware of the numbers on Steam and those in the lobby as well.

The issue here is how do you transform those who play arcade style golf games into purists?

The answer to that is, 'You probably can't'

JNPG is what it is, a game for those who want a pure, authentic sim.

The choice is simple, downgrade the quality of the game so as to appeal to the wider audience, and make another version of TGC or continue to create a sim that surpasses all other golf sims.

If it is the latter than us die hards will have to foot the bill one way or the other.

I know which one I prefer.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users