241 replies to this topic

[highfade]

I like the proposed model and would be the first to buy the Milestone Golf Club, is it real?

[Stephen Sullivan]

I have no issue paying a subscription IF the game is good enough, and there are many more courses than at the moment.  At the moment it just isn't good enough as there are far to many niggly little things that need fixing.

As there is never going to be a "powerstroke" style gauge, I am stuck playing RTS-C and though the long game is manageable, the short game is a lottery at the moment.

We need to hearfrom the devs far more frequently as well as silence is never a good thing.

[frank70]

Some things make me really wonder:

• Why was the game released in an unfinished state?
• Why did Jack Nicklaus give his name for it, when it clearly isn't finished?
• Where is the marketing for the game? Could Jack Nicklaus himself be a factor there in the future?

 

There have to be reasons, why the game suddenly went gold. Was it pressure by the Jack Nicklaus company that they only give their name when the game isn't early access anymore? 

I don't know exactly. But i know, that you can not expect a huge jump in sales, when you deliver an unfinished product and don't do considerable marketing.

 

I said it back when the season pass discussion took place: The main goal for a successful game has to be gaining a high customer base. Get a lot of players in and then things like DLC and microtransaction could work out financially.

 

If you don't manage to do that you will have financial problems as a developer - no matter what business or pricing model you choose.

 

And if the player base stays more or less the same, as it is right now: Then, the few have to pay more in order to hold the game alive over a longer period of time. I will do so, be it by season pass or other models. But how many will do so too?

[olazaboll]

If the new model is up against the season pass idea ... I go for this new model.

I rather make one descision once a  year "You wanna upgrade ore not ? "

than having to think about that every month.

 

It up to everyone if you wanna beat this subject into a "dead horse" or not ... Im done with it anyway.

 

In the end PP are sitting on the figures , their vision and knows what needs to be done ... so I´m all with you there.

 

Just a small reflection before I go: I thougt this game felt right from the beginning , so I pledge 75 usd to the Kickstarter.

Im still 50 usd short of that ...so I won't have a problem when descision time comes on upgrades the few comming years.

Good luck PP and Players and Followers .... Lets keep this game great !!!

/Ola

[Vernon520]

frank70, on 25 May 2016 - 07:33 AM, said:

Some things make me really wonder:

• Why was the game released in an unfinished state?
• Why did Jack Nicklaus give his name for it, when it clearly isn't finished?
• Where is the marketing for the game? Could Jack Nicklaus himself be a factor there in the future?

 

There have to be reasons, why the game suddenly went gold. Was it pressure by the Jack Nicklaus company that they only give their name when the game isn't early access anymore? 

I don't know exactly. But i know, that you can not expect a huge jump in sales, when you deliver an unfinished product and don't do considerable marketing.

 

I said it back when the season pass discussion took place: The main goal for a successful game has to be gaining a high customer base. Get a lot of players in and then things like DLC and microtransaction could work out financially.

 

If you don't manage to do that you will have financial problems as a developer - no matter what business or pricing model you choose.

 

And if the player base stays more or less the same, as it is right now: Then, the few have to pay more in order to hold the game alive over a longer period of time. I will do so, be it by season pass or other models. But how many will do so too?

I agree with you but IMO a large customer base for this type of game is 'pie in the sky'

Most players want a dial it in and knock -10 in the first hour of paying the game.

This game takes hours upon hours of practice and dedication to play a decent round and I wouldn't want it any other way.

PP needs to except the facts and concentrate on it's hardcore support to help fund the advancement of the game.

Like the best wines in the world, you have to expect to pay a higher price but it is usually worth it.

[frank70]

Vernon520, on 25 May 2016 - 07:48 AM, said:

I agree with you but IMO a large customer base for this type of game is 'pie in the sky'

Most players want a dial it in and knock -10 in the first hour of paying the game.

This game takes hours upon hours of practice and dedication to play a decent round and I wouldn't want it any other way.

PP needs to except the facts and concentrate on it's hardcore support to help fund the advancement of the game.

Like the best wines in the world, you have to expect to pay a higher price but it is usually worth it.

Why not have both worlds? I don't see any reason, why there shouldn't be an arcade mode in the game - with a lot of bells and whistles. Let them put spin on the ball in flight, let them .... i don't know. Nobody has to use it. And it might be huge especially for console sales!!

 

A game is a success (financially as well) if it has many buyers - period. It doesn't help to "label" potential buyers as too "stupid" to get the greatness of the game (to be clear: no dev has ever done that!! But sometimes we purists insinnuate it).

 

Links had a large customer base: Why can't PG? Maybe it depends on the overall quality of the game. PG isn't quite there yet. Of course PG is all in all a better and more realistic representation of golf (realtime physics, 3D). But if you consider that Links is over 15 years old one can thoroughly say that it is overall the better game.

[wim1234]

Ted_Ball, on 25 May 2016 - 04:47 AM, said:

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. 

It is not wise, form a marketing point of view, to put a game on the market that is soo clearly nof finished in many many ways.

Cf was promised as a certainty before christmass...not delivered as yet.  I bet we would have had a lot more ppl in.

Also the not being to play usercourses offline is a huge mistake...quite a few ppl cant be online all the time.

About Bethesda(which i bought), its just not good enough, old textures.  New ball i like better.

The gaming indsutry has changed soo much since the good old links2003 days, its gone to the consoles, period.

Pure simulations seems less and less in demand nowadyas, just a few populair ones,like carracing, can survive.

The trainz solution was to do crowd funding before they developed further.

Many many small gaming companies have gone asunder, because of lack of funding/not enough customers.

I do not have a clearcut solution for this, subscription model? , nah, how many are going to buy that, possible a few hundred,

but they need a few thou........

What i also see, right here in this forum, many ppl with quite limited visions, they seem to think their way is everyones way.

The brunt of the consumers never ever post in forums, so how to ascertain why they dont play????

12.000 sold and just tens at any time(peak 150) playing..have the rest lost interest? who knows...?

Right form the start this has been a very risky undertaking with such a small team.

Just  a few days ago, before all this hubbub, i reinstalled links, and what shook me was how proffesional that one looks and plays.

The hd courses, the comments with Petr Aliss, better windeffect..and so on and on, now there is quality.

If pg wants to survive, it really needs to up the quality on a lot of aspects.

A marketing consultant specialised in gaming is whats needed here.

 

i sure hope they will succeed, but the voice in my head says , the changes are not very high.

[frank70]

And another thing: Maybe the strategy to make CF and user courses free isn't viable any more. User courses have to bring revenue as i understood it.

 

Why don't sale them?

 

Every user generated course has to be approved by PP. If it meets the requirements it goes in the download section. Every course costs 0.99 $. The designer gets a share (20 cents?). This won't work with real course renditions i fear. But going this way it would be possible for customers to not buy a major game upgrade but buy courses instead.

[Vernon520]

frank70, on 25 May 2016 - 08:06 AM, said:

Why not have both worlds? I don't see any reason, why there shouldn't be an arcade mode in the game - with a lot of bells and whistles. Let them put spin on the ball in flight, let them .... i don't know. Nobody has to use it. And it might be huge especially for console sales!!

 

A game is a success (financially as well) if it has many buyers - period. It doesn't help to "label" potential buyers as too "stupid" to get the greatness of the game (to be clear: no dev has ever done that!! But sometimes we purists insinnuate it).

 

Links had a large customer base: Why can't PG? Maybe it depends on the overall quality of the game. PG isn't quite there yet. Of course PG is all in all a better and more realistic representation of golf (realtime physics, 3D). But if you consider that Links is over 15 years old one can thoroughly say that it is overall the better game.

Not too sure about that. Why buy this game with an arcade mode when there are plenty of arcade style golf games already?

As for Links, many Links players are now playing JNPG instead.

And let's not forget that there are those who have paid out a lot of cash to buy skytrak ect.

I feel that JNPG will only appeal to a niche market and PP will need to charge accordingly and stop giving everything away for free IMO.

[wim1234]

frank70, on 25 May 2016 - 08:06 AM, said:

Why not have both worlds? I don't see any reason, why there shouldn't be an arcade mode in the game - with a lot of bells and whistles. Let them put spin on the ball in flight, let them .... i don't know. Nobody has to use it. And it might be huge especially for console sales!!

 

A game is a success (financially as well) if it has many buyers - period. It doesn't help to "label" potential buyers as too "stupid" to get the greatness of the game (to be clear: no dev has ever done that!! But sometimes we purists insinnuate it).

 

Links had a large customer base: Why can't PG? Maybe it depends on the overall quality of the game. PG isn't quite there yet. Of course PG is all in all a better and more realistic representation of golf (realtime physics, 3D). But if you consider that Links is over 15 years old one can thoroughly say that it is overall the better game.

Frank, you forget one very very important aspect....the hardware needed.

Some ppl still play pga championship..on xp running puters.

Not everyone is in the ratrace of upgrading upgrading hardware.

I showed this game to my old golfbuddies( 4 of them), they liked it, but would never ever invest in the hardware needed, they all

have basic laptops without graphics card, 2 of them still play links occasionaly.

but 3 of them with kids have consoles..soo...

Maybe they should have made a console version first? That is where the money in gaming is.

All populair racing games have both arcade modes and realistic modes, so they can get as many as potential costumers.

It seems as if the devs never ever made a proper assesment of the gaming market.

 

And, oh yes, why do i and some others post soo much..its something called ..love for golf..

[frank70]

Another idea: Maybe JNPG can get a deal with the European and the Asia Tour. A lot of guys simply like an official label and maybe renditions of real players in the game. There is no European golf game on the market. Maybe the European Tour sees that as a good marketing possibilty.

 

Haven't seen any Japanese players so far neither. There is a large golf market. And video gaming there is very popular.

 

But after all, i think growing the PC or console market isn't the main goal of PP. There real aim is the simulator market and of course the use of course forge in real life - to sell designs (in cooperation with Jack Nicklaus design?). Perfect Golf is more or less a sidekick, it's not their main income as a company. Could be wrong though.

 

Doesn't matter, anyway. The game has already gone a long way and i haven't ever been immersed by a golf game in a way like i am by Perfect Golf. I hope the revenue is big enough that further development isn't in danger.

[HaHo1]

I've got an idea.  Why don't people stop having ideas.  Quite frankly it's getting embarrassing reading all these highly opinionated pseudo CEO brain waves.  Maybe we could try to monetize them instead by throwing them all in a ring and going with the last man standing's idea about how to 'save the company'.  That's how ridiculous I'm now finding this thread.  The biggest issue here is that those with the loudest voices seem to hold sway and this is why we got into this mess in the first place.  The only mistake PP have made was in thinking that those who shouted the loudest represented majority opinion.  It's one thing to have a community driven game and another to allow that community to dictate the business model.  How ironic that people have gone full circle and now want to reinstate a model that they so vehemently rejected.   

 

Regardless of how PP go about financing the continued development of JNPG there will be people shouting from the rooftops both here and in the Steam forum because, "You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time.".  Belonging to the 'being pleased all of the time' camp I am happy to pay what they charge and how they charge it as I know that every penny is money well spent.  

 

I won't be posting in this thread again.  Anyway, back to the golf....   

[frank70]

HaHo1, on 25 May 2016 - 10:09 AM, said:

 

Belonging to 'being pleased all of the time' camp I am happy to pay what they charge and how they charge it as I know that every penny is money well spent.  

A lot of us are and will pay - me too. But will it be enough revenue? I would like the game to be there in 10 years. Need more customers.

[DivotMaker]

JoeF, on 25 May 2016 - 12:53 AM, said:

Just give it the right marketing spin:

"Club membership and green fees" - $5.00/month

 

It is a golf sim after all.  

All over this......

[Dazmaniac]

I pay $49 per year to sub to iRacing. This us the half price rate. Its usually $99 IIRC. Downloading the sim is free, but you have to take out a sub to use it.

They do monthly, 3 monthly, 6 monthly and annual.

You get stock content as part of the sub, several cars and several tracks.

You can pay for yearly subs in advance. I'm currently subbed through to 2020.

Any additional content they offer (laser scanned cars and tracks) you purchase as DLC. You buy them if you want then, otherwise you just run with the stock content.

They do discounts when you buy in bulk, so you get a percentage discount from the total price.

Folks moan that iRacing is way to expensive and it's cheaper to just buy an alternative like PCARS for $60 and have done with it, and buy DLC I'd you need it.

For me, the annual sub to iRacing is about the equivalent of me paying 2 months for my mobile phone contract. For the enjoyment iRacing gives me, it's dirt cheap. Also for me has the best online racing community and events out there.

I'm happy to see PP do something similar. I know others won't be but that's their viewpoint.

[Modman1]

Vernon520, on 25 May 2016 - 08:16 AM, said:

 

As for Links, many Links players are now playing JNPG instead.

 

You can put me on the top of that list.  I used to play real golf but at 4 hours a round, costs from $20 to $100 and my miserable play I gave it up for computer golf.  This is my entertainment and the cost matters little to me.  I enjoy how tough this game is and agree too many arcade type golf games out there and this should never be one of them.  Finally, links used to be a community like PG with the ability to play with people all over the world.  I didn't realize how much I missed that until PG.  I have made many friends here and that has cost me zero.

[clubcaptain]

Ted_Ball, on 25 May 2016 - 04:47 AM, said:

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. 

So true. I've used  the phrase "top notch game" several times indicating the same thing. At present the game is far from finished, polished or top notch.

[RobV]

Vernon520, on 25 May 2016 - 06:45 AM, said:

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.

Completely disagree and it shouldn't be about just the die hards...For many players, FUN is the key here and that is designated by the person playing the game, not the a small group of people who want to dictate or influence the direction of this game one way or another.   

 

PG doesn't have to do anything differently than they are doing today as there are options for the casual player, like myself, where I enjoy a "fun" round without the stress of hitting the ball perfect every time, sitting there for 5 minutes calculating every shot, factoring inches, yardage, green slopes, etc.. it is a video game after all and  there are a bunch of us "Hackers" who want to sit back, get on the mics, grab a cold one, play a round and have fun while doing it.   Has zero to do with "arcade". 

 

Then there are also options for the sim crowd, who enjoy competitive play, tournaments, and all the challenges that come with the game of golf.. good for them.   But if you think that this game will survive on the "die hards" alone, then in my opinion, this game won't survive or perhaps will survive with a limited amount of players.   if you are ok with that, then so be it.     

 

Bottom line, PG is in a tough spot... I am sad to see that the proposed model of pay to upgrade otherwise, you can only play the stock courses, is now less favorable than the original model of a subscription.   I would imagine this would be a nightmare for folks who host tournaments as there will most likely be so much disparity, you will see numbers of participation dwindle to practically nothing.. I feel for those guys who take their free time to organize stuff like that... (OGT).    Seems like there is no easy answer. 

[BaggerVance]

Dazmaniac, on 25 May 2016 - 11:02 AM, said:

I pay $49 per year to sub to iRacing. This us the half price rate. Its usually $99 IIRC. Downloading the sim is free, but you have to take out a sub to use it.
They do monthly, 3 monthly, 6 monthly and annual.
You get stock content as part of the sub, several cars and several tracks.
You can pay for yearly subs in advance. I'm currently subbed through to 2020.
Any additional content they offer (laser scanned cars and tracks) you purchase as DLC. You buy them if you want then, otherwise you just run with the stock content.
They do discounts when you buy in bulk, so you get a percentage discount from the total price.
Folks moan that iRacing is way to expensive and it's cheaper to just buy an alternative like PCARS for $60 and have done with it, and buy DLC I'd you need it.
For me, the annual sub to iRacing is about the equivalent of me paying 2 months for my mobile phone contract. For the enjoyment iRacing gives me, it's dirt cheap. Also for me has the best online racing community and events out there.
I'm happy to see PP do something similar. I know others won't be but that's their viewpoint.

That sounds reasonable in regards to sim racing. Don't know why it's so much more expensive to setup a launch monitor to connect to PG with a tcp/ip interface. 250 a year? Really?

Guess they feel golf sim users are so used to paying thousands of dollars in the past for software, that the sim user is flush with money..

[wim1234]

Life would be really boring without some lively (heated-up) discussion.

Whatever is going to happen will happen, i do NOT need pg to be happy gamer.

Would be nice if it succeeds, if not, there are way more important things than simgolf.