241 replies to this topic

[sirputterman]

sandybunker, on 23 May 2016 - 10:01 PM, said:

I hope it doesn't have a detrimental effect with the online element if it ends up split because there's people playing different builds.

 

Well Sandy if they go ahead with the model being suggest that shouldn't be an issue because if you don't have the latest update poof!! all user made courses magically are useless.

[Bob5453]

Just give us DLC that will blow our minds and we will buy it. Forget trying to come up with money making gimmicks. Build a quality product and it will sell. I waited for the user courses to be released before I bought this game as that is my cup of tea, but I didn't expect to be just renting them.

[Ted_Ball]

There's a nice big, shady tree. There's enough room for all our friends. But first, give me that stick and I'll whack that hornet's nest. Where have our friends gone, Br'er Bear?

 

What is wrong with just selling the game at whatever you think? $40, $50, $60. And make it so attractive that there is no need to gouge money and thus alienating the customers you already have. Not to mention the ones that you don't have.

 

I'll tell you this. Make it Free2Play and you'll get that many players that you can offer as many micro-transactions items and as much DLC as you can come up with and because your base is so huge you will be rolling in it.

 

Regards

Ted Buffett

[zmax - sim]

maxie, on 23 May 2016 - 9:53 PM, said:

So if the guys at OGT are hosting a tournament with a user made course only those with the update will be able to participate in it? I have no issue at all supporting the game i will be buying.Just dont want to log into the lobby and find 10-15 players

 

Maybe at that time, we'll start a new tour using only standard courses and call it "JNPG's Cheap Bastards Tour"?  

 

Personally, I'm not worried.  If and when a major update comes out and they make it a $10-20 DLC, so this project stays profitable, I think most OGT players will buy it.

[tlvx]

-And then, whatever new features are being sold - actually have to work, and not break several other features in the process.

Past is prologue; and so far, the current programming team has not proven they can advance the game forward, without significant flaws.

I think we'd all pay for an update that actually cleaned up the game.

But, can we really bank on that, based on experience?

[Davser]

zmax - sim, on 23 May 2016 - 11:00 PM, said:

Maybe at that time, we'll start a new tour using only standard courses and call it "JNPG's Cheap Bastards Tour"?  

 

Personally, I'm not worried.  If and when a major update comes out and they make it a $10-20 DLC, so this project stays profitable, I think most OGT players will buy it.

Hahaha Zmax, epic one mate

[sirputterman]

Ted_Ball, on 23 May 2016 - 10:39 PM, said:

There's a nice big, shady tree. There's enough room for all our friends. But first, give me that stick and I'll whack that hornet's nest. Where have our friends gone, Br'er Bear?

 

What is wrong with just selling the game at whatever you think? $40, $50, $60. And make it so attractive that there is no need to gouge money and thus alienating the customers you already have. Not to mention the ones that you don't have.

 

I'll tell you this. Make it Free2Play and you'll get that many players that you can offer as many micro-transactions items and as much DLC as you can come up with and because your base is so huge you will be rolling in it.

 

Regards

Ted Buffett

As I said ted I have zero issue with paying or supporting the game my issue is not having a clear and concise idea what it's going to cost me. Again if you going to announce on Steam a change in how your going to market the game then you should also be announcing exactly what the costs will be and how often you plan to charge for it. Not to do so just opens the whole thing to speculation and most times that speculation is negative. Just human nature.

PP is not doing any favors by making this announcement of change and then leave it hanging to what all the details are. If they have no clear idea what the costs are going to be it would be better to not say squat until they did. I mean they must not be so naive to think this would fly under the radar without anyone blinking an eye.

They have obviously been thinking about this for quite some time and surely they must have a amount and time frame the updates would be in effect so again why not announce that also with the news of the change? Just doesn't make sense to keep your customer guessing how this is going to unfold. That's my opinion anyways. 

[tlvx]

Ted_Ball, on 23 May 2016 - 10:39 PM, said:

There's a nice big, shady tree. There's enough room for all our friends. But first, give me that stick and I'll whack that hornet's nest. Where have our friends gone, Br'er Bear?

What is wrong with just selling the game at whatever you think? $40, $50, $60. And make it so attractive that there is no need to gouge money and thus alienating the customers you already have. Not to mention the ones that you don't have.

I'll tell you this. Make it Free2Play and you'll get that many players that you can offer as many micro-transactions items and as much DLC as you can come up with and because your base is so huge you will be rolling in it.

Regards
Ted Buffett

They don't want to do either. They want to have their cake and eat it too.

So, they'll charge for the game upfront, And charge forced microtransactions... just to keep the game playable.

Sounds like a monthly fee may have been a better deal, after all.

[Brendan]

tlvx, on 23 May 2016 - 11:01 PM, said:

-And then, whatever new features are being sold - actually have to work, and not break several other features in the process.

Past is prologue; and so far, the current programming team has not proven they can advance the game forward, without significant flaws.

I think we'd all pay for an update that actually cleaned up the game.

But, can we really bank on that, based on experience?

936 hours in the game ...... you must hate it

[Brendan]

I will happily contribute to pay for course designers DLC - I think they have added huge value to my experience

[tlvx]

Brendan, on 23 May 2016 - 11:10 PM, said:

936 hours in the game ...... you must hate it

Playing a golf game - in spite of its constant beta state - is solely a testament to my interest in video golf games.

Frankly, there's not a whole lot of other non-arcade options, to play turn-based multiplayer video golf.

But, that doesn't mean I'm satisfied with the fit and finish of this software... not in the least.

[Davser]

I wouldn't mind to pay for DLC's. This game is great, and if it means i need to contribute to keep it running like that, so be it...

Yes there are glitches and bugs, but they will be eliminated in time. We still need to remember that this is a fairly new game and it has just been released to public after the beta testing. Every new game has bugs when being released.

 

Paying course designers a small amount to get their courses is no problem, it will keep them making them, and for me they really have been great to test and play. This game wouldn't be the same without them!

[jt83]

I'm a bit concerned that "milestone updates to the game with significant user functionality changes will be paid DLC" when a lot of people will probably consider those updates should have been part of the version released as a finished game.  However, when you consider that so far I've paid $20 for EA and another $5 for Bethesda (a course that is really challenging me for some reason) and the physical copy of Links 2003 would have gone for $90 back in the day...it's not so bad.  Well, it's not so bad assuming these milestone updates won't stretch on for another decade.  So far PP haven't been as mercenary as other developers, but if they charge $10 every time a new "feature" is developed, it will be hard to dissuade the cynical.

[Mulligan]

jt83, on 24 May 2016 - 01:09 AM, said:

and the physical copy of Links 2003 would have gone for $90 back in the day

 

Huh?

[jt83]

Gone for = cost.  Any boxed copy of a game back then would have cost around $90 in Australia.

[wim1234]

zmax - sim, on 23 May 2016 - 11:00 PM, said:

Maybe at that time, we'll start a new tour using only standard courses and call it "JNPG's Cheap Bastards Tour"?  

 

Personally, I'm not worried.  If and when a major update comes out and they make it a $10-20 DLC, so this project stays profitable, I think most OGT players will buy it.

Yes, those surely will, but, but...that playerbase is never going to be enough to sustain the venture.

The amount of casual(or just not tournament) players is way way bigger, they need those in too, and thats not going to happen with a scheme, where usercourses are put behind a paywall.

I firmly belive they are digging their own grave with such a scheme, and they wonder about the negative reviews?, its just

cause and effect.

It really really surpises me to see the devs dont seem to have a good grasp of their potential customers.

Its going to be interesting to see how this will unfold.

[Stephen Sullivan]

It's their project, so they can do as they wish.  I just think some of the ideas are going to alienate more than they are going to gain,

[johnmeyer]

wim1234, on 24 May 2016 - 05:43 AM, said:

Yes, those surely will, but, but...that playerbase is never going to be enough to sustain the venture.

The amount of casual(or just not tournament) players is way way bigger, they need those in too, and thats not going to happen with a scheme, where usercourses are put behind a paywall.

 

Arguably though if your not giving them any more revenue, you can then imagine your not on top of their list to keep you happy as a player from a revenue point of view. In terms of revenue generation I think youve made the key point, in that user made courses are indeed probably the main feature that all users want irrespective of how you play the game, so from a revenue generation POV its the perfect thing to put behind the paywall.

 

The "new" player will get them when he buys the game, hes happy. That is on the assumption he isnt put off by the act that in a non determined period of time from the day he purchases hell have to pay again. This Im not sure about.  The player whos already bought it, had it x years, are the ones who'll lose out, unless they pay again. But as I say, if you arent going to pay again, then financially theres not such a big reason so keep you happy. 

 

It couldve been worse, they could disable all online play too unless you buy the upgrade, Ive not seen ifthat has been mentioned. Or you could be like us sim guys are, where if we dont pay our annual season pass at $250, we cannot use our hardware with the game at all. Imagine if they disabled everything but 3C unless you paid your annual sub

 

Ted made an interesting point in that you could go the other way, and just give everyone the upgrade or the game for that matter, hope for a huge player base and then just micro transaction the hell out of it to build your revenue. But then the "basic" version may not have hardly any of the features you now have anyway, so youd still end up paying anyway. 

 

Ultimately it will come down to what it costs and if you at the time think its value to upgrade, and having your access to user courses removed I would say instantly makes the upgrade better value. 

 

The key concern I will agree is with guys who have created their own course, in say the "old" version. They need to find a way so that you can still play that course in the "old" version. Im not sure how CF works, but if you can play the course withing the CF environment then perhaps that is already covered there?

 

I think the amounts on money being mentioned are all quite low, so other than the issue above I dont see any problems with it all, damn Id love just to have to pay $20 a year to keep getting a new version.. id be $230 a year better off

[HaHo1]

Brendan, on 23 May 2016 - 11:10 PM, said:

936 hours in the game ...... you must hate it

 

 

= $0.02 per day.  

 

 

tlvx can't stop giving his two cents.  

[Mulligan]

jt83, on 24 May 2016 - 02:00 AM, said:

Gone for = cost.  Any boxed copy of a game back then would have cost around $90 in Australia.

 

Oh, gotchya, it was the $90 that I didn't get. It was $40 in the states.