22 replies to this topic

[✠ davef ✠]

is there anyway a designer could build courses and figure out a way to sell them

i would be one that would not mind paying reasonable price for good courses?

[Niblick47]

There should be, we used to pay for designer built Links 2003 courses. I also would be willing to pay for well built courses.

[✠ davef ✠]

There should be, we used to pay for designer built Links 2003 courses. I also would be willing to pay for well built courses.

i would almost bet there are a bunch of folks who would help support something 

like this what would you call a reasonable price for a course i think i would be willing to pay 

6/7 bucks each how much would you pay? i would say just giving it a guess but out of my friends list

i would almost bet 10/15 of my friends would also support something like this as long as they are good courses

and played well. after going through a good testing period. i would also be willing to help out any designers and do some in depth

testing for them if it could ever come to happening. i could also put together a group of long time players of the game to build a testing group

and the testing would be free.

just thinking aloud as these forums need something positive to 

chat about.

[Niblick47]

Totally agree with you. Since there are virtually no new courses coming out, and there are still many playing at PGLS and probably others who don't compete, I would think there would be a market for good courses. I would be willing to pay $10 for a good course. I can remember paying that much for Links courses 20 years ago when $10 then is probably $30 today.

[Mulligan]

Whoever owns the IP rights to PG likely has a claim to a percentage of those dollars used to buy the courses. Anyone ever read the fine print end user agreement? I haven't, but it's a fair bet this is the case.

[Mulligan]

 $10 then is probably $30 today.

$14.97

https://www.dollarti...nt=10&year=2001

[✠ davef ✠]

i sure hope this post works and we get some designers who would like to make some

extra income and will research to see if it is a viable way to keep our game alive and kicking.

and also put some money into the hands of the ones willing to take it on. we all know they

deserve it for all the time and effort it takes to build good courses.

[SouthStPaul]

It is an interesting concept. I have no idea about end-user agreements but I imagine since it has not happened yet it probably would be illegal. Someone could run a gofundme campaign and use the raised money to pay the developer as a donation. The issue would be perceived course quality. Who would determine the criteria for a quality course? Would you feel disappointed if the course did not meet your expectations? Even the best PG developers have been subject to people sniping over the smallest of issues.

[Birdie]

I was also a friend of these p2p courses, probably got them all. And I would still pay for quality courses. But nowadays and especially on this platform you have to be a wizard like MJ to spit out outstanding courses every few months with the default Unity 5 and CF toys worth to pay for, or, if you want a tiny little more up to date looking tech, fancier shading, 3dg and whatever... it simply takes so much time (no, DP is not sleeping...) and also family time and love for just doing it that it really doesn't matter if you get paid for it. I think the few people still making courses on this platform doing it just for the fun of it and no money will make them faster or more.

[✠ davef ✠]

 birdie i got to disagree with you on one thing you posted

there have been a lot of designers who do as good and even better they MJ. and the time it takes when this was in it's prime

there were a number of designers who turned out top shelf courses in a reasonable time period and quite a few that could do it in a month or less. why are people here so quick to put down any kind of ideas to try and get all we can out of this game.

 

as for what makes a good course the designers would need to put together a small group say 4/5

people who have been around the game since the start that know all the in and outs of this game to

give them a stern testing process. i mean people who can do this and not folks who just want to so they can get their hands on the new courses faster i don't think putting a group together would be that hard or maybe each designer putting together their own team of testers.

i really don't think it would be to hard and designers could start getting paid for their time.

[Birdie]

Sorry Dave, this wasn't meant to put the idea down. As I said I generally like the p2p approach, I'm just slightly pessimistic that a little extra money will change the mind of a good designer to build courses again on a platform he has no more interest in or hope for it getting updated. I think that's why so many left the ship and lost a bit of the fun in it. I really wish a few would continue to build courses for PG or maybe just update their older courses with some reflective water or a HD sky or whatever which really wouldn't take much time.

[Buck]

I'd buy courses..

 

But I don't blame any designers for not bothering.

 

The IP is sold, the updates are done, and the userbase numbers really have nowhere to go but down.

 

Hard to want to invest into that environment.

[jurgie]

Totally agree with you. Since there are virtually no new courses coming out, and there are still many playing at PGLS and probably others who don't compete, I would think there would be a market for good courses. I would be willing to pay $10 for a good course. I can remember paying that much for Links courses 20 years ago when $10 then is probably $30 today.

Are you in the UK? I have all the pay to play courses that were ever featured in Links and usually paid for them as they were released. The most I ever paid was   $6.99.

[Niblick47]

I'm in the U.S. Been a long time ago so my memory is probably faulty, $6.99 sounds about right.

[jurgie]

It is really kind of amazing when you think about it but both the Interface and the APCD have been around for over two decades. The architect still produces some very nice looking course designs and the game itself has many bells & whistles. I suspect that Arnold if he was going associate his name with the Links Platform would insist that it was done in a classy way like the gentleman himself.

[jurgie]

Totally agree with you. Since there are virtually no new courses coming out, and there are still many playing at PGLS and probably others who don't compete, I would think there would be a market for good courses. I would be willing to pay $10 for a good course. I can remember paying that much for Links courses 20 years ago when $10 then is probably $30 today.

We all appreciate great course design and are exited when they do surface even if it is every so often. As far as pay to play courses are concerned, I would be very suprised if people would your doors down at $10.00 a whack. Here is why. You will have quality courses emerging but you still have a bare bones PG platform and of course Harry Hacker. Really only people who love online play will benefit the most. The rest of us are stuck with Harry and a very unstable format playing against computer oponents who all look like the Hacker. New courses I am all for, but what is really needed is a sim that is complete and has A1 Interface to compliment the entire Simulation.

[Niblick47]

It depends on what people want most, all the bells and whistles of TGC, with custom ani's and clubs, or a really good golf simulator. Apparently most people prefer all the options and if the simulator physics of golf is not the best, they don't care. They really want a video game for golf. Would I like the options that Links affords, yes; but, what I value most is a golf sim that is as true to the actual physics of the ball flight and reaction to the ground as possible. For me PG is the best I've seen. I haven't played the new TGC but from what I've seen on videos and read here, it is not as realistic as PG. I addition, it gives you only one option for a golf swing, which I do not like. So with the number of people playing PG shrinking, there would probably not be much to be made by making P2P courses, but those still playing every day would pay for good courses. But the next time 2K21 goes on sale, I will buy it just to have the option to play a sim with all the options as well as the continual new courses coming out.

[Buck]

Does it matter if one charges $6, $60 or $600 for a course?

If there's basically no audience left to sell into, who would spend their time making a top rate course beyond just for the hobby/fun of it?

[jurgie]

Of course the physics should be as real as they can possibly be. with todays capabilities and innovations that part of a simulation should not be too difficult to replicate. To Buck"s point, it makes little sense to continue to add additional designs, especially ones that are pay to play into a skeletal platform like PG which will always be what it has been for almost a decade. Strictly an online get together where people who enjoy that kind of thing, to bang a golf ball around. I think it is very optimistic to believe that people would embrace the idea of paying $10.00 or more for a course desined for PG just to add to their course collection. I could be wrong but I would also be very suprised if enough people would hang around long enough to support a play to pay policy.

[RobV]

Maybe a good idea and concept about 1-2 years ago when designers were at their peak, but now with a average of 30 players playing this game, is there really any money to be made for the time that it takes to build a true, quality course?   

 

Either way, it definitely could have been done... was done in Links and bought a few myself.  Not sure about TW, never played that game.