Goals of your franchise you should be looking into for maximizing profits

[Dusty1424]

I agree with you it would be great if GIANTS could get JD on board , and I'm not criticising JD as a manufacturer , I suppose what I'm getting at is some people's perception of JD and that FS as a game is the lesser for not having JD equipment , it would be great to have that choice , I'm sure GIANTS have pulled out all the stops in they're negotiations with JD in order to get them on board , JD still refuse , why ?

[Nigelbilt]

This is just a guess based on similar situations in sim racing but JD could be very protective of their brand and want a level of control with how it’s used that GIANTS doesn’t feel comfortable giving them.

[BARNYwithaGUN]

This is just a guess based on similar situations in sim racing but JD could be very protective of their brand and want a level of control with how it’s used that GIANTS doesn’t feel comfortable giving them.

They probably want the cover to have a John Deere harvesting on one side of the fence with skinny starving animals and a case on the other side with fat animals

[USMarshal12]

I completely agree with you Seltzy123. It's not unrealistic expectations, too ask so little. Madden, 2k franchises, and MLBTheShow have had story mode for a while now. I think it's only fair for those players who don't play the multiplayer mode too have the Ai help, welll be alot more helpful. That way you could be focused on a task and not have to worry that the Ai has gotten stuck or they have finished a field and now you have to physically switch over and move the tractor onto the next "hired help' task. They should update the game in such a way so it's more hands on, it's almost like they all sat around the table and asked 'Who here has ever run or worked on a farm before?" and every reply they got was nope. WELL YOU'RE HIRED THEN! Farming is very hands on occupation and it should be reflected as such in a game that's all about Farming. FS17 is a good game, but is missing a very important piece/pieces to get into that great game category. Hopefully JD hits FS19 but it's a pipe dream.

[Mythtaken]

Interesting list, @seltzy123. However, I think you've got it backwards. As someone who farms for a living, you know the key to profit is increasing income while reducing input costs (expenses). Your list proposes the opposite. If Giants really wanted to maximize their profits they could:

• make a single version of the game for consoles, then offer a port of that to PC. Sure, pc users might lose some quality and functionality in the trade, but it would be less expensive. Further, they could do away with the Mac version, since that's a smaller audience anyway.
• not add any new brands. Licensing brands is extremely expensive -- some companies expect the sun and the moon to use their logo or models. In fact, they could reduce the number of current brands to save even more.
• make the game more accessible for casual gamers. Hardcore players who want more realism and more challenge are the minority in the gaming world. If Giants wants to increase profits, they could appeal to the majority who like to win big without trying too hard. All farm work could become more like the missions -- plow or cultivate or harvest the first third of the field and the rest is magically finished for you. Animals could automatically feed and clean themselves, leaving players the job of looking at them and collecting the money. And of course, tractors and equipment should have a minimal cost, to allow players more easy options. Better yet, there could be an "unlock" system, so every time you successfully harvest a field, you unlock another free piece of equipment.
• provide a way for players to win the game. Perhaps after you own all the fields or reach a certain income, the area citizens vote you into public office and there's a big parade in your honour, with fireworks and a colourful banner on the screen that says "Congratulations". Then you can add your initials to your total and have it posted online to compare with others.

[redglasses]

This is just a guess based on similar situations in sim racing but JD could be very protective of their brand and want a level of control with how it’s used that GIANTS doesn’t feel comfortable giving them.

They probably want the cover to have a John Deere harvesting on one side of the fence with skinny starving animals and a case on the other side with fat animals

Exactly, because JD thinks that there equipment is too superior to be compared to other equipment, I would say the opposite, because you cant compare a green combine thats on fire to a red one that is actually working

[seltzy123]

you missed my Aimpoint here. giants needs to make a option in the menu to suit the needs of experienced farmers. shifting gears, a clutch, (tired of tractors maxed throttled) hooking up pto, hydros, etc. realistic led lighting, suspension of the tractors, the cab. you guys can complain all you want about john deere. whatever. i know its just a tractor. BUT why not add more case ih content if you have the license already to satisfy american players more? 75% of the equipment is european. maybe in the 80%'s. just my tidbit. I know the sole reason my friends have this game is because theyve been around FARMING. im sick of giants coddling new players and making a copy and paste game for 60$. THE GAME HAS BEEN OUT FOR 10 YEARS. dont bother with the new players. they already know about it im sure!! MAKE IT FARMING SIMULATOR. dont make it drive a tractor like a dang car and shoot money out of your butt. lol

[Nigelbilt]

GIANTS does not need to do that at all. They are quite successful doing what they are doing. Having Easy, Medium, Realistic would be cool and all but it quite ludicrous to think GIANTS needs to do this. Catering to the minority is the best way to fail.

[USMarshal12]

GIANTS does not need to do that at all. They are quite successful doing what they are doing. Having Easy, Medium, Realistic would be cool and all but it quite ludicrous to think GIANTS needs to do this. Catering to the minority is the best way to fail.

IT'S NOT CATERING TO THE MINORITY, lol it's a simple concept where they cater to the adults of the community, and that's the best way to grow a cookie cutter game

[Nigelbilt]

Just so I understand your point. You are saying it’s the adults that play FS that are the ones that want realistic gameplay and GIANTS should cater to them?

[cr41g_1965]

make the game more accessible for casual gamers. Hardcore players who want more realism and more challenge are the minority in the gaming world. If Giants wants to increase profits, they could appeal to the majority who like to win big without trying too hard. All farm work could become more like the missions -- plow or cultivate or harvest the first third of the field and the rest is magically finished for you. Animals could automatically feed and clean themselves, leaving players the job of looking at them and collecting the money. And of course, tractors and equipment should have a minimal cost, to allow players more easy options. Better yet, there could be an "unlock" system, so every time you successfully harvest a field, you unlock another free piece of equipment.

for real ??? this game is already ridiculously easy even on hard... I had all the trophies in a month...playing on hard !!!...playing on normal or easy is childsplay with the cheating in money box...have you even played FS17 ?... its a simulator....if you want easy go to facebook and play Farmville

[Mythtaken]

Um... that was kinda the point. The thread was about Giant's maximizing profit. If that was their real goal, then moving the game towards the farmville kind of game would be the right choice.

I was pointing out the things the OP was asking for might make the game more interesting, but not necessarily more profitable for Giants, n'est pas?

[cmdrbyron]

TL;DR - We can't have it all - Scope/Quality/Time/Resources must be balanced! FS17 is an awesome game, and we should be so thankful that the developers/modders are so awesome!

I think there are two issues entwined here (intentional or otherwise):

1. A perceived "lack" of content (in the form of brands, types of equipment, functionality"); and
2. The perceived notion that this product is failing to deliver profit to the developer.

The OP proposes that investment by Giants in their list of features would yield a greater ROI. What they do not account for is the associated cost, and how that influences the promised "increased profits".

The reality is that, in this day and age, game development is about balance, across a wide range of criteria. Sure, it is easy to sit back and pick apart all the aspects that we (collectively, as the user/consumer) have determined to be lacking, and thus offer up our "recommendations" (which quite often come across as demands/whines on the Internet - imo), under the pretenses of "encouraging" the developers to shift development towards our individual idealization of the game. But, we often fail to account for the flow-through effects.

Case-in-point - PC vs Console (not touching VR with a 10ft pole atm). I'm not starting a platform war, but it is widely acknowledged that PC offers up several features/functionality/content that console does not. In providing the game on console, certain sacrifices had to be made. Rather than opting for a singular version catering to the lowest common denominator (aka "most stringent requirements"), we have the privilege of experiencing the game on two different platforms, albeit with some differences in said experiences. How many development companies do this? Most opt for the path that leads to greatest profits for least investment (as many would argue, any profit-seeking entity should), which typically yields products that are "ok" across multiple platforms, vice ones that are "great" on one/few. Imagine if Giants made us pay for the Giants Editor, and another tool to access the files required to generate mods. Never mind the wonderful world of "microtransactions". Imagine if you had to pay RL money to access equipment required for silage/logging, certain crop types, or animals ("sheep and chickens included, but need to pay $5/10 pigs or 2 cows")

What I rarely (if ever) see mentioned here is the notion of compromise. How come few offer up "I would personally prefer X (ex. better ground physics) over Y (ex. more brands)"? Wouldn't that be a better "investment" recommendation, rather than simply demanding that the developer invest more at likely increased risk? Four key aspects to any project: Scope, Time, Quality, and Resources. If we want Giants to inject a whole bunch of content (increased scope), then there needs to be a compromise elsewhere. Are we willing to forsake quality? I would suggest no (given all the demands for improved quality). Do we accept a longer development cycle? Or do we pay more *gasp* so they can increase their resource pool?

Hats off to the team at Giants who face a plethora of "your game *censored* - you should do x, y, z to make it better!", never mind the modders out there who put up with a similar level of demand/criticism (and most don't even get paid!). It's any wonder the modding community here have pulled back in the realm of community engagement/development. We should be so fortunate that they haven't tossed the franchise aside in hopes of a better experience elsewhere!

Just my two cents as a mechanical engineer, working as a software specialist, whose closest approach to RL farming was driving a small wheel loader around, pushing firewood into piles, who is growing weary of the "entitlement" spreading throughout this forum.

[USMarshal12]

Just so I understand your point. You are saying it’s the adults that play FS that are the ones that want realistic gameplay and GIANTS should cater to them?

Yes of course. There are alot more adults that play this game than kids and they are the ones paying their money on it for the kids most times anyway. Kids don't work at an early age anymore in the US, too busy eating tide pods It's time for Farming Simulator to deliver. Two years is plenty of time to change things and make them alot better.

[Nigelbilt]

The only data I could find is from 2013. According to Mark Schwegler from GIANTS said the farming simulator major demographic is young boys.

https://www.destructoid.com/farming-and ... 8886.phtml

Where did you get your data from?