Something that struck me when you were talking about how the game focuses on finding and building cool stuff. Have you considered having some super-rare items/events that only show up once in a while, but make the games really memorable? Not necessarily because they are stronger, but because they push you towards playing a very different, unique, special game. I can imagine that feeling of wonder when you come across an event you've never seen before, and you go and tell your friends about it.
@reynad27
3 жыл бұрын
For sure, there will be lots of these :)
@CynicalWarlock
3 жыл бұрын
That would be cool, yes.
@broomob
3 жыл бұрын
i’m happy that addressing pubic criticism doesn’t feel defensive. just feels like some people who really enjoy discussion, experimenting, and research.
@timhildebrandsalestrainer
3 жыл бұрын
YES! Dude I freaking love these updates. Wish they were weekly!
@ShinyHaunterSJ
3 жыл бұрын
100% agreed
@ecMonify
3 жыл бұрын
they used to be... but people complained that some episodes only were about the creation of artwork and music, so they stopped having them weekly :/
@Pittelite34
3 жыл бұрын
I think a lot of the enjoyment and "interaction" from autobattlers comes from getting an idea of the relative power scaling of the lobby as a whole and figuring out how reasonably greedy you can be. I feel like if you have no information about your upcoming opponent, the optimal strategy is to just try and do the best possible build every single time and either get lucky or not. It seems like it could be fun, but wouldn't lead itself well to competitive play or high replayability
@swissgamer2816
3 жыл бұрын
What if the computer-opponent is a mirror of your next opponent? (With adjucted possibly loss protection - or is that anyway not possible with the no time limit strategy)
@adamalami5731
3 жыл бұрын
I agree with this completely, why would I ever change my strategy up if I have no information about my opponent? I'd just do the exact same build every single game
@santiagovillarroel5023
3 жыл бұрын
One thing I want to add about EDH in Magic as someone that plays that regularly with my friend group. It's not so much that disruptive interaction is frowned upon, but 'heavily' disruptive interaction is what's frowned upon. Playing Armageddon or heavy control decks or combo decks that can win the game on turn 5 is usually not fun for the group since everyone else has to have their game plan denied or significantly slowed down by the one player that is using Armageddon or something like that. A lot of the interaction in EDH is based around politics. One person will have a removal spell in hand and another player will ask them not to use it against them, but instead use it against a different player and in return, they'll get a favor down the line or they won't remove their stuff for a few turns. There still is a lot of interaction in the game, but a lot of it comes from the social aspect of the game, as opposed to the hard coded rules
@JSiky
3 жыл бұрын
This is a video about interactivity but I think misses out on the most important thing that's been missing for awhile. There's no clear direction for us as the playerbase as to what will actually make your game cool in terms of strategic gameplay elements. Right now it's a beyond casual auto-battler and the hardest part of those games is that they CONSTANTLY update and change. They can't maintain the same units/items year after year or the playerbase just leaves. The only strategies we know of are being removed from the game (perma stun) and while that may not be a great strategic archetype to have in the game for obvious reasons, we don't have anything to look forward to. That's something I think we should hear more about.
@tom3fitzgerald
3 жыл бұрын
Interaction I think overall you're pairing removing fun with interaction too much, sure removing fun is a part of interaction but only a subset of what interaction can truly bring. IMO I think removing interaction just to avoid destructive interaction is throwing out the baby with the bath water. There's a ton of benefit of interaction, my major fear is you're going too far in the other direction. When the Bazaar game starts I'm just watching a replay essentially which is fairly boring. To your point Hearthstone Battlegrounds does the same however there is so much interaction between all the units, deathrattles, synergies, battlecries, units that change other units to higher levels, etc (the list goes on.) The point is as the match goes on, it's a bit of a crazy thing to watch. Sure it's like watching a replay however it unfolds drastically in the later games. Right now Bazaar is just 'pew pew pew pew'. Based on what I'm seeing currently the actual gameplay portion is a bit lackluster compared to say Battlegrounds. I'm not saying bring back interaction 100% but I think the dial should be turned higher than the last demo showed. Not even necessarily saying we need actual player controlled interaction during the gameplay but just more interaction between cards/systems than just watching timers resolve. Match making Obviously I haven't played it myself but my first reaction is negative. I like the feeling of a small game, or a small group. Each game being random just doesn't sit well. I'll never rematch or have a new chance to play again after I improve. I know you're considering a different game mode but that feels very awkward. The 'game' should be the game, other game modes are great but IMO the core game should be social. In say Battlegrounds, if I get beat the 2nd round there's a chance I'll see that person again in a later round and maybe I improved or got some new synergy, etc. There's a great feeling there if I beat them the second time. I again feel you're focusing on the negative of the current game modes, such as a turn timer, or having to wait to group with 8 folks. There's a ton of benefit there as it feels I'm around the table with a small group. I hope you don't go too far from that.
@skyrian2454
3 жыл бұрын
Agreed, I honestly feel if there is a happy medium somewhere between their highly innovative ideas and the practical wisdom of the gaming industry.
@freekingfreaking246
2 жыл бұрын
If you consider the "game" the battles and the shopping part just deck building, then the match making works imo and its very similar to Hearthstone Duels which is a great game mode currently. The issue really is in the first part of your comment. Bc everything is automatic and standardized, unlike battlegrounds, and theres no player input mid-game, unlike HS in general, then the fun elements of the game really on reside in the shop phases. Duels, being part of HS, has several problems, but one of the things its strenghs is that the deck tailoring part feels important for your strategy, but you still have agency over it in the battle phase. In bazaar it feels like youre building a board... for what? the climax isn't there at this point imo.
@redprotocol1
3 жыл бұрын
Really happy that you guys are directly addressing comments from the previous videos. Like you said in this one, separate games modes that allow more social interaction would be a great addition to the game. While the core game mode sounds like it would be fantastic, from what we have seen it seems to be more focused on creating a great build, than actually beating the other players. While creating a strong build and beating an opponent go hand in hand, having a game mode that makes beating the other players the priority would help a lot with making the game feel more competitive. That's why I was very encouraged by what you said towards the end of the video about adding a social game mode that is more focused around playing with your friends. While that sounds fantastic I also want to add that I hope that game mode will contain a que that allows you to play with others online as well. From whats been described so far an autobattler type game mode with multiple opponents from a predetermined set of people seems like it would fit really well into the game you are all creating, alongside the core game mode you have already discussed. Excited for The Bazaar and the next update!
@PlayTheBazaar
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the support and the comment! We truly believe the game is where it is today becasue of players like you and comments like this!
@nick-qb5wu
3 жыл бұрын
i feel like interactive gameplay being 0 sum fun is a false assumption. competition thrives when you achieve the exhilaration of a close back and forth match and both players can enjoy that even if there is only one winner.
@JackkReaction
3 жыл бұрын
I think that an extremely competitive match of any card game can be fun; figuring out how your opponent's deck works and engineering how to beat it on the fly has its own reward. Does that mean that you're going to lose horribly sometimes? Absolutely! But shut out matchups have to exist to develop a metagame. If nothing emerges as high-tier, the game is either meticulously balanced (which exists as an example of the back and forth matchup you described) or it's just boring. There's something vindicating about beating a tier 0 deck with straight up janky anti-meta strats. So what if the tier 0 player has a bad time? They've been doing it to everyone else, they deserve to take the backseat every now and then.
@admrlty
3 жыл бұрын
When it comes to destructive interaction, I think what you're saying is true of the more competitive segment of a player population, but not of the general player population when you're targeting a wide audience. Most of the players will be casuals and casuals don't like their cool shit blowing up.
@HucaPuca
3 жыл бұрын
Yeah, I think the "bad" things they mention are really necessary in card games that just arent packed with that much action. Interaction and RNG being examples of things that are generally frowned upon but I dont think any card game or auto battler without it can succeed. Especially is this draft, deck building type game, I dont see how preventing all the "bad" interactions will not lead to an ultimately boring and repetitive game.
@sebastiansolidwork8804
3 жыл бұрын
Absolutely. I can have fun just playing. No matter if I loos or win. And I see the arguments about trolls invalid. Trolls are a problem when people can talk/chat to each other directly and the games is having no match making. So they can look for weaker opponents which they smash by their superior power. How can a troll annoy someone if he is playing only against people at the same skill level and has no direct text based interaction? On the same skill level a troll is demanded to keep up. Otherwise he will lose the match.
@darrenwilliams582
3 жыл бұрын
So I agree with this. Example: I recently built a fun deck in mtg that generates a ton of tokens and if someone board wipes I don't feel bad because I completed my own goal of creating all of those annoying tokens..
@xKumei
3 жыл бұрын
I think the biggest problem for me is that fights don't feel meaningful. It isn't clear how the outcome of a fight is impacting the game as a whole. This may also be why it feels more like a PvE game than PvP. There is 0 impact on your opponent and therefore 0 meaning.
@prussia9255
3 жыл бұрын
Sure but as they point out, the interactivity in battlegrounds or tft is also close to zero, and yet these are still fun games.
@bryanstasko
3 жыл бұрын
Anyone else completely lose interest after last video when they saw its an auto battler and not a deck building game? I feel like most people who follow the noodle wanted a better hearthstone. Not a worse auto battler.
@TinyZu
3 жыл бұрын
I firmly believe they were planning this lead dev hair gimmick since day 1.
@marcoldenburger8420
3 жыл бұрын
One major concern I still have is that without interactivity, people will just start min-maxing to the perfect sandcastle and find out the meta build super quickly. In auto-battlers you at least have a shared unit-pool to partly address this issue.
@ioris8363
3 жыл бұрын
With constant balance changes this should be addressed to a mild satisfaction.
@barnicskobalazs
3 жыл бұрын
I think, without interactivity, your performance is up to your knowledge (which as you said can be maxed via min-maxing and data), game balance and luck. It would mean the dev team would have more responsibility bring the strats to a similar power level without ruining the fun.
@gooblop
3 жыл бұрын
I'll be critical, just because gushing about the parts I like doesn't seem like it will help. The problem I have with having little to no interaction is that the game stops feeling like being multiplayer matters at all. Why does it matter that you have an opponent if you can't interact with them outside of mechanics that feel terrible to be used on you, like freeze/dazed locks? I feel like at that point the game might as well have no live opponent at all, and just score your sandcastle based on it's power potential vs a limitless HP "opponent". That way there's no forced exit before your sandcastle is complete if you lose 3 times. The Matchmaking system being round-by-round does sound like it has some absolutely fantastic benefits, but that also really hurts the feeling of "Multiplayer" as well. What's the player-side difference between randomly playing any person vs using the "Ghost" system like the last video did? I just don't see how you're going to feel like you're playing against real people if you never see anyone progressing or never get anything more than a snapshot glimpse of their build, I don't see the value of any of that being "live" instead of just having Ghosts that the game shuffles to serve up with 0 wait time. Does it matter at all if I'm playing against the real Reynad instead of a Ghost, outside of maybe sending messages/friend requests? If feels like you're forcing online and multiplayer on a game concept that could work 100% offline singleplayer. Don't get me wrong, that is a BRILLIANT Matchmaking system, I just don't see how it benefits a "deckbuilding" game that is meant to feel like PvP and not PvE. If there's always randomized one-off fights against people, what is the benefit of being multiplayer and requiring online instead of having a vast amount of "Ghosts" that get selected? It's not like Arena in Hearthstone where you're gaining benefit from a human piloting the deck, because the "fights" are fully automated with no player input. I don't see why I would care that I am playing against a real person instead of one of a vast amount of ghosts if I'm never seeing them again and the fight requires no input. The benefits of being offline-capable (Obviously playable offline, less data/power usage, less loading times) seem to outweigh the benefits of being online (bragging about cosmetics you have to others easily? Less dev time making day-1 Ghosts? Normally you want to be online to get a "real personal connection", but I don't see how that is achieved in the current one-off system at all if combat is fully automated).
@Yolen16
3 жыл бұрын
I agree with you, but maybe it's good for the game concept to work 100% offline singleplayer. it would prevent the game from dying by simply adding ghost records of real players, rather than programming some ai.
@gooblop
3 жыл бұрын
@@Yolen16 Oh I don't disagree, I'm essentially saying that if it COULD work offline, they might as well at least have a mode for that at least. I don't currently see any serious benefits to being online other than obviously having patches and updating Ghosts faster, but both of those are things that can be done with sometimes connecting to the server and not requiring always being connected. Especially with no timer on your choices, online-only sounds like a vestigial choice with very few benefits but significant downsides. Reynad gave the example of playing on the bus, but I couldn't do that with my phone without using my data, even "unlimited" data plans typically have a cap where they slow you down once you hit it. The time spent connecting to the server and matchmaking would be further reduced if the game could be played offline, it just seems logical from the gamer's perspective to have offline in a game with no real time online interaction.
@intotheunknown4466
3 жыл бұрын
Agreed, whats the difference between this and me just playing an offline AI game?
@davinci451
3 жыл бұрын
Reynad's hair is getting longer, and ben's hair is getting shorter. Conclusion: stop stealing Ben's hair, Reynad.
@wolfinis
3 жыл бұрын
EDH starts with everyone 'building their own sandcastle' until a threat is established, and often results in a showdown where that interaction becomes more relevant for closing the game. I'd like to see The Bazaar emulate that curve of targeted decision making as the game goes on, rather than do away with it entirely. Those interactions are what allow us the feeling of outplaying a person, rather than trying out the latest update of the latest Slay the Spire clone. The most obvious way I could think to do this would be to eventually put players into a tournament or traditional 8-way autobattler setting for the finale of their run, where the power spike can be properly defined and everyone's strategy is online already.
@griztorc
3 жыл бұрын
This sounds incredibly dumb. If you're playing against "the world", then you're not even playing against anyone. You're just making a build to try and get the highest number. It's solitaire but with less thinking.
@rupen42
3 жыл бұрын
Yeah, this is what I feel too. Playing against the whole world sounds like, ironically, a lonely experience.
@HucaPuca
3 жыл бұрын
So you build your own deck with no combined pool, play against literally anyone and with little interaction? I feel like "bad" interactions are necessary, you really seem to be creating a card equivalent of MC creative where you just build your "cool creation" until you lose, and I don't think that is sustainable. Apart from the matchmaking balance, with that little keeping people "in check", I feel like you will just always draft some optimal strategies and win, otherwise you lose.
@counterstrikejoe
3 жыл бұрын
i completely agree with this. it feels like they are going a little off track with the structure of this "auto-battler"
@Evento0
3 жыл бұрын
It sounds like you tried to remove the downsides to PvP and ended up with a PvE game. I feel like trying to keep the PvP aspects without any interactivity just hurts what, at this point, could be a fun PvE roguelike. You don't need direct PvP to have competition. You could have leaderboards/ranks. If you want to keep it a PvP game, I think you need to bring some form of interactivity back. Without it you're just making cool builds over and over without having to worry about anything other than the rng of the bazaar. I don't see how this would be entertaining in the long run. Just my opinion, I could be wrong. Maybe you already have ideas and solutions to keep the game replayable in the long run that you'll share in future updates, looking forward to it.
@swinkscalibur8506
3 жыл бұрын
I agree with the direction on interactivity, my main concern is that if you are playing a real person, I would like there to be some way that it FEELS like you are playing a real person. I mean I honestly think playing a ghost of a real players build each time would be fun enough. The point is, there should be a reason you put the energy into programming a real time matchmaking system besides just to SAY you are playing someone in real time. Again my idea was simply to have a quick preview of your opponent's items and small sideboard with a quick "adjustment" phase to optimize your build vs your opponents build. Of course they would have the same. This would create a potential for a small waiting period, however it would only happen as you entered a battle, so you would maintain the majority of the play at your own pace aspect of the game. For the record, I don't know that this suggestion is necessary, part of me thinks the infinite lobby mode should simply embrace the "player ghost" concept completely. In fact, you might even be able to create an algorithm that would allow you to create a "difficulty" setting for this mode. It could also allow players to create builds that do achieve "Exodia" conditions in the end game, while allowing the game to curate those builds out of the enemy pool.
@DieLollers
3 жыл бұрын
reynoodles hair is getting so fabulous
@DaKindnes
3 жыл бұрын
In the last video the progression between each PvP felt to much on rails, not like an epic hero journey. Instead of it progressing from 3 merchants to 1 monster to 3 merchants to upgrading. It should have a grid system like in Slay the spire, where you choose between different paths. If you feel strong, choose to go out into the woods and fight an elite monster for high risk loot; if you need a weapon, go to the back alley where those types of merchants are likely to be; need buffs, go to the farmers marked etc. Throw in some different backgrounds for each type of Area, so we feel like we are progressing trough each day with flavor and immersion. As the player gets more experienced, the player will learn where to go to find items that might fit his strategy.
@ralphmont8888
3 жыл бұрын
I really like the idea of being able to have a plan and go for it, but it also feels good to see a plan that my opponent is doing and trying to adjust my plan to counter theirs. I know you don't want timing to be an issue but competitive 1 vs 1 is something that's really fun to me personally. Since this is going the auto battler route instead of the deck builder route like it originally was I think the new match making will work fine, but i can't help but feel some fun maybe lacking because of it.
@SpiritVice
3 жыл бұрын
Huge respect for directly addressing the comments from the previous video and having conviction in what you guys think is best for the game. I agree that a lot of card games tend towards the 0 sum environment as you described, and it seems to be the source of a lot of frustrating mechanics in games like hearthstone for example. I don't know if it will be impossible to eliminate that completely, but I am looking forward to seeing your take on it, and trying out the game myself.
@marvinko6610
3 жыл бұрын
I get what you're doing. Everyone who played against a mono blue player gets what you're doing. I'll have to see if this will be for me, because I like a good 1v1 better than autobattlers in general. But I'm still looking forward to the final version
@BlueRaptorTV
3 жыл бұрын
I LOVE that the matchmaking is a completely new space. That said, the satisfaction of outwitting the opponent across from you won't be present, so there needs to be a HUGE payoff for beating a player across from you (and maybe a small penalty for losing) that round in order to make the game satisfying in a competitive sense.
@HighLanderPonyYT
3 жыл бұрын
"A lot of the more popular games are auto battlers now." Please make a great game first and a popular game only second. :P
@FroztDrake
3 жыл бұрын
moneymoneymoneymoneymoney
@HighLanderPonyYT
3 жыл бұрын
@@FroztDrake water is wet
@mrzoranac
3 жыл бұрын
I agree with many other comments I've seen that having more interaction the longer the game goes will, I believe, be more enjoyable and help stop there from being one or two "meta" decks that everyone builds for. The problem with no interactivity is that the game can be "solved" and people will quickly find the most powerful build to go for. This isn't something you can counter with rng either as then, occasionally, people will still get the most powerful build and there will be no counterplay. I think your intentions are right, wanting to let everyone build out and play fun and interesting decks. But I think you need more interactivity, event if it is only on your own board. Something like how you can position units on your board in auto battlers. Perhaps something like equipment slots or something more, merchant-esque, that alters how an item functions. I think you have a really cool theme that should be leaned into more for the actual battles (where the theme currently doesn't seem to really matter). Hopefully this spitballing help you with your ideas!
@thethingyouarewatching
3 жыл бұрын
That is it, and on top of that, the "sand castle" that you are building is fairly lackluster, it is not really a deck, right? Is a collection of unrelated random items (guns, umbrellas, houses, yoyos(?), fountains etc), that somehow are damaging your opponent? And what is going on in the first place? They are in a fight in the middle of the bazar? One character is hitting the other with the items, and switching between his weapons? How does that work? Or the items are animated like in Disney's Beauty and the Beast and they are hitting the other player directly? Either way seems odd and dont feel that you are actually building something cool and unique. Dont know if there is room for them to make a drastical change in the game any longer, but I feel they need to...
@partimentieveryday
3 жыл бұрын
In hearthstone when i play fireball, I feel like a mage, I feel cool. I'll like the game if I get a sense of the "feelings" of the cards, which is harder to do if the items play themselves. It's also easier to get a feel for the items if they are all thematically related (synergy between a snow globe and a sniper rifle is hard to understand). I know these are all examples from early builds and it doesn't reflect the final product. I can't wait to play this game!!
@Lesterberne
3 жыл бұрын
BG and TFT matchmaking are not completely random. For BG, you know what kind of stuff your opponent might have and that would help you make strategic decisions for your battle with them. For TFT, you can kind of do the same with less accuracy. It might not make a lot of difference for what your strategy might end up being, but it gives some illusion of control to the player
@masterpotato2162
3 жыл бұрын
Ah so it’s like arena matchmaking in hearthstone.
@rtfcr
3 жыл бұрын
A little bit yeah, although the match doesn't require you to wait on someone permanently roping you. It just happens in about 2 minutes...
@KingMamba24K
3 жыл бұрын
I think it’s interesting that people criticize this game for lack of interaction, yet Tickatus is public enemy number 1 for casual hearthstone players. I’m digging the direction the Bazaar is going in.
@marekkollmann898
3 жыл бұрын
Im so stocked about this game, I work most of the day and having flexible playtime is soooo unique and welcomed. Love it
@ShinyHaunterSJ
3 жыл бұрын
big agree! the matchmaking system you guys have now is awesome and adding other game modes as well makes it so that the game has something to offer for everybody!
@qwurty200
3 жыл бұрын
From a design standpoint, your arguements are really solid and honest. I’m glad you’re not married to traditional pvp deckbuilding tropes, and are genuinely trying to make an innovative entry to the genre.
@elGnou76
3 жыл бұрын
As usual a nice video. I clearly see your point. Your game mode is like arenas in Hearthstone or even more like Runeterra expeditions. You try to build the best deck you can and then match random people each fight. The main difference is that the core of those games is full of interactivity. In auto battler you also feel nice to reaching top 4. And when you don’t you also have hability to get feedback on what was good in other players builds. I am very curious about your game design and I think that I m afraid of playing « solo » and just trying to do my best around the randomness of the draws. The best part for me in card games is the deck building phase and I think you get the point on that. I am just curious on how the game will maintain interest and replay ability. Good luck anyway !
@counterstrikejoe
3 жыл бұрын
the version of the game that you currently have should be like the main gamemode, the real "the bazaar", with a competitive mode alongside it that is more 1v1 focused? maybe a condensed but rotating item pool and smaller game size, and easier to climb back into a match and recover. i definitely think that the way this game stands, im excited for it casually, but it doesn't really rile up the competitive spirit,,, you guys are really heading in the right direction with the game and i'm super glad that you're open to critisism and fan thoughts!!!! cant wait to see more content
@FroztDrake
3 жыл бұрын
this is for 200% for casual nubs. if you are any kind of competitive player i dont think it will satisfy 95% of the people. Unless they are cardplayers and they enjoy this kind of stuff.
@HighLanderPonyYT
3 жыл бұрын
I love the concepts, the effort, the enthusiasm, your drive. However, I whenever I see the actual results you showcase I feel worried that the game is going to be stuck in eternal development limbo. Often when you showed gameplay it still had incredibly broken things in it and the only hope was "it's going to get better later". Then it happened over and over. It's been about 2 years since you started this, if not more, and we still haven't seen anything set in stone. I feel like you should be in the iteration and polishing phase already but you've yet to lock things in and get started on that. So yeah, just food for thought. Good luck!
@generalnumnumnumnumfe6910
3 жыл бұрын
I’m so excited about this game, the amount of thought in game design and uniqueness that you are bringing to this game is incredible. The one thing I currently feel like the game is missing is a reason to want to win. Just like Hearthstone has an Ranking system and has rewards for playing that makes your deck stronger, this game currently feels that it is lacking that incentive to want to play the game repeatedly. If there is a gold system, what could we expect from it. Could you buy different heroes or new items in the game or new cosmetics. Just an idea I was thinking about, love the game design process, thank you so much for putting so much thought into this game.
@L1GHTWalker7
3 жыл бұрын
I win, I get +5 fun. I lose in a good game, I get +4 fun. Losing doesn't make it a 0 sum system. If one is so competitive that they only have fun when they win, then they are looking for a specific system, but I doubt they are the majority of gamers. If someone breaks my combo, then I get to go back to the drawing board. The fun is having counterplay to the sandcastle kicker. Maybe I put a bear trap down. Like, is the plan to give everyone a trophy for playing a match?
@santiagovillarroel5023
3 жыл бұрын
I get why you're trying to avoid a lot of zero-sum elements in the game since it creates an unappealing game at times. Games like Magic struggle with this aspect sometimes since certain strategies will be built around just denying the opponent their strategy while you slowly build up your own strategy and whittle away at your opponent's life. Even Legends of Runeterra struggled with it until recently with Fiora decks running 3 copies of Fiora as the only unit and then the rest of the deck was just spells to draw and protect Fiora. Stuff like that makes it feel as if you can't do anything. You try and stop their gameplan by removing a key card, but they just deny your cards 1-for-1 until they eventually win. I think what makes strategies like this even more disheartening to play against is the fact that it feels like you're trapped in the game. Sure, you can concede, but if you feel like you have a chance of winning, you'll stick it out and play the game out but never really enjoy any of the time spent playing. League of Legends and other mobas also suffer from this issue. I think a way to combat this is to find ways to make the game faster, or make it so that zero-sum elements of the game don't 'trap' the opponent into playing the game. Allowing the opponent to freeze a card temporarily is a good example of this. The opponent still has the card and it still is usable in the game, but it's just slower. Yes, not having the card function at 100% efficiency is a little bit of a feelsbad, but I think a lot of people are willing to put up with it, especially if they're running disruptive effects in their own hand/table/whatever the Bazaar calls the 'in-play' zone. Just my thoughts. Still looking forward to hearing more development updates.
@LukeJones-bo2pu
3 жыл бұрын
How many devs address criticism that quick. I just started seriously following the development. That video should be an inspiration to all major developer/companies. Rolled with the punches and came with a decent compromise. I'm all in on this game!!! Appreciate the hussle Boys 😀
@LukeJones-bo2pu
3 жыл бұрын
I'd still like a little more ability to counter. Maybe one trinket you can buy for the hero. Have a special seller that just sells hero trinkets. I'd still limit it to one.
@LukeJones-bo2pu
3 жыл бұрын
You could limit it to stuff like: invulnerable this turn 2 charges. Resurrect with 50 health. Freeze first weapon. Stop shield or extra health card. Minimize sloe/frost
@Nightknight1992
3 жыл бұрын
wording it like you did (core gamemode) makes it sound like the only relevant mode for ranking is your solitaire gamemode. however, getting into a timer based 8 player lobby like other autobattlers where you have to react to what people play and to which people drop out sounds like it would be way more competitive. i think youd need 2 ranking systems, one for your quick games where you queue against anybody in the world and 1 for closed lobbys duking it out until 1 player leaves victorious.
@ZiharkSan
3 жыл бұрын
Might be a random suggestion in regards to facing friends why nor have a way to save a run build sorta like a deck and players just have their favorite runs face off or something like that
@Serphentin
3 жыл бұрын
Like saving completed 'decks' and being able to play against a friend's own saved deck? That'd be cool!
@ZiharkSan
3 жыл бұрын
Yeah thats what i meant players can save a completed run and test their run decks against friends
@davados1
3 жыл бұрын
The unpredictable is what holds people to games longer if almost no interaction between people it will become stale fast.
@nedthedog4574
3 жыл бұрын
The thing is in team fight tactics you can actually see what your opponents have in terms of units and react/build according to that whereas in this game mode you will go blind all the time, my question is how will e-sports work with this format ?
@petergardner729
3 жыл бұрын
Along with the time-based game, a game mode could be time-based too. Both payers start with a lot of health. The whole game is only one of the traditional rounds just longer because of the greater health. Imagine a conveyor belt in the middle of the screen that both players have access to and has different items on it. At the start, there are small items, but as the game goes on, bigger items appear. This way there is no waiting playing your friend. It is a real-time game.
@petersanders9455
3 жыл бұрын
Answering to feedback is always appreciated, so this was cool. However. My main issues lay elsewhere. At the end of the day the main game mode will have no interactivity whatsoever. I'm not against this per se - I hate the counterspell system in MTG and in LoR. But there is no reason for the main game mode in this iteration to be PvP if players don't interact with each other's builds in any way or even react to them. At this point it sounds more like a PvE game with a Multiplayer Mode on the side, but instead of facing builds picked by a dev you face builds picked by a random person on the planet. Which changes literally nothing about the core gameplay, since it will be solely a Single Player experience.
@LoserEater303
3 жыл бұрын
This was an excellent explanation for your reasoning behind the matchmaking. I understand that we only have two classes so far, and that these are early days. But as it stands I imagine the core of most builds will be either "hit as many times as possible", "hit as hard as possible" or a strong defense. My biggest concern now is if there will be enough variation. My final point is that I don't like how you find the same items early- and late-game. I 100% agree that the HS Battlegrounds tavern tier system hampers diversity, but it's also really fun to level up and find new powerful options. And if you find mostly the same item names throughout the run it feels less like a journey. Perhaps there is a middle ground where some items are level locked and some are not. Either way I think the card pool has to be big, especially since you visit several shops each round.
@BomberTVx
3 жыл бұрын
I am still wondering about that incremental levels stuff. While it is meant for reducing the "math" on the game, I think it will end up being the opposite, for example, while it is clear that x LVL 10 is better than x LVL 1, it would take a lot of math to actually calculate if it is better to switch a strat from x LVL 5 and y LVL 10, as y may have better stats, but x may have better synergies. Given the fact that there linear and then exponential growth in levels, it would be insanely hard to calculate and even to guess. In the end it will either lead to the game having so much math that it is not worth it to calculate anything, leading to a casual game with big numbers, or a game with an insane amount of math if you want to play it competitively. Personally I wouldn't enjoy a casual game, but a competitive game with such an amount of math seems stressful. You may want to look into that more. Also, every weapon should display the dps at least, so that they can be compared more easily
@craybarmanhorn
3 жыл бұрын
I'd like to see card sets. Cards that work individually but once paired together, take on a new effect. Like a knife and a knife sharpener. Or the tea set and tea leaves/an individual teacup. Potentially even combining to take up less space. Like, you get two teacups and it becomes the tea set. You get the idea.
@Krunschy
3 жыл бұрын
While I definitely see how destructive interaction isn't the most fun interaction, I still think it's incredibly valueable for card design and depth of play. The design space part of this should be obvious: If cards can be removed, you can make cards way stronger as long as they're as more vulnerable to removal. On the extreme end this allows for excitingly overstatted cards, that die to anything and amazingly robust cards, that are terribly inefficient. The depth of play of play comes from all the decision you make just because of the potential for your stuff to die. Like in Magic for example when you're not playing an additional creature to play around a board clear or when you cast your worse cards first when you expect them to counter your play. I see how these playpatterns of pacing yourself aren't fun to everyone, but they certainly are to me.
@xbahamut8953
3 жыл бұрын
Not sure Im sold on the main game mode, but Im not gonna judge it before I tried it. One thing that really came to my mind was, that this game could benefit greatly from a last man standing type tournament mode, similar to how poker tournaments work.
@trauthor9281
3 жыл бұрын
I agree with another poster, the opportunity for counterplay is what matters to me, as far as interactivity is concerned. If I have no way to interact with my opponent, I can only attempt to game the system, which IMO feels less competitive. Also, for me fun is not a zero-sum calculation based on counterplay, rather it is the other way around - without counterplay, the experience feels zero-sum. I like decision-making elements of the gameplay I have seen, such as shop interactions to set up the most linear strategy, it just seems like the opportunity for counterplay is the one layer of complexity is missing.
@jackpagn8424
3 жыл бұрын
Reynad at the Bazaar launch: Cousin Itt haircut.
@theteatable4118
3 жыл бұрын
I know this adds inefficiency, but even having to do some actions during battles might make it more fun. Having to click the weapons to attack might add enough interaction to be good. In addition, it subtly nerfs cd builds since it limits actions to human speed.
@MrNagano00
3 жыл бұрын
Maybe looking at ways of positive interaction could be cool. If you're facing someone and you won against them but you thought the battle was good or interesting you might do something to help them out in their future matches. In the end, it wouldn't really affect you a lot because it's unlikely you'll see the other player as the matchmaking is global but to them it would feel much better because even though they lost they were acknowledged in some way by the opponent so there's a true sense of accomplishment there.
@digbymooney5435
3 жыл бұрын
Something I love about StS that I think could be included is that, while you have immediate challenges in front of you (hallway fights/today's opponent) there's also more devastating fights looming in the future (elites/bosses) that you need to prepare for. Would be cool to have something like Elite fights or Boss battles at a certain number of wins (3 is an important milestone and so is 9). So in addition to having to build for each generic opponent you would have to keep in mind that you've got a boss battle lined up later. You might need to make concessions to your immediate strategy to give yourself a better chance against the boss later. Just thoughts, thanks for the update!
@devonriley3799
3 жыл бұрын
"...so you pretty much always get to do what you came to do, even if it's not good enough alot of the time." This was something Ben said that struck me the most and seems key to some of the negative opinions. Sure, it's great to be able to do what I want to do. I love when that happens in card games. But is it worth getting to do what I wanted to do even if it just ends up being bad? At that point it feels like a heavily luck based game in terms of how well your strategy plays out. I'm still super excited for what's to come and just wanted to give that outlook :)
@giovanisoares4981
3 жыл бұрын
I really love those updates and the way the game is evolving. Keep it up guys! My only question is how this main game mode relates with e-sports. I mean, how a competetive scene would work? Is this your intention?
@admrlty
3 жыл бұрын
I get why they're avoiding destructive interaction, but I worry the wide open match-making system will eliminate a lot of potential non-destructive interaction as well. Sure, freezing or stunning an enemy is non-destructive 'interaction', but it's a very shallow interaction. It's your items interacting with their items, but it's not you interacting with your opponent, i.e., making decisions or adjusting your strategy in response to your opponent's actions.
@ericy1
3 жыл бұрын
LOL as he was talking about sitting and waiting for autobttles and HS BG, i was in a BG game. The thing about that tho, is sometimes I appreciate the waiting. It gives me a chance to go to the washroom mid gmae, get some water, or if I'm streaming interact with chat. It also makes for a much more casual experience, I can watch videos easeir without stressing about my turn, or if I'm in a conversation focus on what I'm saying more. But overall yeah for most games waiting is dog
@aruretheincomprehensible20
Жыл бұрын
One of the worst feelings in card games when you're playing, you're winning, and then your opponent triggers some type of combo and/or synergy that basically wins the game for them and there's nothing they could do about it. This was my biggest complaint about Legends of Runeterra: the interaction was really weak compared to the units you played, and as a result the optimal game plan of both players was to just play Solitaire and not interact with their opponent at all. Keep in mind that this wasn't simply big, game-winning combos, but instead just a matter of "I played a 3-mana elusive unit, buffed it out of range of my opponent's kill spell, and then hit my opponent in the face because they don't have interaction for it. By contrast, I put hundreds of hours into Shadowverse and Eternal because those games had better interaction. Cards consistently and efficiently answered the threats they were supposed to and there were outs against all but the most exceptionally degenerate combo decks. Sure, they had their own problems, but the point is that interaction made these game a lot more fun. I think the biggest issue is that the ability to make decisions is really fun and the ability to interact with the opponent's cards produces more decisions from both players that makes the game a lot more fun in the long run. It feels good when you get to trigger a cool combo, but it feels bad to be on the receiving end of that cool combo, especially when it looked like you were winning for the first 8 turns of the game only to lose the game in the 9th turn from your opponent's game-winning combo when there was nothing you could do to stop it and no way to prepare for the combo itself. I strongly recommend that you reevaluate your stance on destructive interaction, because I believe it produces a better game in the long term.
@RubyPuntastic
3 жыл бұрын
I feel like the matchmaking against the world makes the interactivity meaningless, since you never get to experience how your opponents adjusted to the interaction. I think a great way to approach this would be to offer a separate game mode with a large lobby with a limited amount of players that would mirror the social mode, while retaining the timeless mode as a separate option. In my humble opinion seeing how your opponents evolve their builds is a fun way to discover new ways to play the game, especially for those who don't feel like spending hours watching videos on how to play different combos. On the zero sum fun: I don't really agree on it, I think counterplay is a healthy part of a competition that keeps you on your toes. The disruption of a play is a useful tool to keep cheese strategies from dominating every game and keep a variety of strategies viable. If you are fully aware of the possibility of disruption, you try to play around it and are trying to outsmart your opponents. It's important to be conscious of the possibilities, and cards like hearthstones coldlight oracle was a fun way to disrupt slow combo decks, but ultimately didn't fit the uninteractive design philosophy of the game, which is why they retired it, where magic kept its blue color as the counterplay specialty. I think a healthy approach for the bazaar is to limit the amount of counterplay to some characters, so you can't do it all but have to commit to it and give up personal power as a trade off.
@LinoWalker
3 жыл бұрын
Great update! I tried to support you on Republic, but they didn't accept my ID (which here in the EU we use instead of a passport), and I didn't want to go out and have a passport made in the middle of COVID. Still, I really hope the game does well - you've got something very special going!
@icoivo5529
3 жыл бұрын
I really hope the final game won't make me fight random players all the time. There should be some sort of encounter where you choose to fight a specific player with a specific purpose in mind and he/she should be able to do the same to you. Also defeating a build that you previously lost to is incredibly satisfying.
@dragosmihai1001
3 жыл бұрын
finnaly you listen to me!!! I want % percent of the company as you promised
@scotthannemann582
3 жыл бұрын
My biggest concern regarding using health as the only portion of interaction is this kinda just looks like a big ole math equation once you're in the battle. Most auto battlers have swingy and somewhat random combat, leading to swings of emotion while spectating. Here it just seems like it wouldn't be hard to know if you're winning or losing within a few seconds, yet I have to sit through it all
@Marceau.
3 жыл бұрын
period
@SikeiOK
3 жыл бұрын
I really like the matchmaking idea for the game, feels like a roguelike deckbuilding game and it seems that will fit perfectly to this type of game and i'm really hyped and looking foward to it, but as you guys said a lot of people like to play with friends or interacting with other people and i think that's good for the game too. I can see the main game being the matchmaking you guys talked about but would love having, for example, a 8 player lobby queue, where you can play with few friends and with other people, get rewards (gold, cards, maybe special profile icons or something unique that you can only get on this mode, which , little side note, i think its super important to give people SIGNIFICANT rewards, not just golden cards as HS does for hitting legend) and most importantly you can just have fun. I remember tryharding the ladder on hearthstone but when i got mad because a bad loss then i would jump into arena and just have fun with the game i liked instead of playing league or other games, it didn't matter if i lost with 2 or 3 wins because i enjoyed a different game mode. ~ Loving the updates! thank you for listening to the community aswell
@sinnerman20
3 жыл бұрын
I think you are wrong on the whole 0 sum analogy. The player losing is generally hoping to pull off that same interaction in a future game, and creates something like, lets call it "expected fun". So if you would put a number on it like you did it would be +5 for one side, and only -3 for the other side. For example in Hearthstone when you get completely destroyed by a certain type of combo deck, not fun, but you are already thinking about copying that deck and doing the same to someone else. That "revenge" element that comes with losing like that makes it imo not 0-sum. If you would play only 1 game ever, and that's it, then it would be 0 sum. But you always have the expectation of a new game.
@FroztDrake
3 жыл бұрын
Ehm no. I havent played hearthstone for like 5 years but back in the early days ( i never netdecked) so when i made a new deck and some decks beat the crap out of me and i had tons of enjoyment tweaking my deck to make it better and start winning vs those decks that i had lost to hard. Losing is not unfun unless you dont learn anything or cant take anything away from it. I will never play this game i can see that, I play TBC arena now and im losing a lot of games ofc, i can learn something from each loss and im having 9/10 fun during those times. now thats a fun game. This wouldnt even be called a game in my world since its so casual. Well a single caasual game id call it.
@swissgamer2816
3 жыл бұрын
Payment question: If i pre-order the game but my currency is not USD does that work? Second: Your game looks and feels really amazing! Please consider tuning down the brightness of the flames during combat.
@dontfearothers
3 жыл бұрын
Have you guys thought about allowing two people who match up with each other the option to see each other again? I think it would be a cool feature if you saw someone with an interesting build, and after you fight, you both click a button that allows you to match up again if you both finish your next turn in, say, 30 seconds. Inspired by last video, just commented here because it's the newest one.
@uS0ra
3 жыл бұрын
I really agree with too much interaction/destructive interaction being really unfun for a game, and also the waiting part, those were big reasons LOR became really unfun to play, and no one likes playing against a counterspell control deck in mtg, a big part of those interactions being unfun is also alot of hidden interactive cards from hand. Pokemontcg actually does pretty well with the interactivity being in a fun place i feel, what your opponent's pokemon can do is layed out on the board , and most of the interaction is bringing one of your benched pokemon to the active, so you can always expect that this interaction could come, and plan for it, theres also always cards that help the losing player to come back.
@Zeus.2459
3 жыл бұрын
WAIT WAIT HOLD ON If the game's all about constructive interaction and building a sandcastle, why not make the social gamemode like 2v2 or tag teams or cooperative? Then it's like building a sandcastle WITH YOUR FRIEND(S), you can help each other out if one player's not done, you don't have the waiting issue, and 2v2 gamemodes are popular, see league and starcraft brooooo I hope the devs see this
@WarioImpersonator
3 жыл бұрын
I don't have particularly specific argument to make but I personally am easily bored of games that are mostly you just building your 'cool contraption' and facing off vs someone else who is doing the same thing. I get the sense that because you're not in a limited matchmaking pool most of the game will revolve around a growing strategy, there won't be room for highly aggressive 'decks' its all a long con. I'm sure you already investigated it but Jagex's Chronicle was a good example of heavily reduced destructive interaction culminating in a fight at the end. Rambling aside I do have faith in the design team and if this ends up being the direction of the game I won't mind I'm sure people will love it, but its personally pushing me away quite heavily. Despite it all I'm glad Mr.Reynoodle is finally making a game.
@cameronreid5619
3 жыл бұрын
How on earth are they "deciding what our game should be" this many years into development?
@ShinyHaunterSJ
3 жыл бұрын
i mean, its a good thing that they are taking their time and making something they really believe in instead of just rushing it
@ecMonify
3 жыл бұрын
it does seem a bit strange that they basically scrapped the old game entirely and are now working on an auto-battler instead. they sold me completely on the old game and i was extremely excited about it, but this new one i have virtually no interest in whatsoever :/ imma keep watching these videos though, maybe one day they'll revert to the old game :P i do feel sorry for the people that backed the old game though. i'd be pissed if i had spent money on what was advertised as a a strategic deckbuilding game, and instead got this auto-battler-thing :P
@FroztDrake
3 жыл бұрын
@@ecMonify *Solitaire game
@PedroMiguel-zv3fj
3 жыл бұрын
The biggest "problem" I see so far is that most people (in the comments at least) seem to be more excited for a lobby system/pvp mode than for the main game mode. If that were true (which we can't know without actual data), then it would be good to reconsider what should be the "main" mode of the game. All to say that you guys should do some research and surveys around what people think of the game so far and what not
@Quiem88
3 жыл бұрын
This is the way!
@aR0ttenPICKLE
3 жыл бұрын
I disagree. They should be making the product/game that they want to make/play, not another version of an existing card game. People are just not used to change and should wait to try it themselves first.
@PedroMiguel-zv3fj
3 жыл бұрын
@@aR0ttenPICKLE I mean, you have a good point there, but maybe I worded my comment a bit poorly, just worried with a project that I like to follow. The most important part I wanted to suggest was surveys and research in player interest, which helps with developing the game for the correct audience (even if that audience isn't me), in the end they don't need to change something because people respond poorly to it or something, just makes them more mindful of the "landscape" right now and helps guide descisions
@AidenAndCrymsonRoses
3 жыл бұрын
Super interesting I'm very excited to play this.
@rtfcr
3 жыл бұрын
Creating Content about this hearthstone clone? pfft. never... I'm sure I'll get my actual thoughts out on yet another awesome update from you guys soon, thanks for doing these, the insight into the development of the game is sooo interesting ^^
@barnicskobalazs
3 жыл бұрын
I get what you're saying and I liked everything, however, does this not eliminate a lot of the decision-making since you don't have to react to your opponent's strategy? I think this depends heavily on the meta and will require either a good amount of skill or not much at all. Think back to HS arena before and after they started to limit to the sets you can draft from. Playing around things only make sense if the number of things is comprehendible.
@pantsmcgee4997
3 жыл бұрын
I was rather iffy on the matchmaking system when I first heard about it. Naturally I thought it would turn the game into what felt like more of a PvE experience however the more I hear about it the more I’m loving the idea. I thought about what I usually do when I play card games and autobattlers and I feel like I spend half of the time I play those games on my phone. It’s become a requirement for me to play those games with my phone so I don’t have to wait and be bored. Compared to how I play Slay the Spire, constantly clicking and engaging no substitute for fun needed it seems rather dull. The matchmaking system still gives the feeling of a PvE game but I think if you can pull it off just right I could see it being the best of both.
@jwrs6292
3 жыл бұрын
Reynad's going for the Superkai64 look
@frasafrase
3 жыл бұрын
When I play a game of Hearthstone against a random opponent there is no social interaction either. Just because I'm stuck with one person for a longer period doesn't mean its better interactivity. Especially in Hearthstone nowadays, sometimes you are just there as fodder waiting for the other player to complete their strategy hoping your strategy beats them first (i.e. the same thing happing in this Bazaar iteration). And Ben hit the nail on the head about autobattlers too; I'm often just doing my own thing until there are 2-3 players remaining.
@jamesricherson7233
3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for address our complaints. For me socal assmpects for card games/autobattlers is nothing special and not something I care about. That being said I think destructive interaction is supper important for a game, it allows for balneving. When I play against someone in tft or battlegrounds it just feels bad if they got lucky and got better stuff and I have nothing to do about it. I feel like I just roll over and let them do their thing, and fell like I have no say in the game on the other hand magic is filled with destructive interaction and it is not fun to play against a blue deck. But I think hearthstone did interaction amazingly, it's not to the point of magic but u can still find ways to play around your opponent and to show skill and knowledge. Also I think our model of destructive interaction is quite flawed, I think the player who wins the interaction gets alot more out of it and the loosing player can have a negative mind set and see it as u said or they can look to see how to play better and avoid getting punished like that again. Finally y'all seem very focused of fixing a "time problem" in card/autobattlers, I don't think time is much of a problem. Compared to another compensative game genre autobattlers and cards games both have an extremely low time per game and only on extremely rare occasions do I get mad at people for how long they take in games (when a player ropes after playing everything and ending right before the rope ends)
@Kool212
3 жыл бұрын
Your zero sum argument really is what I dislike about modern game design especially in strategy games. There is way too much focus on every action being “fun” and not on the overall flow of the game. It’s like the participation trophy of video games. When you say getting my spell countered is -5 fun, what then is fun by winning through that, or baiting that spell out to play something better after? I’d argue it beats the -5 fun by magnitudes.
@michaelmacleod2665
3 жыл бұрын
Followed this game for a while. Im totally ready for something different. It just needs to be competitive and have a good ladder system. Can't stress that enough. I need to keep coming back to improve my global position. I'm sure you'll take care of the rest! :-)
@BomberTVx
3 жыл бұрын
Any updates on when we can expect a beta?
@TraxisOnTheLines
3 жыл бұрын
When it comes to interaction, I just want to know I'm fighting the character I'm fighting. In Commander (EDH), I would play my deck differently vs someone using a lot of tokens than I would vs someone using a lot of artifacts. It's still my deck, my style, my plan, but I have to tweak it based on my opponent. I want to know that Vanessa and Pyg are two separate characters. It doesn't need to be destructive, it doesn't need to ruin fun, but it needs to feel like my opponents exist and chose the character they chose.
@Serphentin
3 жыл бұрын
I had my concerns but I think if there's alternative modes, that's fine. I wouldn't mind having a matchmade version of the 1v1 or small pool mode, either. Sure, it'd be a fairly extended match, but it'd still be pretty interesting to play that 1v1, counter-based style even without a friend on hand.
@ZarrocLP
3 жыл бұрын
This video has me concerned that you guys are going for a put fires out as they come approach. When really your focus should be to make the best out of the game as you can. You guys want this global matchmaking approach, then go for it no apologies add mechanics that only work with a global matchmaking. For example if you have so many possible opponents why not make people choose who to face or reveal the opponent at the start of the round. Change store items based on the upcoming opponent or let a group of players have limited stores. These could be trade based stores where players could leave a powerful item behind for a different player and if the it gets pick up and gets a win it could reward the donor. You guys get a great gimmick - now stop being an all-people pleaser and make an amazing game
@pavelicii
3 жыл бұрын
So you basically end up doing another/better Battlegrounds with Expedition/Draft/Arena matchmaking system. Not sure how I feel about that.
@justinjoy1471
3 жыл бұрын
In fighting games there will be a winner and a loser, even in situations where you're getting combo'ed you're just watching yourself get destroyed. I think losing and getting destroyed has its merits, obviously losing and going overboard isn't fun.
@GianfriShow
3 жыл бұрын
Pog new video
@ffjustin
3 жыл бұрын
I understand and agree with your points on interactivity. Interactivity as we know it is disruptive, and disruption usually means one person is going to have a bad time. I just hope you find a way to avoid the situation where both players already know who will win a fight before combat begins, simply because one build always beats the other. Solve the rock paper scissor problem if you can.
@ChristopherLMunoz
3 жыл бұрын
But that's the fun part of a combo deck, to see if it goes through. Like tetris, does that one piece disrupt everything and how to fix that part of the puzzle.
@AmssoBadorSpacelot
3 жыл бұрын
I'm wondering how this is unlike regular skill-based matchmaking found in many online games.
@garnix5427
3 жыл бұрын
I think your approach to fun in a game is a little black and white. i can have fun even though my opponent is crushing me or if the game is a nailbiter. Just because your gameplan doesn't work out, doesn't automatically make my happiness go -5. Maybe something to keep in mind.
@Jeckman814
3 жыл бұрын
This is Hearthstone, arena style, matchmaking. It sounds like this game will be an auto battling variant of Hearthstone dungeons game mode.
@steveboblefinagin
3 жыл бұрын
Go watch the earlier original update videos, and tell me you don’t get a feeling of wonder and excitement for what this game could be. With the way the game is now, and watching the recent gameplay video, I just don’t feel the magic.
@nahuelflash
3 жыл бұрын
Star Realms in this format might work. Build a deck, draw cards out of it against some random opponent see if it plays itself out.
Пікірлер: 200