EPTThe LiquidLegends Lounge - Page 291
| Forum Index > The Shopkeeper′s Inn |
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
| ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
| ||
|
Lord Tolkien
United States12084 Posts
On July 31 2015 22:49 Parnage wrote: Ah the DCAU always good to see them continue with quality. Man those trailers kinda meh. Diana's win just for being the one that didn't make me think they are only doing this as a "what if we had maximum edge" stories. Well, it's a rewrite of their origins, with a darker undertone. I'll be honest, I really liked the Superman trailer, and overall, while it's probably not the BEST DC animated original (Dark Knight Returns or The Red Hood are superior, maybe New Frontier or Wonder Woman), it's up there. + Show Spoiler + Batman is Kirk Langstrom, Superman is the son of Zod raised by Mexican migrants, and Wonder Woman is the New God Bekka | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On August 01 2015 01:45 Seuss wrote:+ Show Spoiler + http://www.liquidhearth.com/staff/monk/PowerRank/June2015_2/Kolento_Priest.png It's been a decent card since beta, it's just not more than decent. The point being that some complaints about randomness are really players venting frustration about overpowered cards that happen to have random elements, and it isn't necessarily even that the card is too strong (SEE: Piloted Shredder) but that the player has no control over the situation. It was more directed at Nefarian. I know Thoughtsteal is fine, I played Control Priest in some form for basically the entire time I was playing HS. It still creates those stupid situations some of the time, but it's also much more controllable due to the player knowing what's in his own deck and being able to adjust. On August 01 2015 01:45 Seuss wrote: On the other hand some people fundamentally don't enjoy RNG and I don't mean to diminish that complaint, it's legitimate. There's RNG, and there's RNG. RNG is acceptable up to the point where a player feels they did not have agency in their win/loss. Obviously RNG is intrinsic to the nature of the game, but much of the "good" RNG is still impacted heavily by how the player sets it up in the game state, thus still feeling like player agency is the dominant factor in a win. If this is NOT the case, it detracts from the fun of the game from both sides of the table. This is part of the difference between Thoughtsteal and Unstable Portal. Because the card pool for Thoughtsteal was crafted by the player it was used against, he still feels he has some agency in the situation, by virtue of how well he knows his own deck. | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
Anyway, outside of getting a place in my "RNG Mage" deck I don't see that new card being useful. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
While I applaud Blizzard for branching out into new genres they've never developed for before, both Hearthstone and HotS show some pretty rookie design mistakes that other developers in the genre learned the hard way years ago that Blizzard has to learn again due to being new. I'd very much expect the same from Overwatch, except even more so due to how prolific the competitive shooter genre is (resulting in many more stumbling blocks developers had to get over to get to the state of modern shooters). The game is probably going to be very rough around the edges for the first few years compared to something like TF2 or CSGO, and it's going to take a lot of work for Blizzard to catch up to decades of shooter development experience. The hubbub that got raised a while ago about Overwatch having locked FoV is already proving this to be true. | ||
|
nafta
Bulgaria18893 Posts
On August 01 2015 02:04 TheYango wrote: This kind of stuff is part of why I have very tempered optimism about Overwatch. While I applaud Blizzard for branching out into new genres they've never developed for before, both Hearthstone and HotS show some pretty rookie design mistakes that other developers in the genre learned the hard way years ago that Blizzard has to learn again due to being new. I'd very much expect the same from Overwatch, except even more so due to how prolific the competitive shooter genre is (resulting in many more stumbling blocks developers had to get over to get to the state of modern shooters). Considering hearthstone was never intended to be a competetive game why is rng like that bad?Most people I know who play it like it was intended to enjoy it quite a bit. | ||
|
Prog
United Kingdom1470 Posts
On August 01 2015 02:04 TheYango wrote: This kind of stuff is part of why I have very tempered optimism about Overwatch. While I applaud Blizzard for branching out into new genres they've never developed for before, both Hearthstone and HotS show some pretty rookie design mistakes that other developers in the genre learned the hard way years ago that Blizzard has to learn again due to being new. I'd very much expect the same from Overwatch, except even more so due to how prolific the competitive shooter genre is (resulting in many more stumbling blocks developers had to get over to get to the state of modern shooters). The game is probably going to be very rough around the edges for the first few years compared to something like TF2 or CSGO, and it's going to take a lot of work for Blizzard to catch up to decades of shooter development experience. The hubbub that got raised a while ago about Overwatch having locked FoV is already proving this to be true. Can you give examples of those "rookie design mistakes"? | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
That's a design concept that is totally unrelated to competitive play. WotC discovered years ago that even among very casual playtesting groups, people felt "bad" RNG cards were unfun to play with. And yet Hearthstone is filled with them. | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
edit - holy shit the title track is fire | ||
|
Prog
United Kingdom1470 Posts
On August 01 2015 02:09 TheYango wrote: The game doesn't have to be competitive for lack of player agency in a win/loss to feel unfun or unrewarding. That's a design concept that is totally unrelated to competitive play. WotC discovered years ago that even among very casual playtesting groups, people felt "bad" RNG cards were unfun to play with. And yet Hearthstone is filled with them. Every kind of gambling game involves some sort of lack of agency and those games are played pretty much forever. Randomness as a design element has a pretty good track-record I'd say. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On August 01 2015 02:16 Prog wrote: Every kind of gambling game involves some sort of lack of agency and those games are played pretty much forever. Randomness as a design element has a pretty good track-record I'd say. Randomness intrinsically involves lack of agency, yes. But the basis of good design for random elements is to design them in a way that hides the lack of agency from the player. Even in gambling, some of the more popular game variants are those which give the player more apparent agency than those that don't. And a lot of the successes of gambling comes from the deception of someone believing that they can "beat" the randomness through a system (which may or may not actually be true based on how well the game is designed). | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On August 01 2015 02:04 TheYango wrote: This kind of stuff is part of why I have very tempered optimism about Overwatch. While I applaud Blizzard for branching out into new genres they've never developed for before, both Hearthstone and HotS show some pretty rookie design mistakes that other developers in the genre learned the hard way years ago that Blizzard has to learn again due to being new. I'd very much expect the same from Overwatch, except even more so due to how prolific the competitive shooter genre is (resulting in many more stumbling blocks developers had to get over to get to the state of modern shooters). The game is probably going to be very rough around the edges for the first few years compared to something like TF2 or CSGO, and it's going to take a lot of work for Blizzard to catch up to decades of shooter development experience. The hubbub that got raised a while ago about Overwatch having locked FoV is already proving this to be true. To be fair Blizzard routinely repeats mistakes in WoW that they'd supposedly learned from years ago. When 6.2 launched there were objects which, surprise, could only be interacted with one person at a time that were critical to completing the questline to gain access to the new zone, and thus a traffic jam ensued. I'm less worried about Blizzard making mistakes as being unwilling to fix them after the fact. I don't want to encourage Blizzard to take a Riot-style hand in their games, but I think they're far too reluctant to take advantage of the digital nature of Hearthstone. I liked how they were handling things right after beta, but since GvG they've basically stopped doing balance patches at all. | ||
|
TheHumanSensation
Canada1210 Posts
On August 01 2015 01:49 jcarlsoniv wrote: Oh is there a hidden legendary pirate too???? oops + Show Spoiler + maybe On August 01 2015 01:51 Numy wrote: Cards from my opponents deck I can largely play around or adjust. Using a portal than not playing that card basically means there's a potential threat out there among even single card in the game that I can't account for and could win him the game. I get what you saying but the RNG and cost reduction make it feel like he's cheating. He has this "advantage" in that if the wind blows right he can win the game. The risk he gets is well hardly anything as there's a high chance of getting value AND it synergizes well with Flamewaker anyway. Man I hate that fucking card so much. Most of GvG I hate from a design POV. Yeah, I think I agree with monte that the -2cost is the biggest problem with the card and not the rng itself, since it creates that "5%-10% of the time win because of this card got crazy value" scenario that you wouldn't get without the cost reduction. If it was just a spell with some weak rng effect it'd probably still see decent use just because of mage spell synergy (see arcane missiles). I kind of like that the new mage card is mediocre though, so that hopefully mage won't get a big power boost with this set relative to the other classes (like it feels like it has historically). I really don't mind just not knowing what their card itself is, though. It creates a bit of mystery that you can't just solve by identifying the deck archetype, same with spare parts (in a much more limited capacity). Honestly I don't mind auto-losing 5-10% of the time that much, but my least favourite scenario is when they draw something weak that's 2 or less mana and they just play it right away. Talk about anti-climactic... On August 01 2015 02:20 TheYango wrote: Randomness intrinsically involves lack of agency, yes. But the basis of good design for random elements is to design them in a way that hides the lack of agency from the player. Even in gambling, some of the more popular game variants are those which give the player more apparent agency than those that don't. And a lot of the successes of gambling comes from the deception that someone can "beat" the randomness through a system (which may or may not actually be true based on how well the game is designed). Oh crap right my gambling addiction, maybe this is why I like playing against unstable portal... imo anything with over a 50% chance of success doesn't have the thrill of futility. In related news: shouldn't have pre-ordered. The 50 packs icon is tearing me apart. | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On August 01 2015 02:24 TheHumanSensation wrote: In related news: shouldn't have pre-ordered. The 50 packs icon is tearing me apart. right?! It's just taunting me =( | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IeMorkz.png) | ||
|
mordek
United States12705 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
TheHumanSensation
Canada1210 Posts
On August 01 2015 02:29 TheYango wrote: I think you guys are crazy for preordering, but that's just me. yes On August 01 2015 02:42 TheYango wrote: Demonfire specifies it can only buff *friendly* Demons, so this can be used with BGH to kill something! Demons that can now be BGH'd for 2 cards: Succubus, Dread Infernal, Floating Watcher (most of the time), regular Infernal (Jaraxxus HP), void terror (sometimes), Pit Lord. So, uh, I dunno about that one. | ||
| ||
