|
I kind of get it. The better Path of Champions has become, the less I've spent on cosmetics.
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 18:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
Setting aside monetization, the community keeps going "well, Path of Champions is the focus of the game now, pvp's as good as dead". I never got that myself, since the devs have always been clear that Path only works as a single-player game because they're building off of a really solid multiplayer game, but I can't really blame people for panicking about how live service games treat them. Honestly, I half believe that they were always planning a post-Path 2.0 launch team size reduction, and they're just framing it this way publicly to make the community relax. (If that was the plan it's not really working, because all the Twitter comments suck. But I guess that's LoL-adjacent communities for you.) Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Jun 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 18:17
|
|
|
Outside of games, it's not uncommon for teams to add more people for a large goal and then shed some once it's more steady state.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 18:32
|
|
|
This game isn't popular and isn't getting more popular but they keep doing expensive stuff like more and more elaborate cutscenes. People who have been through the end of service games can recognize a lot of the signs - lead designer leaving, changes in design philosophy, random hail marys like announcing PoC as your main focus, volatile changes in roadmaps, moving devs to other projects. So it's hard not to talk about it online... because where else are you going to talk about it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 18:33
|
|
|
What a weird pivot. They cut limited format because they said they were focusing more on singleplayer content and couldn't give it the attention it required. They seemed to make good on that sentiment by releasing a brand new POC mode that promised it was only the beginning of a much grander project. Now within 2 weeks of that release they immediately double back and say they are basically done with singleplayer content. It's hard for me to make heads or tails of this other than it seems like a bad sign for the future of the game overall, especially with them pulling devs off the project entirely. Edit: After taking a moment to think on this, this is definitely with No Wave says. They wrote a lot of flowery words to say they are removing half of the dev team from the game. Seems like it probably took the LOR team by surprise too, given that it doesn't match their recent messaging about expanding POC. Megasabin fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Jun 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 18:47
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:It's hard for me to make heads or tails of this other than it seems like a bad sign for the future of the game overall, especially with them pulling devs off the project entirely. there's no good way to spin it EDIT: make PoC a $10/year unlockable. Fate Accomplice fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Jun 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 19:04
|
|
|
I wish they just sold PoC as its own thing like Monster Train or Slay the Spire, I'd buy it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 19:07
|
|
|
It does sound like they released PoC and realized a week later after spending a lot of money and dev time on it that they forgot that it doesn't make them any money in the slightest since people only care about cosmetics if other people get to see them. It probably would of been successful as a 10$ addon with the PvP being free and drawing people in, then they could do 5-10$ for champ packs or expansions for PoC a few months down the line as they continued to develop it and fresh out the world ahead of their MMO.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 19:50
|
|
|
I know this viewpoint is very much against the grain of this thread, but singleplayer LoR content has always seemed fundamentally flawed to me. LoR is a game designed from the ground up to be about interaction between human players, everything about its card design and the flow of its systems is working toward this goal. LoR's singleplayer stuff replaces one player with an extremely rudimentary algorithm and attempts to balance that with overpowered one-sided powers. I've never really understood the attraction or why someone would choose to play that rather than a different card game that had actually been designed with pve as its main goal. I agree this sounds more like PR speak about resources being assigned away from the game, but focusing on the areas that the game is good at should only be a positive for its longer term health.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 19:50
|
|
|
hit button posted:I know this viewpoint is very much against the grain of this thread, but singleplayer LoR content has always seemed fundamentally flawed to me. LoR is a game designed from the ground up to be about interaction between human players, everything about its card design and the flow of its systems is working toward this goal. LoR's singleplayer stuff replaces one player with an extremely rudimentary algorithm and attempts to balance that with overpowered one-sided powers. I've never really understood the attraction or why someone would choose to play that rather than a different card game that had actually been designed with pve as its main goal. it's very fun
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 20:31
|
|
|
hit button posted:LoR is a game designed from the ground up to be about interaction between human players, everything about its card design and the flow of its systems is working toward this goal. PvP takes effectively forever to play.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 20:34
|
|
|
As well some people like stupid poo poo, overpowered decks on their end, non competitive game modes, not having to deal with a meta.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 20:53
|
|
|
hit button posted:I agree this sounds more like PR speak about resources being assigned away from the game, but focusing on the areas that the game is good at should only be a positive for its longer term health. It clearly isn't very good at being the PvP card game when the other big (and some small) PvP card games dominate it in terms of players and viewers, so doubling down on it doesn't seem like a move that'll help it's long term health. In any case, cutting a large portion of the devs working on the game is not a good sign for either PvP or PvE, no matter how they try to reframe it as "refocusing".
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 21:35
|
|
|
I understand where they're coming from with the focus on PVP, but I'd pay full price of game and maybe more if they'd release an AAA (heck, even AA) singleplayer game of Path of Champions, but structured more like Thronebreaker. Both Monster Train and Slay the Spire are great to fill similar niches, but there is something to be said about the presentation of Thronebreaker. As for LOR though - few pages ago somebody posted a Yeti deck and I just wanted to say that I'm finding it super fun. Thanks for sharing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 21:39
|
|
|
kaaj posted:As for LOR though - few pages ago somebody posted a Yeti deck and I just wanted to say that I'm finding it super fun. Thanks for sharing. Welcome, I think there are still ways to improve it but would mostly just be turning 3 of 3's into 2 of 3's or finding a champion to replace Sion with (he can sometimes be a fun finisher though if the game goes long), might consider Gnar. Giving this one a go with 2 assessors and 1 apothecary since if you ever draw both apothecary they become a bit too much. CQBQCBABCIBAIAYCAQBQCAIOGAZQMAIBAEPQCAYBAIAQIAIKAECQVIIBAICAGCAPAQAQGBBBGQ2QEAIBAMVACBQDDU Though I'm finding that a full board of 1 mana 5/5's replacing themselves with random normal 5+ attack units is going to be a bit lackluster compared to other win conditions these days like 20/19 overwhelm legion deserters on turn 8, or illaoi scaling to insane levels if you can't constantly remove tentacles fast enough, or even mono-shurima. Ra Ra Rasputin fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Jun 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 23:47
|
|
|
No Wave posted:This game isn't popular and isn't getting more popular but they keep doing expensive stuff like more and more elaborate cutscenes. People who have been through the end of service games can recognize a lot of the signs - lead designer leaving, changes in design philosophy, random hail marys like announcing PoC as your main focus, volatile changes in roadmaps, moving devs to other projects. So it's hard not to talk about it online... because where else are you going to talk about it. Yeah not a great sign. I'm assuming execs had some (unrealistic, because who was this even marketed to besides existing players?) expectations for Path 2.0 bringing in X number of new users and they didn't even come close. Hope they can give it a shot in the arm because I really like this card game!
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 05:19
|
|
|
I'm surprised the game isn't more popular, I feel like it should be eating hearthstone's lunch but maybe people have a sunk cost going on with their hearthstone or MTG collections and don't want to switch to yet another card game or don't like some aspects of it like champions or spell speeds or the meta during the time of the worst best decks like azirellia. Seems to be some weird internal politics going on if their last two major messages to the playerbase were "we're going to focus less heavily on PvP and more heavily on path of champions PvE" followed by "we're going to mostly abandon path of champions and focus on pvp" less then a week after their hyped path of champions update came out which had to kill expeditions to live. In the end though I remember hearing they never expected this game to make a ton of money to begin with and just wanted to try and make a none-predatory online card game while also onboarding people to the ~runeterra universe lore~ Ra Ra Rasputin fucked around with this message at 06:19 on Jun 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 06:16
|
|
|
Yeah, I was always a bit baffled that this game isn't doing well. I think it has the best implementation of digital-only mechanics in a card game and it has a better version of MTG's stack. I thought the stack thing would be a huge selling point, but my MTG friends did not like the attack/defend pattern of the game. But what I do know. I still think Duelyst was the greatest digital card game of all time by a large margin and that game probably did even worse than LOR. I still laugh that the devs of that game went from making that masterpiece to Godfall.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 06:20
|
|
|
Ra Ra Rasputin posted:In the end though I remember hearing they never expected this game to make a ton of money to begin with and just wanted to try and make a none-predatory online card game while also onboarding people to the ~runeterra universe lore~ I think that's an important point to consider when people say "well duh, Path doesn't get people to buy cosmetics" -- while they almost certainly have internal financial goals for LoR to make $X amount of money, it's possible they were mostly riding on new user metrics instead and they fell short. I would bet they got a really nice boost from the Netflix show coinciding with the original Path launch, thought they could repeat it with a big update, and it just didn't happen. I really like Path and I'll be sad if it doesn't continue being developed but they probably drew the conclusion that it was the show moreso than the update that gave them a boost.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 07:03
|
|
|
I imagine with the groundwork already laid it wouldn't be that hard to come up with new playable characters in poc or new routes, they would only need 10 minutes of their B team artists and writers and the hardest part would be brainstorming decks and powers and a few poc only cards.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 07:16
|
|
|
The actual stories of the routes have such generic fighting game-esque dialog that I would not be even slightly disappointed if they just cut it out entirely and focused on new decks instead. Edit: Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but only Jinx's deck has any unique cards, right? Everyone else uses standard cards with OP items pre-attached to make them more useful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 07:18
|
|
|
Clarste posted:The actual stories of the routes have such generic fighting game-esque dialog that I would not be even slightly disappointed if they just cut it out entirely and focused on new decks instead. Some of the enemy encounters I noticed had unique cards, they weren't anything crazy but they had artwork and were unique.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 08:17
|
|
|
I don’t know what I’d play if LoR went under because it’s economy is so good it ruined me .
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 14:52
|
|
|
I'm playing YGO Master Duel but I hate its economy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 15:23
|
|
|
yeah i heard yugioh was not wallet friendly at all
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 15:27
|
|
|
It's pretty helpful for getting your first, maybe second deck. But after that, depending on what you made/crafted in the beginning, it can get harder to build stuff. Maybe it would have been easier had I gone with meta stuff, but I started with Monarchs before moving into Fabled and Danger!/Dark World which meant I had to work on crafting Synchros, XyZs, AND Link Monsters, all from separate archetypes (which meant I couldn't just repeatedly buy one booster pack). A lot of the generosity is frontloaded. At least the paid Battle Pass literally pays for itself (it costs 800 crystals, and you get 800 crystals + a bunch of useful crafting resources for finishing it). Also yeah I spent $45 on the game and it got me very little in terms of what I wanted, so I'm not spending any more money on that game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 15:53
|
|
|
Yugioh did the lovely thing most gachas stopped doing of giving you an absurd amount of starting gems to mask the fact that once those dry out your daily income is nothing. They also prevent you from restarting on any platform lol. Pokémon had a new app go into beta a few months ago but it’s a trash fire that doesn’t look like it’s getting fixed any time soon. Digimon still physical only. Magic arena is still bad starting out unless you want to grind with awful decks or are really good at drafting [E] is eternal still good? DrManiac fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Jun 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 16:31
|
|
|
Is a successful card game with a non-predatory revenue model even possible? Eternal is hard to catch up if you fall behind but is reasonably generous if you play regularly. My problem with Eternal is that the devs are super non-communicative and every set’s mechanics are the lowest effort possible. They’re never pushing the envelope, it’s always “a new mechanic on our not-lands” or “interact with the Market in a new way!”
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 17:26
|
|
|
the duelyst re launch will enter beta any day now, i still have daithNo Wave posted:This game isn't popular and isn't getting more popular but they keep doing expensive stuff like more and more elaborate cutscenes. People who have been through the end of service games can recognize a lot of the signs - lead designer leaving, changes in design philosophy, random hail marys like announcing PoC as your main focus, volatile changes in roadmaps, moving devs to other projects. So it's hard not to talk about it online... because where else are you going to talk about it. yeah 100%, this is the death kneel for LoR. what a shame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 17:49
|
|
|
CitizenKeen posted:Is a successful card game with a non-predatory revenue model even possible? The FFG games are good if you get in early and play for the life of the game, very reasonable total cost comparable to like an mmo subscription Getting into them late is a nightmare though. you see people talking about how cheap the games are because you get exactly what you want and there's no gambling, then people will drop 800 dollars all at once on a game they've barely played for a complete collection due to FOMO.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 17:51
|
|
|
I was wondering more about a digital game. It seems like every digital card game either fizzles or gets predatory in its pricing. I’d love an LCG digital model. (Also, I think that late adopter pricing is why FFG pivoted to coop games. Both Marvel Champions and Arkham Horror - especially with Arkham’s new publishing model - are really cheap to join later.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 19:04
|
|
|
Eternal, back when I played it, felt incredibly generous in how many packs / gold it gave out. Like, not LoR levels of generous, obviously, but you could probably craft a handful of meta decks you wanted if you were smart. Heck, I loved playing Gauntlet. My problem was that I generally spent my crafting resources on making meme decks for Gauntlet, like my Knucklebones Crown deck, and that daily quests and the free daily pack require me to play/win PvP, which I hated. Wonder if the daily quests are still the same stupid poo poo they were back then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 19:22
|
|
|
Honestly I will say on the Path 2.0 drawing in new players, for me at least it made me less likely to recommend the game to people who hadn’t played it before. Path 1.0 was fairly good, low buy in, and importantly while it had a grind, didn’t have much of a way to screw you over aside from not dropping optimal relics. 2.0, even with the bundle I got for doing a good deal of 1.0, I’m unable to complete it entirely because the game has given me zero Runeterra champions, despite around a 75% chance of the bundle giving me one. The only guaranteed drop for any new players are Jinx and Yasuo, and Jinx is so good she’s boring, while Yasuo is jank you need to know how to get best use out of.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
What I'd expect changed in the next balance update:
Ra Ra Rasputin fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Jun 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 23:21
|
|
|
Ra Ra Rasputin posted:What I'd expect changed in the next balance update: Best I can do is: Darius +2 Power at Level 2 and a “we’re monitoring the meta”.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2022 23:36
|
|
|
hit button posted:I know this viewpoint is very much against the grain of this thread, but singleplayer LoR content has always seemed fundamentally flawed to me. LoR is a game designed from the ground up to be about interaction between human players, everything about its card design and the flow of its systems is working toward this goal. LoR's singleplayer stuff replaces one player with an extremely rudimentary algorithm and attempts to balance that with overpowered one-sided powers. I've never really understood the attraction or why someone would choose to play that rather than a different card game that had actually been designed with pve as its main goal. for what its worth i was only really onboard for the pvp. it was a lot of fun to make decks and have a ton of variety in being able to shift from deck to deck and having a bunch of fun win cons and having spent zero dollars on the game at all being able to craft a deck right away on patch day. that being said i think the inclusion of bandle city it felt like the power creep was a bit too much for me and turned me off, and that was even after Targon and Shurima being pretty bonkers poc and its prototypes like the pve thing against viktor always seemed pretty drat boring to me. if i wanted to play a deck building pve game that feels like slay the spire, ill play slay the spire and not the one hundred billion derivatives that spawned from its success, even if its using a world and characters i like sts is really good but goddamn has it poisoned games devs to include it everywhere
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 00:37
|
|
|
So I was able to grind to 18 with Illaoi and beat the 2.5 star map with her at 1* to unlock The Colossus. Beat it with 2 Heroes, promptly got a bunch of sthards for heroes I've already gotten to 3 stars. While my Runeterra heroes remain locked. And guess what the Colossus needs for the 3rd completion. I now have no way to progress.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 01:05
|
|
|
There is no more progress, the Colossus is the end. Possibly forever if they moved the devs away.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 01:06
|
|
|
ChrisBTY posted:So I was able to grind to 18 with Illaoi and beat the 2.5 star map with her at 1* to unlock The Colossus. The daily Path quests give out a trickle of shards. I got lucky enough that I got Bard with the very last dump of quest shards, but I couldn't get any stars on him. So now he's a 0-star level 15. Managed to clear out 2-star maps with him so far.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 01:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
DrManiac posted:Pokémon had a new app go into beta a few months ago but it’s a trash fire that doesn’t look like it’s getting fixed any time soon. Meanwhile the current version of Pokémon is a decent client to play on, but is an absolutely dogshit economy if you want to play for free. But since the entire economy is actually based on supporting the physical card game, if you're okay with spending money you actually don't need to spend very much to be in a decent spot for building decks. Especially if you prefer the kind of meme-y decks built around cards that aren't going to be in super high demand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2022 01:36
|
|
