Post by DeathsAdvocate (Admin) on Feb 22, 2020 19:30:17 GMT
Imported Trello Card:
Some card progression, or all cards owned from the start?
in list Game design principles
Description
Edit
Progression Pros:
- Sense of reward.
- Possibly friendlier for new players.
Cons:
- Increased development complexity
- Increased ui complexity.
- Possibly frustrating for new players.
Activity
Show Details
Write a comment…
Chris Feb 5 at 8:02 PM (edited)
@qazzquimby As with most things, its the time required to code up. I believe that our time could be better spent coding up a new feature.
I mean, in terms of work I suspect it would be easier to implement Gauntlet than it would be to implement all the various details involved in card collections.
So, I say we go for the biggest impact thing we can with our time. If we prioritise work based on who wants what I suspect that collection features will always end up near the bottom.
Reply
Qazzquimby Feb 5 at 3:34 PM
@smash_the_hamster Because it's more fun, is the counterargument I believe, as listed in the description. I think the benefits exist, but I agree they're outweighed by development costs.
Reply
Chris Feb 5 at 9:18 AM
Adding all cards is easier to do from a coding perspective. By did rid of the very idea of collecting we then don't need to implement loot boxes, card rarity systems, databases full of user information about what cards they own, etc).
Imo, less coding is NOT a trivial benefit.
I also think owning cards is a major barrier to players adopting new card games.
And I feel that the real underlying motivation for having a collectable aspect is that its a money maker, as the "whales" spend hundreds collecting everything. And then you end up with debates like "is X game pay-to-win".
Well, if we are not doing it for money, we don't need all the collecting nonsense.
Why not just make a card game with no bullshit -- you just play, with whatever cards you like.
2
Reply
Atheistmantis Feb 4 at 4:14 PM
Progression>All from the start .
Reply
AtTheEdge Feb 3 at 4:52 PM
@qazzquimby Very valid point.
I wouldn't have thought that achievements are that hard to implement. Maybe there is an easier way that allows us to lock certain cards and unlock them when specific requirements are met?
Reply
Qazzquimby Feb 3 at 3:39 PM
If card progression is "really fast" or "extremely generous" to the point that most players own close to all cards, it makes me think that the brief introduction isn't worth the costs in development.
More specifically, I think in an ideal world some fast card progression would be fun, but I worry that those in favor of it aren't thinking about the costs in development time and code complexity.
2
Reply
Qazzquimby Feb 3 at 3:34 PM
@attheedge_77 Unfortunately achievements would be too much trouble to implement, but I like the idea.
Reply
AtTheEdge Feb 3 at 6:24 AM
In addition, opening packs/orbs/whatever is rewarding for the player and keeps them playing. Orbs should, however, be extremely generous if implemented. Also, I can imaging there being some kind of achievement-based card progression. If done right, this keeps the players engaged while supporting different playstyles (I‘m talking about something like: „Surround the enemy general completely with your units“ > Unlocks card xyz)
Reply
Pirtz Feb 2 at 8:02 PM
I think progression is important from a gameplay perspective, even if it's very fast.
Starting from a basic deck and trying to just improve it makes deck creation more gradual and easy to do, and you don't overwhelm the player with choices.
1
Reply
Qazzquimby Feb 1 at 5:20 PM
Many votes on the discord are for eliminating card progression, so I'm going to archive this.
Reply
acp_trello Feb 1 at 3:30 PM
Think all cards should be owned for the initial release but also a set of prebuilt decks should be added to a convenient UI.
Reply
DeathsAdvocate Feb 1 at 3:22 PM (edited)
I liked Faerias model of giving a FULL collection over a couple weeks to months. Lets people do what they want real quick, but without overwhelming you either.
Even if we are not in this for profit (Although for profit would be nice, but again while it may be a goal it should not be a priority.) we are still going to end up with costs so monetization still needs to be considered. While
adds/kickstarter/cosmetics(can be expensive for us on their own), go a long way, card acquisition is where a lot of the money is.
I liked duelysts model of not putting power into rarity, rather complexity.
Also starting out I am in favor of full collections. Just later on when we are moving to servers and what not is the time to add progression in.
TLDR: I am in favor of EXTREMELY generous card ownership, as well as continuing the model of rarity does not equal power. Because revenue is important but not a priority.
Some card progression, or all cards owned from the start?
in list Game design principles
Description
Edit
Progression Pros:
- Sense of reward.
- Possibly friendlier for new players.
Cons:
- Increased development complexity
- Increased ui complexity.
- Possibly frustrating for new players.
Activity
Show Details
Write a comment…
Chris Feb 5 at 8:02 PM (edited)
@qazzquimby As with most things, its the time required to code up. I believe that our time could be better spent coding up a new feature.
I mean, in terms of work I suspect it would be easier to implement Gauntlet than it would be to implement all the various details involved in card collections.
So, I say we go for the biggest impact thing we can with our time. If we prioritise work based on who wants what I suspect that collection features will always end up near the bottom.
Reply
Qazzquimby Feb 5 at 3:34 PM
@smash_the_hamster Because it's more fun, is the counterargument I believe, as listed in the description. I think the benefits exist, but I agree they're outweighed by development costs.
Reply
Chris Feb 5 at 9:18 AM
Adding all cards is easier to do from a coding perspective. By did rid of the very idea of collecting we then don't need to implement loot boxes, card rarity systems, databases full of user information about what cards they own, etc).
Imo, less coding is NOT a trivial benefit.
I also think owning cards is a major barrier to players adopting new card games.
And I feel that the real underlying motivation for having a collectable aspect is that its a money maker, as the "whales" spend hundreds collecting everything. And then you end up with debates like "is X game pay-to-win".
Well, if we are not doing it for money, we don't need all the collecting nonsense.
Why not just make a card game with no bullshit -- you just play, with whatever cards you like.
2
Reply
Atheistmantis Feb 4 at 4:14 PM
Progression>All from the start .
Reply
AtTheEdge Feb 3 at 4:52 PM
@qazzquimby Very valid point.
I wouldn't have thought that achievements are that hard to implement. Maybe there is an easier way that allows us to lock certain cards and unlock them when specific requirements are met?
Reply
Qazzquimby Feb 3 at 3:39 PM
If card progression is "really fast" or "extremely generous" to the point that most players own close to all cards, it makes me think that the brief introduction isn't worth the costs in development.
More specifically, I think in an ideal world some fast card progression would be fun, but I worry that those in favor of it aren't thinking about the costs in development time and code complexity.
2
Reply
Qazzquimby Feb 3 at 3:34 PM
@attheedge_77 Unfortunately achievements would be too much trouble to implement, but I like the idea.
Reply
AtTheEdge Feb 3 at 6:24 AM
In addition, opening packs/orbs/whatever is rewarding for the player and keeps them playing. Orbs should, however, be extremely generous if implemented. Also, I can imaging there being some kind of achievement-based card progression. If done right, this keeps the players engaged while supporting different playstyles (I‘m talking about something like: „Surround the enemy general completely with your units“ > Unlocks card xyz)
Reply
Pirtz Feb 2 at 8:02 PM
I think progression is important from a gameplay perspective, even if it's very fast.
Starting from a basic deck and trying to just improve it makes deck creation more gradual and easy to do, and you don't overwhelm the player with choices.
1
Reply
Qazzquimby Feb 1 at 5:20 PM
Many votes on the discord are for eliminating card progression, so I'm going to archive this.
Reply
acp_trello Feb 1 at 3:30 PM
Think all cards should be owned for the initial release but also a set of prebuilt decks should be added to a convenient UI.
Reply
DeathsAdvocate Feb 1 at 3:22 PM (edited)
I liked Faerias model of giving a FULL collection over a couple weeks to months. Lets people do what they want real quick, but without overwhelming you either.
Even if we are not in this for profit (Although for profit would be nice, but again while it may be a goal it should not be a priority.) we are still going to end up with costs so monetization still needs to be considered. While
adds/kickstarter/cosmetics(can be expensive for us on their own), go a long way, card acquisition is where a lot of the money is.
I liked duelysts model of not putting power into rarity, rather complexity.
Also starting out I am in favor of full collections. Just later on when we are moving to servers and what not is the time to add progression in.
TLDR: I am in favor of EXTREMELY generous card ownership, as well as continuing the model of rarity does not equal power. Because revenue is important but not a priority.