Poll: Given the many recent new additions/changes to Hex in the last weeks (Merry Melee modes, Cosmic Coins/Siege Sacks, Ladder changes), is your future outlook on Hex positive?

  • Portensio wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Chocmaw wrote:

    Obsidian wrote:

    No, not really. Siege sacks will be cool for a little bit, but doesn't solve Siege's AI problems. I know that the developers want more PvE content (you can see it whenever they talk about it, it's what makes Hex special and they want to bring it to the forefront), but we still don't see much of it. It's a backseat compared to new set development. My negative theory is that Hex's code has become large and unwieldy, and they simply can't produce new content at the rate they want to. It's why issues linger on longer than they ever should. Their development mode seems to be working on something new, staple it into existing systems, and move forward. Why can't we get a revamp of the AH? Why is the AI still so terrible? Are we ever going to see the finished PvE product?

    I don't think their internal structure is easy enough to work with in a sustainable way. I think they've wanted to fix card identity before restructuring AH, such that cards are no longer unique items (since Doublebacks have been dropped), and it's just not feasible. Things like that are holding up features that we should have seen a long time ago. Bugs are getting so impossible to fix that we're in the 'it's a feature, not a bug' mode.

    I think the game's being dragged down by kludgy code. I don't have proof, but that's what it feels like every time I see new posts on the forums. So I'm not hopeful. I got my money's worth out of the game already, so it's whatever, but I really was looking forward to a robust and ongoing PvE campaign.
    This is what I think as well.HxE initially was a team of great TCG game designers with very little exposure to being a software development company. Unity was decided as the base back when they started. Now I'm guessing that there is a pretty large engineering team in place and they may even make up more than half the resources in the company. I would love to know, just at a conversational level, what their opinion is on using Unity and whether they would prefer coding in something else.

    I don't know enough about these things, but it sounds like any decision to change the base would be suicidal, so they're stuck with what they have and need to make the best of it. Based on the past couple of weeks, I think there has been some change in direction and strategy. My hope is that this leads to an uplift in player retention and engagement and subsequently, longevity of the game.

    I'm an eternal optimist, so I'll always take the positive outlook.
    As someone who has worked with multiple engines I can say unity definitely isn't the proper choice for hex and in many cases does make developing hex harder. My bet is the cross platform support feature of unity was what made hex ent pick it. The idea that in theory you only have to code once then port to all platforms probably made hex think they could focus more on new content and have less engineers overall. On paper sounds great, but unity really isnt meant for a tcg. It is better for level based games like platformers or shooters.
    Mtg arena is unity , is very fluid and will be ported Maybe it’s just badly coded.? (I have 0 knowledge of coding just mentioning )
    I'd say one of the biggest problems is cards being unique. The 2nd problem is tcgs have redundant data. Every new scene or window is basically it's own level. When loading your new level you have to reload assets. Even if you were just using this information. There are extensions/plugins to get around some problems. Even some publicly shared plugins. I don't work for WotC, but odds are they use custom built systems to make this more efficient. While hex appears to be closer to vanilla unity.
  • Plotynus wrote:

    Overall, I think they're addressing the main problems the community had in the past weeks at a good speed. Implementation may be an issue for some, but its better having something and start from there. I believe they havdo things that are in between what they want, what we want and what they ca do. And that creates negative feedback some time

    I think the game, in PvP, is closer to have a very consistent client who can compete with any top game. Improving the new player experience and introducing more support to other formats (casual and competitive) its the final paintbrush.

    I think they're addressing the right issues. Some things can be done differently? Sure.

    My fear is that the community is just overly negative towards the game (with or without reason). Anything they do gets 10 pages of people complaining, some even with some kind of violence. Thats just bad, and it will hurt the game more than any lack of marketing. If your player base (and th one that gathers to form community) have that attitude, its just going to fail because whatever thy do with their limited respurces will never met any expectations. To be clear, its not fault of the users, but I dont see how they can lift the spirit up at this point.

    Azuchi wrote:

    In fairness, we have done so, and gladly...well, up until the point that we realized just how heavily Hex was sabotaging our efforts.

    -snip-

    These two quotes are a fascinating contrast.
  • NeroJinous wrote:

    Portensio wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Chocmaw wrote:

    Obsidian wrote:

    No, not really. Siege sacks will be cool for a little bit, but doesn't solve Siege's AI problems. I know that the developers want more PvE content (you can see it whenever they talk about it, it's what makes Hex special and they want to bring it to the forefront), but we still don't see much of it. It's a backseat compared to new set development. My negative theory is that Hex's code has become large and unwieldy, and they simply can't produce new content at the rate they want to. It's why issues linger on longer than they ever should. Their development mode seems to be working on something new, staple it into existing systems, and move forward. Why can't we get a revamp of the AH? Why is the AI still so terrible? Are we ever going to see the finished PvE product?

    I don't think their internal structure is easy enough to work with in a sustainable way. I think they've wanted to fix card identity before restructuring AH, such that cards are no longer unique items (since Doublebacks have been dropped), and it's just not feasible. Things like that are holding up features that we should have seen a long time ago. Bugs are getting so impossible to fix that we're in the 'it's a feature, not a bug' mode.

    I think the game's being dragged down by kludgy code. I don't have proof, but that's what it feels like every time I see new posts on the forums. So I'm not hopeful. I got my money's worth out of the game already, so it's whatever, but I really was looking forward to a robust and ongoing PvE campaign.
    This is what I think as well.HxE initially was a team of great TCG game designers with very little exposure to being a software development company. Unity was decided as the base back when they started. Now I'm guessing that there is a pretty large engineering team in place and they may even make up more than half the resources in the company. I would love to know, just at a conversational level, what their opinion is on using Unity and whether they would prefer coding in something else.
    I don't know enough about these things, but it sounds like any decision to change the base would be suicidal, so they're stuck with what they have and need to make the best of it. Based on the past couple of weeks, I think there has been some change in direction and strategy. My hope is that this leads to an uplift in player retention and engagement and subsequently, longevity of the game.

    I'm an eternal optimist, so I'll always take the positive outlook.
    As someone who has worked with multiple engines I can say unity definitely isn't the proper choice for hex and in many cases does make developing hex harder. My bet is the cross platform support feature of unity was what made hex ent pick it. The idea that in theory you only have to code once then port to all platforms probably made hex think they could focus more on new content and have less engineers overall. On paper sounds great, but unity really isnt meant for a tcg. It is better for level based games like platformers or shooters.
    Mtg arena is unity , is very fluid and will be ported Maybe it’s just badly coded.? (I have 0 knowledge of coding just mentioning )
    I'd say one of the biggest problems is cards being unique. The 2nd problem is tcgs have redundant data. Every new scene or window is basically it's own level. When loading your new level you have to reload assets. Even if you were just using this information. There are extensions/plugins to get around some problems. Even some publicly shared plugins. I don't work for WotC, but odds are they use custom built systems to make this more efficient. While hex appears to be closer to vanilla unity.
    Chriss did say he found a way to run the game faster in PS4 and recoded in consequence for it but has yet to apply to it to PVE (campaign). Its for that reason that we don't have the updated code on PC. Did anyone compared ps4 and pc loading and playing ?
  • NeroJinous wrote:

    I'd say one of the biggest problems is cards being unique. The 2nd problem is tcgs have redundant data. Every new scene or window is basically it's own level. When loading your new level you have to reload assets. Even if you were just using this information. There are extensions/plugins to get around some problems. Even some publicly shared plugins. I don't work for WotC, but odds are they use custom built systems to make this more efficient. While hex appears to be closer to vanilla unity.
    Didn't Cory say that the unique card thing was dropped, so that should be less of an issue going forward?
  • I mean, no reason other than that's how the entire database is structured. Who knows how complicated converting from one system to a new non-unique system would be, and if anything goes wrong, there's potential trouble with peoples' real world collections.
    Old username: Aradon | Collector backer | Starting a guild for Newbies -- "The Cerulean Acadamy" -- Taking applications once guilds are implemented
  • Alternative theory to my doom and gloom: porting to tablet has been harder and more time-consuming than expected and after that platform's been accessed, we'll see content flowing more regularly.
    Old username: Aradon | Collector backer | Starting a guild for Newbies -- "The Cerulean Acadamy" -- Taking applications once guilds are implemented
  • I can't speak for anyone else but for me this is a big improvement. Yes its a personal flaw that i stop playing once i reach cosmic because there is no longer any "value" even if i would still find it fun. Cosmic coins let me bypass that personal flaw.

    Siege sacks make me more motivated to attack as i feel attackers are at a big disadvantage currently and being able to win sacks gives me further motivation to battle against that disadvantage.

    This change isn't for everyone and it doesn't fix all the problems in the game but to me it is a big step in the right direction and does ad a lot of stuff people have been asking for.
  • I don't think it's just the code. I know it's game dev incompetence too, and a complete disconnect from the playerbase, and a lack of putting things into context. Siege is the biggest indication of that: It could've been exactly the thing HEX needed to build stability and grow. It could've been a laid back, non-competitive gamemode where you can play with any cards you like and have a realistic or even high chance of winning. It could've been a relaxing, fun-for-everyone gamemode with a little trickle of gold income on the side.

    Instead, it became pay2play, the balance was skewed in favour of the non-playing side, and the entire gamemode just... Flops. It's irrelevant. Because what it offers is realistically almost no different from the experience that FRA offers.

    You want cutthroat net-decking, you can go to PvP constructed, or you can go into FRA. Siege being added to this is a major waste of dev time because it added nothing new.

    It -could- have been the endlessly renewing PvE content that players have been begging for for about two years now. It could've been HEX' ticket out of the responsibility of expanding campaign, which they aren't going to do in a timespan of -two years-.

    With everything that's going on and the gamemodes that are already there, all in the back of your head, what would possibly move someone to design siege in the shape it was designed now?

    It's not code, it's incompetence.

    Seriously, siege should've been Gems of War's PvP mode. Gold income, bigger, weekly benefits for collecting wins every week. Passive income trickle from defense as a thank-you for populating the game and offering content to other players. It would've solved SO much of HEX's issues.

    But instead they went for a more PvP oriented mimicry of FRA. Which, by the way, led to the nerfing of PvE exclusive cards and strategies, which also impacted the campaign. (Terrormill was also one of the keys on the Ghallow Ghasts lock)

    Seriously, a game that's two steps away from being mobile phone shovelware has 10 times the playerbase HEX has, according to steam charts. That's seriously not all, or even largely down to the code being clunky.
  • Firellius wrote:

    I don't think it's just the code. I know it's game dev incompetence too, and a complete disconnect from the playerbase, and a lack of putting things into context. Siege is the biggest indication of that: It could've been exactly the thing HEX needed to build stability and grow. It could've been a laid back, non-competitive gamemode where you can play with any cards you like and have a realistic or even high chance of winning. It could've been a relaxing, fun-for-everyone gamemode with a little trickle of gold income on the side.

    Instead, it became pay2play, the balance was skewed in favour of the non-playing side, and the entire gamemode just... Flops. It's irrelevant. Because what it offers is realistically almost no different from the experience that FRA offers.

    You want cutthroat net-decking, you can go to PvP constructed, or you can go into FRA. Siege being added to this is a major waste of dev time because it added nothing new.

    It -could- have been the endlessly renewing PvE content that players have been begging for for about two years now. It could've been HEX' ticket out of the responsibility of expanding campaign, which they aren't going to do in a timespan of -two years-.

    With everything that's going on and the gamemodes that are already there, all in the back of your head, what would possibly move someone to design siege in the shape it was designed now?

    It's not code, it's incompetence.

    Seriously, siege should've been Gems of War's PvP mode. Gold income, bigger, weekly benefits for collecting wins every week. Passive income trickle from defense as a thank-you for populating the game and offering content to other players. It would've solved SO much of HEX's issues.

    But instead they went for a more PvP oriented mimicry of FRA. Which, by the way, led to the nerfing of PvE exclusive cards and strategies, which also impacted the campaign. (Terrormill was also one of the keys on the Ghallow Ghasts lock)

    Seriously, a game that's two steps away from being mobile phone shovelware has 10 times the playerbase HEX has, according to steam charts. That's seriously not all, or even largely down to the code being clunky.
    How would you prefer to see Siege designed?
  • Malakhar wrote:

    How would you prefer to see Siege designed?
    GoW's PvP works like this...

    Players set up a defense team. Then they get the choice of three opponents, arranged in terms of difficulty. Higher difficulty = greater rewards and faster ladder climbing. Battles are simply 1-shots, player versus the AI-controlled version of the defense team they chose to challenge. Since the player is smarter than the AI and always gets the first move, it's relatively easy to win, unless the defender genuinely has a much stronger team or gets lucky.

    This causes attackers to win the majority of fights, making it easy to get the points you need for weekly PvP-rank climbing rewards, which include GoW's version of packs (only one card, though, uncommon rarity and up), glory (Used to buy more single-card packs, specific troops or the stuff needed to upgrade those troops) and gold.

    So, HEX's siege would work like this...

    Players choose a champion and build a deck for that without any PvE-only cards. This is their defense side.

    Then, when they want to attack, they get three randomly selected defense teams to choose from, arranged by win%. Higher difficulty keeps net you more gold for defeating them. Every week, you can accumulate points which, when you pass certain thresholds, will net you additional gold and the packs that siege sacks can buy you.

    Attacking does not cost gold, neither does defending. Attackers get to build a no-holds barred deck under a campaign champion, merc or regular champion. This skews the gamemode in favour of the actually playing side.

    This would create a gamemode where players are free to make very wild and bizarre decks and still have a high chance to win. There's a reward for playing in this endless-content gamemode and there's additional rewards for submitting content to it. Players get to showcase card combos they thought of in their defense team and thereby get other players curious about those cards.

    Additionally, to fatten the reward pool for Siege, cards from discontinued sets can be added to the possible rewards.

    Boom, you have a PvE mode with infinite content and excellent rewards for long term play.
  • I would not believe this many pessimist, depressive and spoiled players can find each other and spam bulls**t all the time in a games forum. HEX is objectively in a state much better than ever before content wise. There are tons of different fun stuff to do. I am playing and planning to play HEX in the future more than ever before considering new contents are added so frequently.
  • Portensio wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Portensio wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Chocmaw wrote:

    Obsidian wrote:

    No, not really. Siege sacks will be cool for a little bit, but doesn't solve Siege's AI problems. I know that the developers want more PvE content (you can see it whenever they talk about it, it's what makes Hex special and they want to bring it to the forefront), but we still don't see much of it. It's a backseat compared to new set development. My negative theory is that Hex's code has become large and unwieldy, and they simply can't produce new content at the rate they want to. It's why issues linger on longer than they ever should. Their development mode seems to be working on something new, staple it into existing systems, and move forward. Why can't we get a revamp of the AH? Why is the AI still so terrible? Are we ever going to see the finished PvE product?

    I don't think their internal structure is easy enough to work with in a sustainable way. I think they've wanted to fix card identity before restructuring AH, such that cards are no longer unique items (since Doublebacks have been dropped), and it's just not feasible. Things like that are holding up features that we should have seen a long time ago. Bugs are getting so impossible to fix that we're in the 'it's a feature, not a bug' mode.

    I think the game's being dragged down by kludgy code. I don't have proof, but that's what it feels like every time I see new posts on the forums. So I'm not hopeful. I got my money's worth out of the game already, so it's whatever, but I really was looking forward to a robust and ongoing PvE campaign.
    This is what I think as well.HxE initially was a team of great TCG game designers with very little exposure to being a software development company. Unity was decided as the base back when they started. Now I'm guessing that there is a pretty large engineering team in place and they may even make up more than half the resources in the company. I would love to know, just at a conversational level, what their opinion is on using Unity and whether they would prefer coding in something else.I don't know enough about these things, but it sounds like any decision to change the base would be suicidal, so they're stuck with what they have and need to make the best of it. Based on the past couple of weeks, I think there has been some change in direction and strategy. My hope is that this leads to an uplift in player retention and engagement and subsequently, longevity of the game.

    I'm an eternal optimist, so I'll always take the positive outlook.
    As someone who has worked with multiple engines I can say unity definitely isn't the proper choice for hex and in many cases does make developing hex harder. My bet is the cross platform support feature of unity was what made hex ent pick it. The idea that in theory you only have to code once then port to all platforms probably made hex think they could focus more on new content and have less engineers overall. On paper sounds great, but unity really isnt meant for a tcg. It is better for level based games like platformers or shooters.
    Mtg arena is unity , is very fluid and will be ported Maybe it’s just badly coded.? (I have 0 knowledge of coding just mentioning )
    I'd say one of the biggest problems is cards being unique. The 2nd problem is tcgs have redundant data. Every new scene or window is basically it's own level. When loading your new level you have to reload assets. Even if you were just using this information. There are extensions/plugins to get around some problems. Even some publicly shared plugins. I don't work for WotC, but odds are they use custom built systems to make this more efficient. While hex appears to be closer to vanilla unity.
    Chriss did say he found a way to run the game faster in PS4 and recoded in consequence for it but has yet to apply to it to PVE (campaign). Its for that reason that we don't have the updated code on PC. Did anyone compared ps4 and pc loading and playing ?
    I don't think Unity is a problem at all. Great games have been made Unity (and a lot of TCGs). For example: unity3d.com/games-made-with-unity or en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games
  • Edswor wrote:

    Portensio wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Portensio wrote:

    NeroJinous wrote:

    Chocmaw wrote:

    Obsidian wrote:

    No, not really. Siege sacks will be cool for a little bit, but doesn't solve Siege's AI problems. I know that the developers want more PvE content (you can see it whenever they talk about it, it's what makes Hex special and they want to bring it to the forefront), but we still don't see much of it. It's a backseat compared to new set development. My negative theory is that Hex's code has become large and unwieldy, and they simply can't produce new content at the rate they want to. It's why issues linger on longer than they ever should. Their development mode seems to be working on something new, staple it into existing systems, and move forward. Why can't we get a revamp of the AH? Why is the AI still so terrible? Are we ever going to see the finished PvE product?

    I don't think their internal structure is easy enough to work with in a sustainable way. I think they've wanted to fix card identity before restructuring AH, such that cards are no longer unique items (since Doublebacks have been dropped), and it's just not feasible. Things like that are holding up features that we should have seen a long time ago. Bugs are getting so impossible to fix that we're in the 'it's a feature, not a bug' mode.

    I think the game's being dragged down by kludgy code. I don't have proof, but that's what it feels like every time I see new posts on the forums. So I'm not hopeful. I got my money's worth out of the game already, so it's whatever, but I really was looking forward to a robust and ongoing PvE campaign.
    This is what I think as well.HxE initially was a team of great TCG game designers with very little exposure to being a software development company. Unity was decided as the base back when they started. Now I'm guessing that there is a pretty large engineering team in place and they may even make up more than half the resources in the company. I would love to know, just at a conversational level, what their opinion is on using Unity and whether they would prefer coding in something else.I don't know enough about these things, but it sounds like any decision to change the base would be suicidal, so they're stuck with what they have and need to make the best of it. Based on the past couple of weeks, I think there has been some change in direction and strategy. My hope is that this leads to an uplift in player retention and engagement and subsequently, longevity of the game.
    I'm an eternal optimist, so I'll always take the positive outlook.
    As someone who has worked with multiple engines I can say unity definitely isn't the proper choice for hex and in many cases does make developing hex harder. My bet is the cross platform support feature of unity was what made hex ent pick it. The idea that in theory you only have to code once then port to all platforms probably made hex think they could focus more on new content and have less engineers overall. On paper sounds great, but unity really isnt meant for a tcg. It is better for level based games like platformers or shooters.
    Mtg arena is unity , is very fluid and will be ported Maybe it’s just badly coded.? (I have 0 knowledge of coding just mentioning )
    I'd say one of the biggest problems is cards being unique. The 2nd problem is tcgs have redundant data. Every new scene or window is basically it's own level. When loading your new level you have to reload assets. Even if you were just using this information. There are extensions/plugins to get around some problems. Even some publicly shared plugins. I don't work for WotC, but odds are they use custom built systems to make this more efficient. While hex appears to be closer to vanilla unity.
    Chriss did say he found a way to run the game faster in PS4 and recoded in consequence for it but has yet to apply to it to PVE (campaign). Its for that reason that we don't have the updated code on PC. Did anyone compared ps4 and pc loading and playing ?
    I don't think Unity is a problem at all. Great games have been made Unity (and a lot of TCGs). For example: unity3d.com/games-made-with-unity or en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games
    yes it is possible, but as said before you really need a lot of custom additions to make it function properly. The argument wasn't on possibility it was on convenience. Unity is extremely inconvenient for many hex functions and requires a lot of custom systems to work efficiently. There are other engines hex ent could have used with far less effort to get the same if not better results(same amount of dev time could have accomplished more)
  • Bansheiri wrote:

    I would not believe this many pessimist, depressive and spoiled players can find each other and spam bulls**t all the time in a games forum. HEX is objectively in a state much better than ever before content wise. There are tons of different fun stuff to do. I am playing and planning to play HEX in the future more than ever before considering new contents are added so frequently.
    I can only support this statement.
    Everytime a new feature is announced that I like and I open the according thread, so much negativity.
    It's just like nearly nobody dares to even try to write something positive to not be drown by some peoples pessimism.

    HEX is not your life. At least it shouldn't be. Take a break if it's killing you.

    Maybe it's time to quit ... the forums ;)

    ---------------------------------------------------

    I like the new prizes for playing siege and cosmic.
    I always stopped constructed ladder after reaching cosmic. Limited to get new packs always burnt me out after like 30 evo runs and some drafts (like after approcimately a month). So it's great that I can now mix up more modes for collecting packs to finish each sets playset. New stuff for PVE would surely be great, because it meant even more diversity. But I think every feature that adds something new is a good feature.
  • omoreindakitchen wrote:

    I can only support this statement.
    Sure- gotta love trolls [like Banshieri] who don't address topics head-on, but use strawman arguments and attempt to tangent the thread. :huh:

    You may legitimately think you're supporting the game, but that sort of approach only aggravates things- by not treating players with concerns respectfully, you're further creating a "them and us" split in the community, leading to drama. "I respect that people have concerns with the game, but I don't believe the concerns are as severe as indicated for the following reasons.." is the correct response.
    The nonsense above is only going to serve to emphasize the poor response we've gotten so far.

    As far as "taking it too seriously", we're not. Well, not all of us are. We're trying to make points out of exasperation, as a last ditch effort before giving up entirely. That's a fair way of approaching any situation- much like any relationship, you try to make it work and, when it truly seems it won't, you give up on it without reservation. Not all of us have gotten to that last point yet.

    Also, the comment in question is a blatant trolling, don't feed it. Anyone that ignores that people are leaving the game all the time with dramatic disdain over the exact same points [rather than a small subset converging to complain about every little detail], in favor of attacking people, isn't worth giving any real attention to.
    Again, deliberately misunderstanding contexts and ignoring facts is never a good response, in any topic. Disagree and, if you have valid perspectives, present those properly. Baselessly attacking other people with all the grace of a drunk shitting on themselves isn't going to help anyone.

    I apologize for contributing to the negativity, but the negativity itself comes from the devs not communicating. Once they do, then you can say "Hey, they're trying, back off," but for now the ball is in their court. It's like saying "Yeah, I know your father needs to go to rehab, but at least you have a father. If you don't like it, leave the house." Clearly, that's nonsensically ignoring the "Yes, but I'd like to try getting them into rehab first" aspect of things.

    The fact that so many players have already left is what emphasizes our concern over the situation [as being a hopeless one], not any desire to create drama.
    Regardless of if our approach is the best or not, we're at least trying to contribute constructively to the game. So long as you're doing the same, we can work together as a community to figure out the best way to improve this thing we enjoy.
    Or, y'know.. we can just keep encouraging players to leave the game, with all the nonchalance of someone saying "If you don't like local global climate change policies, move somewhere else." Yes, that resolves the immediate conflict, but it blatantly ignores that the end result of that approach could be rather final [ie, in encouraging the game to shut down far sooner than it would otherwise].

    Also, due to a tragic incident involving a Wild shard, the world's largest cake, three Siamese Pippits, and Skynet, my life actually IS Hex. True Story!

    P.S. Most of the users who've been expressing negativity in recent threads do say positive things about Hex all the time.. it's just always related to conceptual design elements, rather than developer approach to communication and prioritization. Don't blindly typecast us into being antagonists, when it's clear we're expressing appreciation for the game on a regular basis.

    The post was edited 5 times, last by Azuchi ().

  • @bansieri

    Let me try and explain it with an analogy.

    You purchase a new bathroom from a plumber, he promises to get it all installed.

    Day one: Everything looks all right, except the plumbing is a little leaky. So you mention it to the plumber.
    Day two: The plumber installs new lights. Okay, nice, but not what we asked for and the plumbing is still leaky.
    Day three: The plumber installs a new flush button. Also nice, but not what we asked for, and the plumbing is still leaky.
    Day four: You try to call the plumber to ask him to fix the plumbing. No answer.
    Day five: You try again, again, no answer.
    Day six: No answer.
    Day seven: He paints the bathroom. No answer on when he'll fix the plumbing.
    Day eight: He finally responds to your question and says he'll fix the plumbing "Maybe sometime this year".
    Day nine: He installs new lights in the bathroom, but one of the two doesn't work. Still leaky plumbing.
    Day ten: You angrily demand that he fixes the leaky plumbing. Someone comes running in and tells you not to be so damn pessimistic and entitled. The plumber's done all that nice stuff for you, after all!

    The game's core functionality is still busted. Co-op is missing, Campaign is missing features, there's no raids, no guilds, the AH is still horrid, apparently ladder isn't working properly either, Siege is in a bad state, FRA is in a bad state, VIP is in a bad state, the entire game is constantly hemmorhaging players, and what do the devs invest time in?

    Cosmic coins and Siege sacks. Candles on a half-baked cake that looks like it begs for you to put it out of its misery. And one of the two isn't even working properly either.

    HEX is pretty close to the grave and it's not getting any traction. Considering its troubled past and its gradually growing list of failures and mistakes, any player that leaves now will be that much harder to reclaim later once those mistakes DO get fixed. HEX failing entirely and the game dying out is not an unlikely scenario at this stage, so these kinds of discussions and all the negative feedback that's coming out here? That's life or death for HEX. So excuse us for not sugarcoating the ugly truth.

    We want HEX to succeed. We also know that it won't as long as our concerns aren't listened to. We've been voicing concerns for ages, and we've constantly been ignored. So yes, we're pissed. And that's completely reasonable.
  • What I see it like: The husband doesnt think the plumbing is important and prefers the plumber to install new lights in the bathroom. The wife thinks that plumbing is more important. So the actions of the plumber, no matter what he does, cannot ever make everyone happy at the same time.