Friday Update - Cake is Good

    • Rendakor wrote:

      Pandaemonium wrote:

      That argument is pointless, I am wrong clash was not free at the beginning. I am sorry...
      But the main point that I guess you dont want to talk about is that the tournaments showed that hex did not have enough players to live off on.

      I am guessing the average tournament was around 170 players? Does the bot know? Does the bot think that any of those numbers are viable for a company like hex?
      We get it. You're convinced that HXE's PVP focus is what fucked up the game. You make this point in every single post. Not everyone agrees with you. I, for example, think every hour they spent developing PVE was wasted time, and if that time had been used on proper support for casual PVP formats (EDH, Rock/Pauper, Kitchen Table Mode) then the game would have done much better. No one is changing anyone else's mind at this late stage.
      Decention was mainly frowned upon by the influencers because people wanted exalted status. Anyone who can do basic math knew that the number of people in the pvp tournaments were not viable.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Pandaemonium ().

    • tournaments not getting a lot of people isn't proof pvp was not the main pull of the game. The tournaments took too long for a lot of people (personally i disagree with this), only running major tournaments on the weekends, kept me from participating in 98% of them and im sure there are others affected by that. The prizes weren't appealing enough to a lot of players.

      There are tons of reasons for lack of participation in tournaments, but none of them equate to pvp being the wrong focal point in the game
    • Completely agree anomaly pvp alone is not why the game died. But the focus on hardcore tcg mechanics like the tournament system was a big nail in the coffin. They probably never had the tech, but a more asynch style tournament system would have helped (or weekend tournaments).

      Artifact is talking about mechanisms to keep cards cheap. Will be interesting to see what they do. The signature decks helped for hex, but it was too little too late.

      Pvp being the focal point in the game the way they did it didnt work. And quite honestly the tournament numbers over the years are a bell weather for showing that they were not working. But hex continued on.
    • Metronomy wrote:

      I mean...they didnt even have on-demand constructed that involved prices. Which was a point of criticism for years (since they removed CG). So the debated "focus on pvp" was at least botched in that regard.
      removal of constructed gauntlet was terrible. But what i hated more was the removal of daily scheduled tournaments, i didn't even care most didn't fire, but having the chance of one firing made me play a lot more. Didn't make sense to remove them, not like it costed them to have them still in the game

      The post was edited 1 time, last by AnomalyCobra ().

    • On PvP vs. PvE: I think it's good that HEX had both. F2P games live or die by the breadth of their playerbase, so it's important to have a large variety of playstyles to offer to players to keep things enjoyable.

      I do think there was -too much- focus on PvP. Making a game like this run on PvP alone would, I think, require very meticulous game design and balancing to ensure that there is a large variety of playstyles in the top tier decks AND that these decks are fun to play. That's a very difficult task, especially for a neophyte company like HXE.

      I also think the biggest problem was the effect this had on PvE. PvE wasn't built with longevity in mind from the ground up, as it mostly consisted of a handful of strictly scripted battles, which are prone to repetitiveness. That is a problem, and though HXE had multiple opportunities to resolve that problem, they were instead wasted on creating content to try and push more players from PvE into PvP, such as the difficulty fuck-up in FRA and the abysmal design of Siege.

      Not every PvE player can be converted into a PvP player, and trying to push for that can have adverse effects. Myself, I would just much rather stop playing the game altogether than be left with only the same repetitive PvE content and PvP or pseudo-PvP.

      In short: More work should've been done on PvE for PvE's sake, rather than as a stepping stone for PvP.
    • The problem wasn't the lack of PVE, there is a lot of content there... it was just designed poorly and offered little reason to play it more than once.

      Also it should never have been players (dots) sliding along a map (world)... this offers no immersion, no sense of being... nothing.

      It needed a world in which players could explore (2D top down would have been fine), see friends and enemies roaming, and expanded over time... then you could call the game a MMO TCG.



      Another problem that I've been mentioning for years is that people WANT to play games WITH their friends (which the above world would have been nice for)

      We were promised raids (3 friends vs a raid boss) and potentially 2v2 and what not... I still stand by that this would have been huge had it ever happened.

      Twitch —— YouTube —— Twitter —— Steam —— Patreon

      The post was edited 6 times, last by HAVOC ().

    • If I look back, the 10 biggest problems as I see them were:

      1) Lack of casual options for pvp play.
      2) Lack of social features.
      3) Lack of options for replayable pve. Early on we just had the super easy arena. Later we just had the super hard arena. Neither of which involved peoples' pve characters.
      4) Lack of competitive pve.
      5) Lack of multiplayer content.
      6) Obsession with nickle-and-diming their players with things that should be free.(even pre-merry melee, siege is another bad example)
      7) Lack of willingness to offer low-cost cosmetics.
      8 ) Weird blind spots when it comes to making use of the tech they already have (why was there never a tournament utilizing evo sealed concepts, or a pve game mode that functioned off a draft, etc.)
      9) Lack of new-player onboarding.
      10) Way too much invested in prizes before they had the playerbase to support those prizes.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.
    • AnomalyCobra wrote:

      problem with #4, the AI is too abusable to ever be competitive. The only hard matches were due to cheating mechanics.
      I assume he meant that players would compete among each other. Like how WoW guilds were competing for server / world firsts.
      Also the Siege could 100% been "competitive PvE".
      Finally I'll remind you that Chris Woods said "We could turn up the AI, but people wouldn't be having fun" (implying that it'd be so good it'd be crashing people).
    • Vroengard wrote:

      AnomalyCobra wrote:

      problem with #4, the AI is too abusable to ever be competitive. The only hard matches were due to cheating mechanics.
      I assume he meant that players would compete among each other. Like how WoW guilds were competing for server / world firsts.Also the Siege could 100% been "competitive PvE".
      Finally I'll remind you that Chris Woods said "We could turn up the AI, but people wouldn't be having fun" (implying that it'd be so good it'd be crashing people).
      This would have been cool. Leaderboards for every dungeon in the game, with scores ranked by time, turns, cards played, overkill damage dealt, etc. and with scores compared to all players, recent players, and friends (and guilds!). Yet another example of low hanging fruit that HXE didn't go for.
    • Vroengard wrote:

      AxelDWater wrote:

      What I can understand from their latest moves, is that they have some kind of salvation plan.
      Please expand on that, because you're the first person to claim so.
      Sorry Vroen, I was busy as hell. It was just an assumption based on their willingness to revamp VIP. I mean since they are still trying to fix some stuff, maybe they do have some sort of plan B. Just that.

      Vroengard wrote:

      AnomalyCobra wrote:

      problem with #4, the AI is too abusable to ever be competitive. The only hard matches were due to cheating mechanics.
      I assume he meant that players would compete among each other. Like how WoW guilds were competing for server / world firsts.Also the Siege could 100% been "competitive PvE".
      Finally I'll remind you that Chris Woods said "We could turn up the AI, but people wouldn't be having fun" (implying that it'd be so good it'd be crashing people).
      It would be nice if had the option to battle against standard or tuned AI.
      The Wardens of Entrath is a large, open to public community of Hex enthusiasts with a mission to help and support Hex players and content creators alike!

      Find us on our Discord server or website!
    • One final thought for this thread, I find it heavily ironic that vast amount of positive vibes for hex comes from a pve discord. PvE was and is the red headed step child of hex and there are still people there defending the game. Goes to show that maybe hex's priorities were way off.
    • Lets not get into pvp vs pve we both wanted different things and lets be honest neither really got what they wanted so far. Pve might have made more promises that werent implemented than pvp but its not like pvpers were living the dream for long after the beta.
    • AnomalyCobra wrote:

      problem with #4, the AI is too abusable to ever be competitive. The only hard matches were due to cheating mechanics.
      Actually, the real problem is that they made us too broken op. And people were too touchy about balance changes(even to pve stuff) for some unfathomable reason for that to ever change.

      That being said, they still could've created competitive content. Create a boss with infinite health and measure damage dealt in x turns 1 week, measure cards milled in x turns another weak, measured max health achieved in x turned in another week, and so on. Not saying the above ideas are necessarily good, but there are ways to create competitive content even out of something easy.

      Vroengard wrote:

      AnomalyCobra wrote:

      problem with #4, the AI is too abusable to ever be competitive. The only hard matches were due to cheating mechanics.
      I assume he meant that players would compete among each other. Like how WoW guilds were competing for server / world firsts.Also the Siege could 100% been "competitive PvE".
      Finally I'll remind you that Chris Woods said "We could turn up the AI, but people wouldn't be having fun" (implying that it'd be so good it'd be crashing people).
      To a degree, this is likely what would've ended up happening. We never had anything that would encourage people to 'compete', but Hex could've done it.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.