PDA

View Full Version : Friday Update is Here -- Big News!



Stok3d
08-23-2013, 04:04 PM
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cze/hex-mmo-trading-card-game/posts

Shadowelf
08-23-2013, 04:07 PM
Yup both DragonCon and PAX presence, and backer vanity cards within 30 days

MoikPEI
08-23-2013, 04:09 PM
>Have a $100 item on the D3 RMAH for sale
>Waiting for emails from Paypal to say it sold
>New Email! Did it sell?
>No, it's a Hex Update!
>Still happy!

Extended art on every card? Interesting. I wonder how many art assets Hex has...

Stok3d
08-23-2013, 04:10 PM
I can't wait to see what the next version of hextcg.com is going to look like! (Still a long ways out, but at least it's something that will happen).

Set 2 artwork (and vanity cards) coming w/i a month! o.O

Miwa
08-23-2013, 04:14 PM
Extended art on every card? Interesting. I wonder how many art assets Hex has...
Well, the KS was kind of there to get the money to do the art, and it kind of went off the rails... so...

MoikPEI
08-23-2013, 04:16 PM
Phil's write up is awesome. The point about how... evangelistic? the community is seems different from others. It's at a higher level. More saturated. We have the same instincts as a virus. :)

BossHoss
08-23-2013, 04:27 PM
It`s not like extended art is doing 2 of every card either. I think they were referring more to the fact that the engineers are now finalizing the card frame reveals of all cards...

Icepick
08-23-2013, 04:31 PM
I... don't see where the big news is here o_o
I'm not seeing any new info there at all besides the fact that vanity cards are being made along with the Set 2 art. Massively overblown thread title, I think :p

HyenaNipples
08-23-2013, 04:33 PM
^ Agreed.

Stok3d
08-23-2013, 04:37 PM
Guess you missed that we are in fact getting new website (and hopefully forums), extended art on every card, and Set 2 artwork & vanity cards are around the corner...

I'm really anxious at the thought of getting new forums.

Icepick
08-23-2013, 04:46 PM
Guess you missed that we are in fact getting new website (and hopefully forums), extended art on every card, and Set 2 artwork & vanity cards are around the corner...

I'm really anxious at the thought of getting new forums.

None of that is new information. New website/forums has been known for ages, extended art for every card was known and Set 2 artwork is no more around the corner for us than Set 2 itself is. They are working on it, which is obvious - that doesn't mean we get to see it. Vanity cards may be news, but only for a very small percentage of the community.
I suggest changing the thread title to "Slightly interesting news!" :p

Shadowelf
08-23-2013, 04:53 PM
Having a presence at PAX is important too; i mean we are talking for one of the largest gaming conventions in the US, with thousands potential customers. Kyle will be there answering questions, so i bet that more news about the game will flow

4gn0st1x
08-23-2013, 04:56 PM
...

HyenaNipples
08-23-2013, 05:09 PM
I guess a Mod Bot would be excited about new forums. It's like a toaster getting excited about the new wall socket.

ossuary
08-23-2013, 06:30 PM
Imagine how sad toasters must be when nobody wants toast.

Grumph
08-23-2013, 06:45 PM
extended art on every card,

Does this mean the KS and Gencon AA cards will have alternative extended art as well?

Daer
08-23-2013, 06:45 PM
Biggest news today is probably that the WoW TCG is over.

The_Wine_Gnat
08-23-2013, 07:08 PM
Imagine how sad toasters must be when nobody wants toast.

Reading this made me sad for toasters. I don't even have one, but want to find one to make toast with now. :(

Stok3d
08-23-2013, 07:13 PM
I guess a Mod Bot would be excited about new forums. It's like a toaster getting excited about the new wall socket.

lol--you guys are too funny. Yes, I admit I am w/o a doubt most excited about the thought at updated forums...

Chiany
08-23-2013, 07:40 PM
Biggest news today is probably that the WoW TCG is over.

Agreed, but that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
Glad I sold my collection a few months ago.

Stok3d
08-23-2013, 07:49 PM
Agreed, but that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
Glad I sold my collection a few months ago.

Yeah, Blizzard is putting out their own TCG. The writing is on the wall that they are pushing Cryptozoic out and keeping it in house. At least now all the Cryptozoic Competitive TCG energy can be focused on Hex now though...

hex_colin
08-23-2013, 08:24 PM
Yeah, Blizzard is putting out their own TCG. The writing is on the wall that they are pushing Cryptozoic out and keeping it in house. At least now all the Cryptozoic Competitive TCG energy can be focused on Hex now though...

Think the Hex vs. Hearthstone dynamic sped up the WOWTCG decision? Or was this the expected timing?

Stok3d
08-23-2013, 08:28 PM
Think the Hex vs. Hearthstone dynamic sped up the WOWTCG decision? Or was this the expected timing?

I believe the below answers this perfectly:



From my outside perspective, I believe Blizzard has put the writing on the walls for quite some time that they were going to do this to Cryptozoic. First off, if you played WoW you had red flags flown as you saw the Black Market Auction House started selling the Loot Rewards for in game gold. I was seriously confused when I saw this. It later made sense when they announced Hearthstone. At that moment, I saw they were going to do as they did with the UDE Point Redemption and shut the project down.

Honestly, I believe Blizzard solely wants to now keep the TCG (or properly stated now--CCG) in house. It makes sense--they don't need Crytozoic anymore now for this genre. I will say one thing though that you can probably thank Cryptozoic for--their "parting gift" to those that play WoW-TCG. Having all the loot cards available in one set is amazingly profitable and a great way to end the game.

I'm just excited to see what Cryptozoic can do when they don't need to answer to anyone and can focus all their energy to something that is in house--Hex.

Dralon
08-23-2013, 08:52 PM
As someone who loved the WowTCG it is sad to see it go. I will still play with my son with the cards I have, and enjoy Hearthstone as it moves forward. Licences don't last forever, having lived through the Star Wars CCG, and LOTRTCG, WowTCG's time had come. Having the full force of CZE behind Hex though can only be a good thing in my opinion. I got a parting mount out of my box of Reign of fire and will ride it around WOW from time to time to remember the game!

Maphalux
08-23-2013, 09:41 PM
It is always a shame to see what happens to licensed game IPs when the time runs out. It is almost never good for the end user.

I feel bad for the WoW TCG players. That has to feel like a knife in the gut.

At least HEX will not have licensing issues to worry about seven years from now.

Deathfog
08-23-2013, 10:00 PM
This was strongly expected the moment the Hex kickstarter got started. I feel bad for blizzard though seeing as Hearthstone is quickly decaying to hardcore pay to win after a few days of closed beta. NL_Kippies stream has pretty much been solidly casting it and its interesting to see how opponents decks are rapidly evolving towards really overpowered endgame cards.

KiraForce
08-23-2013, 10:56 PM
So PAX is too far, Dragon Con is too far... Now if we can just find out if HEX is coming to NYCC, I'd be happy... I already have a ticket to THAT.

Nicalapegus
08-23-2013, 11:27 PM
Cancelling WoWTCG. Huh, Blizzard is kinda slipping out of existence. WoW down to 6 million subs and falling fast. Sc2 abandoned for LoL. 90% of D3's players stopped playing after 3 months. Their track record is not good currently. They are making a new game on console though! And it... isn't SC: Ghost. WTF. D3.

Yeah... my passion for Blizzard games has certainly been waning as of late and this news has me even less interested in their company.

Shadowelf
08-24-2013, 01:05 AM
Biggest news today is probably that the WoW TCG is over.

Agreed; stopped playing years ago but i have fond me memories of the game, and i have to admit that restarting at some point was constantly on the back of my head

Vengus
08-24-2013, 03:04 AM
Think the Hex vs. Hearthstone dynamic sped up the WOWTCG decision? Or was this the expected timing?
I wouldn't be surprised if it did, judging from the last question on their FAQ:
Q: Will you be renewing the contract for the WoW TCG with another partner?
A: While we don't have any specific announcements to make at this time, we don't expect to renew the license for the WoW TCG.

Sounds to me like they would like to renew it if they could, but they don't expect to have any publisher do it. Hex is a competitor now, and Blizzard might not be too happy with the idea they are being overshadowed.

Icepick
08-24-2013, 03:56 AM
I think this whole thing may have been a bit more mutual that is being implied here. With both parties developing their own digital TCGs, it would have been something of a conflict of interest for them to continue working on the WoW TCG. Maybe this is just my naive idealism at work, but I like to think that they both just got together and decided to call it quits in favour of their own projects.

Mathaw
08-24-2013, 05:41 AM
I think this whole thing may have been a bit more mutual that is being implied here. With both parties developing their own digital TCGs, it would have been something of a conflict of interest for them to continue working on the WoW TCG. Maybe this is just my naive idealism at work, but I like to think that they both just got together and decided to call it quits in favour of their own projects.

This. Unless there's some juicy gossip I don't know of I'm sure it was relatively amicable. Neither company is circling the drain, so no need for any bitterness IMO.

Punk
08-24-2013, 06:12 PM
Guess you missed that we are in fact getting new website (and hopefully forums), extended art on every card, and Set 2 artwork & vanity cards are around the corner...

I'm really anxious at the thought of getting new forums.

Usually when I see a company revamp their website, they only do the website portion and leave the forum module the same (unless they were having issues with it).

I'm looking forward to a proper 'www' A record to be used. It just looks trashy when it does not automatically forward to www.hextcg.com. -- I do this for a living so I have much higher standards than the average internet user.

Patrigan
08-25-2013, 12:24 AM
I'm looking forward to a proper 'www' A record to be used. It just looks trashy when it does not automatically forward to www.hextcg.com. -- I do this for a living so I have much higher standards than the average internet user.

Please god no, don't add the "www". Time to change your working habits. The www is so... blergh... It's outdated, simple as that.

Quite a few humans I know don't even understand what the www is for. I've had companies request that I "remove that www, because it's too much to type".

So please, leave it as is. That's the only correct way to divide main domain and subdomains, not with the "www".

Punk
08-25-2013, 04:26 PM
Please god no, don't add the "www". Time to change your working habits. The www is so... blergh... It's outdated, simple as that.

Can't tell if trolling...

...

Between work related and personal interests, I access hundreds of websites every day at work. All day today I have paid attention to which websites do not use a subdomain such as "www" as their default:

cryptozoic.com / hextcg.com
upperdeck.com
bluehost.com

Like I already knew, the sites that have it setup this way are few and far between. Everything you stated is 100% your own personal opinion.


Quite a few humans I know don't even understand what the www is for. I've had companies request that I "remove that www, because it's too much to type".

Did you explain to them that if their DNS records are setup properly, they never have to type in the 'www?' -- I am assuming you did not and bought into their request because you are just as ignorant as they are.

I do not know how you had their site setup before, but below is really how simplistic this fix is.

Record - Type - Content

domain.tld - HTTP - www.domain.tld
www.domain.tld - A - 192.168.1.1 (replace this IP with the IP for your host)



So please, leave it as is. That's the only correct way to divide main domain and subdomains, not with the "www".

The "www" does not divide a domain name from the subdomain, the "www" IS a subdomain. This is also known as the primary subdomain for your domain name.

Other than indexing your site, subdomains are great for clearly separating the domain from the Hyper-Text Transfer Protocol. Examples of this would be:

HTTP://hextcg.com
HTTP://www.hextcg.com


Additionally, having "www" shown as the subdomain when first going to a site reassures the common, non-technical-savvy individual that they are at the correct site. Don't ask me why some people think this, but I did work at an ISP for many years and this was a call I received on a few occasions: "Why is <insert site> not giving me my www's? Am I not connected to the internet?"

Icepick
08-25-2013, 05:13 PM
stuff

Most of this is as subjective as you claim the post you quoted is. www. is a relic from a time when "the webs" weren't the most popular thing on the internet. It is no in way required in this day and age. The only real reason to have it, beyond personal preference (and in most cases that's all it is either way) is for the separation of cookies between the primary domain and subdomains, if required.

Edit: Oh, and there are plenty of other sites that don't use it too. Just because the ones you happened to check do have the www. proves very little - the first 4 I bothered to check just now don't. *shrug*

felmare
08-25-2013, 05:58 PM
how did this get into the technicalities of web development. honestly all of web development is personal preference of the programmer. people are weird about symantecs for no reason because users don't realize any difference.

Niedar
08-25-2013, 06:00 PM
What are you even talking about man, no modern browser even displays http:// anymore and www is not actually used as often as you think.

Punk
08-25-2013, 06:38 PM
Most of this is as subjective as you claim the post you quoted is. www. is a relic from a time when "the webs" weren't the most popular thing on the internet. It is no in way required in this day and age. The only real reason to have it, beyond personal preference (and in most cases that's all it is either way) is for the separation of cookies between the primary domain and subdomains, if required.

That is one reason, yes, and so is directing domain.tdl and www.domain.tld to two completely different places. These instances would be so unique that I would never take it into account for a discussion like this.

Professionalism and advertising would be two other points that can easily be taken into account here. When you see an advertisement and they list a website, regardless if this is on TV, an advertisement on a website or on the radio, they almost always advertise it by first stating the "www."

Take your signature for example. This is advertising a website you are a part of and is using the same format that has become a staple to domain names. There is no good reason to change this other than personal ones and it would be silly to risk any business not being directed their way (referring to the example I gave previously regarding the customer calling me). Just because most people may not have an issue with this, why not spend 5 minutes and change it to avoid deterring any potential customers?


Edit: Oh, and there are plenty of other sites that don't use it too. Just because the ones you happened to check do have the www. proves very little - the first 4 I bothered to check just now don't. *shrug*

There are some fan sites that I go to which are not setup this way, but I was really only taking into account business's or major communities as anyone with $10 and 5 minutes could set this up without.

Punk
08-25-2013, 06:39 PM
What are you even talking about man, no modern browser even displays http:// anymore and www is not actually used as often as you think.

It is displayed by default in IE and Firefox. In Google Chrome, it is only displayed by default if the protocol is HTTPS.. so I have no clue where you are coming from with this information.

Niedar
08-25-2013, 07:27 PM
No, it is not displayed in Firefox.

Modern advertisements also no longer use www anymore, maybe you should start paying attention.

Patrigan
08-25-2013, 10:53 PM
The "www" does not divide a domain name from the subdomain, the "www" IS a subdomain. This is also known as the primary subdomain for your domain name.

And this is where the whole problem lies. Your primary subdomain, should just be regarded as your primary domain. In this modern day of age, there is absolutely NO reason to have the "www", except to conform to standards of an age long past. Holding on to standards is what makes things stabilize and unable to evolve.

That is also why I, no offense intended, utterly despise your breed of programmers. You're the kind that stops the evolution of technologies. Again, this isn't personally to you, most likely, this is what you were taught. But do you believe Apple got so popular because it conformed to the standards? Why would they? People would just choose Microsoft, master of the age old standards. Apple decided to evolve, dump whatever standards are not needed anymore.

This is why a browser like chrome (unsure about firefox) nowadays just drops the www in the address. They are unnessecary bloat. We all despise bloat.

So do yourself a favour, try to find out WHY exactly you need this www and what is actively preventing you from dropping it, aside from an age old standard. (There are a few minor reasons, example cookies.)

To be honest, all this actually kind of goes for the "http://", sadly that one still has an actual function: it helps for autoparsing, to see what is a website and what is not.

As for advertising? It is more than sufficient to say a word followed by "dotcom" or "dotorg".

Here's a bit more information about the "www" coming from one of the most distinguished IT sites: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2008/06/dropping-the-www-prefix/
Extra note: That's something from 2008 and a lot has changed since then as well.

Next time, just start by doing a bit of research. Don't blindly follow your professors, I have known many professors who just fail to follow the current trends and evolutions. It's good to know why something used to be, but you always have to look forward, to the next step of the technological revolution.

Again, no offense intended to you personally, mostly to the line of thinking you used when making your comment.

ossuary
08-26-2013, 03:56 AM
Holding on to standards is what makes things stabilize and unable to evolve.

I think you meant "stagnant," not "stabilize." :)

That being said, standards are actually pretty important to stability, so maybe your faux pas was more accurate. ;)

Kroan
08-26-2013, 04:19 AM
There are some fan sites that I go to which are not setup this way, but I was really only taking into account business's or major communities as anyone with $10 and 5 minutes could set this up without.
twitter.com is a big one that doesn't use www by the way.

Patrigan
08-26-2013, 04:28 AM
I think you meant "stagnant," not "stabilize." :)

That being said, standards are actually pretty important to stability, so maybe your faux pas was more accurate. ;)

I kind of meant both. English isn't my first language, so I might miss some of the nuances :p

I agree that standards are important for stabilization and often that's a good thing, but just as often it isn't. Some standards are very constricting.

Punk
08-26-2013, 10:50 AM
No, it is not displayed in Firefox.

It dawned on me after I left work yesterday that my IT department actually setup their own special version of Firefox on all computers at my job, so this could of been incorrect information. So, just to confirm my judgement on this browser, I had installed Firefox on my personal computer at home last night just to test it on a few pages and it does not remove the HTTP like chrome does.

If you were actually testing this and not just saying that it does not, then I would not know why we are having different results.


Modern advertisements also no longer use www anymore, maybe you should start paying attention.

You partially correct. I don't access many website that have banners or advertisements ran on it these days. I specifically went out to some sites this morning that do, and only about 1 in every 4 showed the www first.

While watching TV last night (side note: the new episode of Breaking Bad was great!), I caught 6 commercials that websites were relevant to their advertising. All 6 displayed the www on the screen, but there was two commercials that verbally said the domain name without stating the www first.

The next time I have Pandora on, I will try to pay attention to advertisements done there.





And this is where the whole problem lies. Your primary subdomain, should just be regarded as your primary domain. In this modern day of age, there is absolutely NO reason to have the "www", except to conform to standards of an age long past. Holding on to standards is what makes things stabilize and unable to evolve.

That is also why I, no offense intended, utterly despise your breed of programmers. You're the kind that stops the evolution of technologies. Again, this isn't personally to you, most likely, this is what you were taught. But do you believe Apple got so popular because it conformed to the standards? Why would they? People would just choose Microsoft, master of the age old standards. Apple decided to evolve, dump whatever standards are not needed anymore.

Sure, if there was a benefit for this and a place for it to evolve to, then that would be just fine with me. You are stating that there is no real reason to use it and I am stating that there is no real reason not to use it. If it is the standard and this is what most people are accustomed to, why would you be so opposed?



This is why a browser like chrome (unsure about firefox) nowadays just drops the www in the address. They are unnessecary bloat. We all despise bloat.

Chrome does not drop the subdomain shown in the address bar. If www is the primary subdomain, then that will be shown every time. What you may be confused with is that Chrome only drops the HTTP as long as the protocol is not secured.

Two completely different things.


So do yourself a favour, try to find out WHY exactly you need this www and what is actively preventing you from dropping it, aside from an age old standard. (There are a few minor reasons, example cookies.)

You have such a distaste for this, it is actually quite interesting.. but you haven't given me any reasoning behind this at all. I can't really have this conversation with you unless you actually have a leg to stand on other than "I don't like it."


Here's a bit more information about the "www" coming from one of the most distinguished IT sites: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2008/06/dropping-the-www-prefix/
Extra note: That's something from 2008 and a lot has changed since then as well.

Next time, just start by doing a bit of research. Don't blindly follow your professors, I have known many professors who just fail to follow the current trends and evolutions. It's good to know why something used to be, but you always have to look forward, to the next step of the technological revolution.

First off, the article you specifically linked was completely biased and had no real information in it at all. What it did have was a few links to other articles on completely different websites in which I have read before.

I think you are taking this to some extreme level that may only exist with you. If your only argument, out of everything you have presented, is that technology cannot evolve because we are still using the www subdomain as the default, then I would suggest you may want to take a step back and rethink your argument or at least provide any information as to how using the www subdomain is hindering your ideals in any way as of right now.


twitter.com is a big one that doesn't use www by the way.

Good eye. I do not use twitter so I would've never discovered this.

Patrigan
08-26-2013, 03:03 PM
I think you are taking this to some extreme level that may only exist with you. If your only argument, out of everything you have presented, is that technology cannot evolve because we are still using the www subdomain as the default, then I would suggest you may want to take a step back and rethink your argument or at least provide any information as to how using the www subdomain is hindering your ideals in any way as of right now.

You took a small part of my whole post and you explode that to be my main point. I hate internet discussions, so many humans incapable of properly reading and understanding. Might be because something gets lost in the textform...

The "www" subdomain is simply an old archaic approach. Less is more. If something doesn't add anything, then drop it. Even Microsoft understood that with Metro (although they took it slightly too far). If you can't understand that simple fact, then it's simply not worth discussing. Was a fun discussion though.