PDA

View Full Version : Set 2: Show Me the Meta



knightofeffect
06-11-2014, 08:48 AM
Hey everyone, been a while since I've had a controversail enough topic to tl;dr post on, but here goes...

I'm not going to make any demonstrative statements here, so lets just start with a "Shattered Destiny" pros and cons list:
PROS

Creates new interest and deckbuilding in constructed
Completely changes drafting with new synergies and strategies
Shows competent, well-balanced design is not a fluke
Creates a new "launching point" to bring in new players and get media exposure
Continues to accentuate the innovative design decisions that sets Hex apart from other TCGs


CONS

Could off-put new players that want a "ground-zero" start
Could lower the price of set 1


Now let's address the cons:

Putting off new players
Perhaps we've all been spoiled by the incredibly well-balanced and rounded-out limited experience that Set 1 offers that we forget it is not even half of a fully formed meta. The limited meta in a typical TCG consists of an entire block of cards, until that entire block is available, the limited meta is a novelty where players collect cards and wade-in to understanding the potential of some lower-level synergies. Several pro TCG players I knew would refuse to even begin drafting a new block in earnest until the second set was released, even then the primary limited meta would remain the previous block in rotation until the new block was fully released.

New players are missing nothing from the release of a second set when the first full meta for limited doesn't even exist yet. I would propose that seeing a living, growing, improving game with exciting new cards where you can still be a part of the first meta formation is worth more than buying into a game where the current playerbase has been invested in the same set for 8+ months.

The first true constructed meta won't even exist until we have two "blocks" (more or less than 7 sets depending on Hex's way of grouping sets) in the first rotation cycle. However, I think it is fair to consider the first block as representing a sufficent competative meta pleateu of sorts where major tournaments can be considered as supporting a legitimate meta. It isn't until after that point that new players would really have to consider "catching-up".


Reducing the value of set 1
This is all purely speculative. We have theories as to the real dollar (platinum) market value of set one packs will be and some 3rd party online stores have taken stabs a individual card values (which seem pretty healthy), but until the rubber-hits-the-road with trading and an AH, the market will not have a chance to normalize around demand.

Will set 2 packs be worth more than set 1 packs?

Highly likely; at least until the market completely normalizes (likely sometime during the second block)
Will set 2 packs drive down the price of set 1 packs?

This is purely subjective on how you look at the price bias effects of every TCG when a new set releases. I like to think that the new set/cards are actually overvalued at release, which, of course, drives down the relative value of other items. Since we have only been thinking in relative terms due to a lack of AH, it would at least seem like set 1 was being devalued.

My favorite time for making money in TCG trading was at prereleases; I'd take the "overvalued" new shiny cards and trade back for staples in the previous block that will remain prevalent in the new meta (or even have increased prescense) while also trying to find the undervalued gems in the new set that might fit into the new meta. One TCG prerelease I left with 20+ solemn simulacrums (a $2 valuation at the time) and devoided myself of all guilded lotuses ($15 valuation at the time). Basically, the talent in turning a TCG collection profit hinges on taking advantage of the relative over/under valuations of cards as they just rotate in and as they are about to rotate out while having a good prediction of the meta evolution (with respect to vintage cycle play as well).

Fortuently, we have been given every indication that we will have a functioning AH before set 2 releases which should allow for the first wave of set 1 price normilization to take effect, which will naturally be distrubed by the imminent release of set 2, but then that too will normalize as the cycle continues. Some people will take advantage of the momentary instabilities, some people will end up on the wrong side of a few prices swings, that is the nature of economics. As I said before, I don't think we will truley see a price normalization of set 1 peices until midway through block 2 with PvE in full effect for a while (hopefully by that time =).

tl;dr
I know E3 is a passion-driven time for overreactions and I know people love their 35+ pages-in-a-single-day controversy topics. If you just take a step back and think about it though, "Shattered Destiny" is simply a TCG taking the appropriate and natural step forward as it trys to build momentum into a full-featured product.

Also... I love everyone =D <3

Xenavire
06-11-2014, 09:03 AM
I think this is a well thought out post. Obviously, there is a bit of back and forth to be had, but I agree with pretty much everything here.

mach
06-11-2014, 09:13 AM
I think the main reason for disappointment regarding yesterday's announcement is not because of Set 2 itself being a bad thing but because of the lack of any news regarding PvE means that PvE is likely even further in the future than people were expecting. If PvE were coming in August or September that would likely have been announced at E3 alongside the Set 2 announcement. So that means that the PvE will be here October at the earliest, with a very good chance of it not arriving until next year.

That's what's really disappointing people.

Xenavire
06-11-2014, 09:16 AM
We did get a bunch of panorama spoilers. I would say that is the most we have seen on PvE in a while.

It isn't all doom and gloom, but people like to ignore things like that. *shrug*

mach
06-11-2014, 09:20 AM
We did get a bunch of panorama spoilers. I would say that is the most we have seen on PvE in a while.

It isn't all doom and gloom, but people like to ignore things like that. *shrug*

I'm pretty sure art isn't what's holding up PvE's release. If they had gone live with the "before" versions of what's in those videos they probably wouldn't have gotten any complaints.

nicosharp
06-11-2014, 09:26 AM
The more and more I think about it..
Shattered Destiny is exactly what it is.

knightofeffect
06-11-2014, 09:28 AM
I think the main reason for disappointment regarding yesterday's announcement is not because of Set 2 itself being a bad thing but because of the lack of any news regarding PvE means that PvE is likely even further in the future than people were expecting. If PvE were coming in August or September that would likely have been announced at E3 alongside the Set 2 announcement. So that means that the PvE will be here October at the earliest, with a very good chance of it not arriving until next year.

That's what's really disappointing people.

I agree with is completely. I intentionally didn't mention PvE at all in my OP as that is even higher-order speculation. We don't really know how/if PvE sets will be synced with PvP counterparts, it seems there would at least be some block coordination from a story-driven perspective. I wish ShadowElf was around to immediately summon all relevant information from CZE to-date regarding such matters, but with my own poor recollection, I don't remember anything concrete.

Still, I think it is reasonable for people to really want PvE information, but I don't think it is reasonable to fret about the 2nd set's release for lack of PvE information.

Personal tentative timeline imaginings:
July - AH, starter trials (PvE-ish, at least an AI improvement I'd think)
August - Set 2
September - First PvE dungeon, trading
October - Open Beta
Holiday Season - Set 3, Full PvE, Double Back, All my hopes and dreams from Santa-Cory himself.

Its worth mentioning that resident man-in-the-know Colin has pointed to the month of September as tentatively being significant. =)

knightofeffect
06-11-2014, 09:33 AM
The more and more I think about it..
Shattered Destiny is exactly what it is.

Bold choice with all the witty forum users around, isn't it.

I assume you have multitude of reasons to imply doom to the future potential of the game directly tied to the release of the second set in August that defeats any points I could have made, but were at the same time too obvious to point out so witticisms will suffice.

What happened Nico?

nicosharp
06-11-2014, 09:42 AM
More sarcasm than anything. But speaking to some of your earlier points in OP.

I am sticking around for the package, but all I've seen is lackluster AI, and PvP on par with MTG:O. A new set doesn't fix the game, or round out the package the game promised from the start. PvE is a really important element that they want to get right, but in its delay and the lack of definitive progress/deadline targets does not comfort anyone. Then the added push of more monetized content.

I am still a fan, but the timing for this and lack of follow-up on something else a lot of people are pining for which promises to move this game to free-to-play, seem off.

knightofeffect
06-11-2014, 09:55 AM
More sarcasm than anything. But speaking to some of your earlier points in OP.

I am sticking around for the package, but all I've seen is lackluster AI, and PvP on par with MTG:O. A new set doesn't fix the game, or round out the package the game promised from the start. PvE is a really important element that they want to get right, but in its delay and the lack of definitive progress/deadline targets does not comfort anyone. Then the added push of more monetized content.

I am still a fan, but the timing for this and lack of follow-up on something else a lot of people are pining for which promises to move this game to free-to-play, seem off.

Sorry about the judgement, I've been known to miss text-based sarcasm =P.

I agree and sympathize with all the consternation regarding PvE, I really want it too. I think it will be huge for the growth of the community and really set the game apart from its competitors in several ways. I'm disappointed that what we currently know shows very little of what is really required for the fully-functioning PvE portion of the game.

However, like Cory said in a post a few months ago, the decision was not to have PvP sit by and wait for the release of PvE. From what we know (with little intuition jumps):

Set 2 has been completed from a design perspective for a little while now
Design has already moved on to set 3
The implementation tools for introducing new cards has been refined while making set 1
The card-creation tools are needed for PvE elements just as much as PvP
Releasing a new PvP set should not diminish any coding resources from PvE as the tools already exist
The design for all the planned launch PvE dungeons is complete
Coding up all the interactions, special visuals, story effects, and enviroments is what is holding PvE back


Therefore, I think its fair to assume that releasing set 2 does not diminish the focus or timeline from PvE in any significant way, it is simply following the scrip Cory laid out when he said that the coding difficulties in implementing PvE would not hold back the progress of the PvP portion of the game. If anything, it does require a little more initial work with the equipment and interactions with set 2 in the PvE enviroment to "get-over-the-hump", but who knows, maybe they already built that into their release process.

I sincerely hope we see a much more mature AI in the starter-trials launch in the next few weeks, if that is not the case (minus allowances for a buggy launch), then there is certainly room for serious concern on that front.

All in all, while PvE information is definitely the most desired pieces of information, I don't think the set 2 release information is anything but good for the game and should not fall victim of reactionary doom and gloom due to perceived PvE deficiencies.

nicosharp
06-11-2014, 10:02 AM
Okay, let me put it a different way....

It's like releasing paid DLC's for a game before the game is even out.

My opinion is based on the package presented now. It is also based on the idea of the outside worlds potential perception of this game in the months to come. I really don't care what they do... I just have an idea of market perception that many others would not agree with, or see. It's better to live for now, rather than fear for the future.

knightofeffect
06-11-2014, 10:43 AM
Okay, let me put it a different way....

It's like releasing paid DLC's for a game before the game is even out.

My opinion is based on the package presented now. It is also based on the idea of the outside worlds potential perception of this game in the months to come. I really don't care what they do... I just have an idea of market perception that many others would not agree with, or see. It's better to live for now, rather than fear for the future.

While I don't exactly follow this... I do understand that there has always been a confusing grey-area for this game when people have try'd to fit their now-established online gaming buzzwords like "f2p", "pay2win", "DLC", etc. For me, this game is first and foremost a dTCG (which is also the only portion of the game we have so far) and while it aspires to be so much more and take the genre to a place its never been (and I know that is the promise that so many bought into), it still has be deliver on the fundamental tenants of a dTCG.

It is still highly speculative (and people love guessing) as to what degree this game will be able to be competitively played at a PvP level while being fully F2P and sustaining your PvP limited play and collection growth purely by grinding PvE and using the AH. I guess that really is the million dollar question that people feel the entire future of the game is riding on. How they can pull off that balance with the promise of really engaging, replayable PvE that will constantly bring in new players and sustain an economy.

Again, I think these are all valid issues in the (hopefully) near future. However, I think that spinning the August release of set 2 as some sort of "paid DLC" analogy is a disservice to news that should be both expected and welcomed for its own place in the development of this game as a whole (as it pertains to the "PROs" that I pointed out in the OP).

Thanks for the good discussion Nico! =)

mach
06-11-2014, 10:57 AM
While I don't exactly follow this... I do understand that there has always been a confusing grey-area for this game when people have try'd to fit their now-established online gaming buzzwords like "f2p", "pay2win", "DLC", etc. For me, this game is first and foremost a dTCG (which is also the only portion of the game we have so far) and while it aspires to be so much more and take the genre to a place its never been (and I know that is the promise that so many bought into), it still has be deliver on the fundamental tenants of a dTCG.


The problem is that they're marketing it as a MMOTCG so it's not unreasonable for people to apply the standards of MMOs. Their set 2 move is appropriate by TCG standards but inappropriate by MMO standards, which leaves them in an awkward spot.

Personally I wish they'd drop the MMO label entirely until they are actually ready to add the features which would make it a MMO.

nicosharp
06-11-2014, 11:01 AM
Personally I wish they'd drop the MMO label entirely until they are actually ready to add the features which would make it a MMO.

But then they give the lawsuit legs....

chili
06-11-2014, 11:57 AM
Mmmmmm.... I think people are confusing when crypto is asking and when it's telling something. Set 2 is coming out August period, nothing is stopping that except Cryptozoic finding another bug that crashes tournaments and delaying this (so it's coming out in october).

Second...

More cards = better decks (better meta generally)

Prices will crash but if they do it's because they were crap cards to begin with that were going to be displaced at the first semi upgrade. Also certain combo enablers or other types of cards will shift in price as well.

Quite honestly I think aggro will rape too much face, I think it's positioned to be the strongest deck because of Poca, and with some cards pushing it over will just kill everything, and outrace the wrath.

Gwaer
06-11-2014, 12:03 PM
Also... I love everyone =D <3

This statement offended me greatly. You should be ashamed. Do not give false hope to the unlovable. It's cruel.

Otherwise, it was a great post.

mach
06-11-2014, 12:06 PM
But then they give the lawsuit legs....

I very much doubt that calling themselves an MMO (before they actually have the MMO features) will help them in court. It may even hurt them by making them look dishonest to jurors.

Leingod
06-11-2014, 01:17 PM
I can only imagine the biggest problems with pve implementation are multiple person games and AI. AI is still quite bad and I can't imagine it providing a decent challenge without some Super Turbo button reading style cheese.

Svenn
06-11-2014, 02:04 PM
The problem is that they're marketing it as a MMOTCG so it's not unreasonable for people to apply the standards of MMOs. Their set 2 move is appropriate by TCG standards but inappropriate by MMO standards, which leaves them in an awkward spot.

Personally I wish they'd drop the MMO label entirely until they are actually ready to add the features which would make it a MMO.
Even after they add all the features it still won't be an MMO. It will be a dTCG with a PvE campaign, including multiplayer. I'm still not sure why they keep referring to it as an MMO. It's no more of an MMO than something like Diablo.

mach
06-11-2014, 02:07 PM
Even after they add all the features it still won't be an MMO. It will be a dTCG with a PvE campaign, including multiplayer. I'm still not sure why they keep referring to it as an MMO. It's no more of an MMO than something like Diablo.

You're probably right, but we know so little about PvE that I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt until we see what PvE actually is.

Svenn
06-11-2014, 02:18 PM
You're probably right, but we know so little about PvE that I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt until we see what PvE actually is.
We know that PvE is 1 person dungeons and 3 person raids. We know that you progress through a dungeon one encounter at a time, by yourself. We know that it's a card duel with some modified rules. We know that you progress from one node on a map to the next doing a new encounter at each (some of which might be puzzles or other non-card things). We know how the structure of the PvE works, we've known that forever. We even have a pretty good idea of how the leveling system works. The only things we don't know are specifics of dungeons, champions, or PvE cards really.

None of that is at all like an MMO. It's just an RPG.

Clawdius
06-11-2014, 03:03 PM
The longer they go without making any concrete announcement about the state of PVE and the expected release of PVE the easier it is to believe that it was never their focus. At this point I'm just waiting for them to announce that they're going to release the tablet client before they make any announcements about PVE.

It is somewhat disappointing that a game that claimed it would have a beta ready client in a few months has at this point been effectively delayed a year. I just wish they had been forthright about the time frame for release, and while I understand that Cryptozoic was primarily composed of artists and card/game designers etc. and almost certainly was mislead by their tech employees as to the complexity of the task at hand the unrealistic expectation of having the PVE out before this point wasn't espoused by backers and users, it was the Hex team that made claims that obviously couldn't ever have been anywhere close to being true.

The bottom line is, if you can't get a feature complete beta for your project ready a year late, why on earth did you ever claim that it would be ready in a few months time? At this point the Hex fan base is like a publisher who advanced an author an appreciable sum for their next book and is left hanging. And now the author, without any context, is talking about an entirely different project than the one the publisher was expecting. To me at this point promises of a beta worth client in September 2013 sound a lot like George R. R. Martin's promises of the release of A Dance with Dragons at the end of A Feast For Crows, he said it would take a year to edit the work and slap a bow on it and it wound up taking six years.

I just hope that Hex PVE is actually a focus for the team, everything they've put forth thus far has been solid and I appreciate the fact that in a TCG they need a solid base both in terms of mechanics and ideally a sizeable player base buying their products. I'd much rather have a solid foundation on which to build than have them rush out anything that leaves a negative impression that haunts the product. That being said, whoever made it sound like they had a few months between the Kickstarter and the beta release (which while it was only said that our Kickstarter rewards would be available during beta, there was no indication that this would be done piecemeal or that such a thing was even a possiblity at least as far as I recall) was clearly mistaken. The assumptions that must have taken place for someone to think building an "MMOTCG" that was beta ready could be handled in a few short months were obviously way off base. And, honestly, I feel that it was at the very least somewhat disingenuous of the Hex Kickstarter to make it sound like it was plausible if it wasn't.

To be fair to Hex, a great many Kickstarter projects wind up slipping and end up missing major milestones and in some cases are delayed by as much as a year ( in some cases even longer, or indefinitely). However, I can certainly understand the disapproval for announcements like Shattered Destiny, when the project as portrayed by the Kickstarter campaign is, at best, incomplete. For me the worst part of it, oddly, is just how much better Hex is than anything else on the market. But at least to me it is absolutely the worst part, knowing that trying to use another game in the genre to prop up my PVE desires while I wait on Hex is like trying to cure my scurvy by licking a picture of a pitcher of orange juice.

knightofeffect
06-11-2014, 03:11 PM
People will point out that technically all MMO means is the letter of the words contained in the acronym. Which the game definently fulfills. However, this is again a historically hazy ground as to whether or not an rpg such as Diablo should be able to claim the title MMO, if not, where is the line vs themeparks and runescape/maple story. The general consensus (and one that I agree with) is that it's not, but that doesn't mean that a game like Hex can't use the term.

You might feel that it is misrepresenting the game at its own peril, but CZE clearly believes it is the shortest-sweetest way to encapsulate the genre-redefining implementation of PvE that they have planned.

Early on I stated I wanted it to be made very very clear from an announcement and marketing perspective that Hex was only entering it's PvP beta with the PvE portion still seemingly in closed (or pre) alpha. Honestly, with a solid AH, trading, and large-scale tournaments, the PvP portion would probably be ready for open beta in and of itself (saving double backs and additional formats for launch); although, and rightfully so I believe, Cory has said the game will not move to open beta without at least some initial PvE dungeons.

One thing is quite clear though: the pointless bemoaning of set 2 is really just the Sheep's clothing for the general discontent regarding PvE :)

Werlix
06-11-2014, 03:16 PM
The longer they go without making any concrete announcement about the state of PVE and the expected release of PVE the easier it is to believe that it was never their focus. At this point I'm just waiting for them to announce that they're going to release the tablet client before they make any announcements about PVE.

It is somewhat disappointing that a game that claimed it would have a beta ready client in a few months has at this point been effectively delayed a year. I just wish they had been forthright about the time frame for release, and while I understand that Cryptozoic was primarily composed of artists and card/game designers etc. and almost certainly was mislead by their tech employees as to the complexity of the task at hand the unrealistic expectation of having the PVE out before this point wasn't espoused by backers and users, it was the Hex team that made claims that obviously couldn't ever have been anywhere close to being true.

The bottom line is, if you can't get a feature complete beta for your project ready a year late, why on earth did you ever claim that it would be ready in a few months time? At this point the Hex fan base is like a publisher who advanced an author an appreciable sum for their next book and is left hanging. And now the author, without any context, is talking about an entirely different project than the one the publisher was expecting. To me at this point promises of a beta worth client in September 2013 sound a lot like George R. R. Martin's promises of the release of A Dance with Dragons at the end of A Feast For Crows, he said it would take a year to edit the work and slap a bow on it and it wound up taking six years.

I just hope that Hex PVE is actually a focus for the team, everything they've put forth thus far has been solid and I appreciate the fact that in a TCG they need a solid base both in terms of mechanics and ideally a sizeable player base buying their products. I'd much rather have a solid foundation on which to build than have them rush out anything that leaves a negative impression that haunts the product. That being said, whoever made it sound like they had a few months between the Kickstarter and the beta release (which while it was only said that our Kickstarter rewards would be available during beta, there was no indication that this would be done piecemeal or that such a thing was even a possiblity at least as far as I recall) was clearly mistaken. The assumptions that must have taken place for someone to think building an "MMOTCG" that was beta ready could be handled in a few short months were obviously way off base. And, honestly, I feel that it was at the very least somewhat disingenuous of the Hex Kickstarter to make it sound like it was plausible if it wasn't.

To be fair to Hex, a great many Kickstarter projects wind up slipping and end up missing major milestones and in some cases are delayed by as much as a year ( in some cases even longer, or indefinitely). However, I can certainly understand the disapproval for announcements like Shattered Destiny, when the project as portrayed by the Kickstarter campaign is, at best, incomplete. For me the worst part of it, oddly, is just how much better Hex is than anything else on the market. But at least to me it is absolutely the worst part, knowing that trying to use another game in the genre to prop up my PVE desires while I wait on Hex is like trying to cure my scurvy by licking a picture of a pitcher of orange juice.

http://coryhudsonjones.tumblr.com/post/83645967847/hex-beta-is-almost-here

Also, PvP progress does not hinder PvE progress. So the announcement of set 2 in no way delays PvE.

Turtlewing
06-11-2014, 03:24 PM
Even after they add all the features it still won't be an MMO. It will be a dTCG with a PvE campaign, including multiplayer. I'm still not sure why they keep referring to it as an MMO. It's no more of an MMO than something like Diablo.

Well yes the MMO term is misapplied (Hex games are not massively multiplayer, they're just multiplayer, and a lot of PvE will be single player.)

What they'e actually creating is an interactive fiction driven card game. Potentially a multiplayer card based RPG.

However what most people who say "MMO" mean is "gear heavy online game focused on completing quests and leveling up".

Hex PvE probably fist that description well enough.

knightofeffect
06-11-2014, 03:25 PM
@clawdius (pretty awesome name)
That is a great post and I think most everyone agrees with most of it, we have all felt the disappointment and disillusionment you referenced at one time or another. Cory himself has at least posted on 3 separate occasions that he himself agrees that they missed it badly, understands the frustration, and apologizes profusely.

At the same time they have tried to do the only thing they can, not beat themselves up, look forward, and make the best decisions they can with what they've got. Sometimes the community has disagreed with what the best timing/decision is, but on the whole, CZE has been doing a pretty bang-up job.

While the lack of PvE disappointment is palpable, possibly even more so as we expect life-changing info on all our favorite games at E3; I think we should celebrate overall game progress like a new set rather than twisting into the new whipping boy for our PvE frustrations. :)

nicosharp
06-11-2014, 03:32 PM
While the lack of PvE disappointment is palpable, possibly even more so as we expect life-changing info on all our favorite games at E3; I think we should celebrate overall game progress like a new set rather than twisting into the new whipping boy for our PvE frustrations. :)
It doesn't hurt to show we still love them, by adding more fuel to the fire under their asses to keep this train moving. The last thing I want to do is shower them with praise for PvP content already developed, which could lead to complacency and slow downs for other focus areas.

This is a company in So. Cal after all and its summer time :P (J/K)

I can pat everyone on the back for the amazing product so far, but the mission statement we were sold one year ago is still far off the mark.

Xenavire
06-11-2014, 03:38 PM
It doesn't hurt to show we still love them, by adding more fuel to the fire under their asses to keep this train moving. The last thing I want to do is shower them with praise for PvP content already developed, which could lead to complacency and slow downs for other focus areas.

This is a company in So. Cal after all and its summer time :P (J/K)

I can pat everyone on the back for the amazing product so far, but the mission statement we were sold one year ago is still far off the mark.

I may not have been onboard with all of your posts today, but I fully agree here. They need to know that we are waiting for PvE, and I think they will have heard it (and not in the most pleasant or flattering way.) But we need to give positive feedback on set 2 (and negative if we find genuine fault with the content.) we want them to want to cater to us, not just pack it in because we are ungrateful little shits hahaha.

Seriously though, PvE by 2015 or we riot, and I will lead the charge.

nicosharp
06-11-2014, 03:40 PM
You are such a pessimist!
(Oh and know that I am mainly a PvP player - Most of my posts today do not 100% mean to capture my personal opinion or contentment with the product. I am more playing advocate for future free-to-players, and individuals that find out about this for the first time, like I did 1 year ago, and pee their pants in excitement)

Clawdius
06-11-2014, 03:44 PM
http://coryhudsonjones.tumblr.com/post/83645967847/hex-beta-is-almost-here

Also, PvP progress does not hinder PvE progress. So the announcement of set 2 in no way delays PvE.

I never said that it did, but what I did say was that the longer this goes on the easier it is to believe that their focus is on PVP which makes them money, rather than PVE which requires significant time invested from artists, writers, and programmers without having any immediate boost to their bottom line.

I can't say that is the case, but it's certainly easy to understand why people might feel that way. And while there is likely not much overlap between the people working on set 2 and those working on PVE, if you can't empathize with people who are concerned by the lack of any concrete announcements about the state of PVE I'm not sure there is anything I could possibly say to change that.

At the end of the day, when you have a large segment of your player base who has been champing at the bit waiting for a specific announcement, any other announcement is often seen as a disappointment. I know that when ArenaNet announced that work had begun on Guild Wars 2 when they came out with Eye of the North, a lot of the fanbase felt that the focus of the company would no longer be on updating Guild Wars. That wasn't the case, Guild Wars still had a live team that focused on the metagame and made a number of significant changes long after work on GW2 had begun.

I feel like it's a catch 22 in any community, if you play your cards too close to the vest the community may feel that you aren't working toward what they want done, and if you announce anything too specific that winds up not being a fun mechanic that needs to be reworked or scrapped entirely people often get more upset than if you had never said anything at all.

Honestly it doesn't bother me, I gave up waiting eagerly for Hex PVE a long time ago and have written it off as "likely to be done some time before 2042".

Werlix
06-11-2014, 03:51 PM
http://coryhudsonjones.tumblr.com/post/83645967847/hex-beta-is-almost-here

Also, PvP progress does not hinder PvE progress. So the announcement of set 2 in no way delays PvE.


I never said that it did...

Then how is this related to the thread topic?

Xenavire
06-11-2014, 03:55 PM
You are such a pessimist!
(Oh and know that I am mainly a PvP player - Most of my posts today do not 100% mean to capture my personal opinion or contentment with the product. I am more playing advocate for future free-to-players, and individuals that find out about this for the first time, like I did 1 year ago, and pee their pants in excitement)

I respect and support this. :D

Clawdius
06-11-2014, 04:04 PM
Then how is this related to the thread topic?
I read the thread up to where I made my post, and that was what the conversation up to that point inspired me to write. I wasn't the first person to bring up PVE, and while I'm sure it gives you great pleasure to write your banal quips I'm afraid I'm not amused. Enjoy being the self appointed Forum Etiquette Pedant.

Banquetto
06-11-2014, 04:19 PM
I don't think it's 100% true that PvP development does not hinder PvE progress. Bear in mind that set 2 does not just feature new cards but at least one entirely new game mechanic in the form of Tunneling. That's going to need programmer and software QA time, which on a low-budget project like this cannot help but divert at least some resources away from other areas, like PvE or completing features like double-backs.

Werlix
06-11-2014, 04:23 PM
I read the thread up to where I made my post, and that was what the conversation up to that point inspired me to write. I wasn't the first person to bring up PVE, and while I'm sure it gives you great pleasure to write your banal quips I'm afraid I'm not amused. Enjoy being the self appointed Forum Etiquette Pedant.

I just find it a strange coincidence that there are suddenly all these people posting about PvE delays when there's just been an announcement about a new PvP set. Either people think that PvP sets delay PvE sets, or people are just angry in general about the PvE timeline and are randomly venting on threads devoted to discussion about set 2. How about creating a new vent thread?

Xenavire
06-11-2014, 04:30 PM
(When are people NOT venting about PvE? We know. You aren't alone. If I could give up my collection to get PvE in the game, I would, and would take donations to get it back. :p)

Clawdius
06-11-2014, 04:35 PM
It's tough to say exactly when double backs will make an appearance, in his blog post a few months ago it is listed as one of the features that will be in the closed PVP beta. That being said, from what we've been told a large amount of the art assets and gameplay design including card mechanics is actually already extant since Cory said he had played a dungeon in game in the dev build a month ago. Engineering resources are likely the primary requirement to getting PVE up to snuff to be released to the public, and it's not implausible that the delay of the double back has adversely affected PVE being released.

That being said, it's tricky in situations like this where no concrete announcement exists for people to point to, and instead we have to extrapolate from a variety of sources (blog posts, site updates etc) and try to project the probable future from an incomplete data set. While we want PVE and we want it last week, especially with the pending lawsuit something (like set 2) that will have relatively immediate fiscal returns makes sense so they can bolster the company coffers.

I'd just love to see an announcement that sets some of this in stone. It's all well and good to say how different Hex is than that other game, but PVE is where Hex will truly differentiate itself in a big way from the competition. After all, even Duels of the Planeswalkers is at its core MTG, nothing new or innovative exists in that space to make the PVE substantially different than if you were playing a young child that didn't understand how the cards worked for whom you were willing to bend the rules in the interest of their being able to play. Hex on the other hand has everything from gear and mercenaries, to cards and mechanics designed specifically to never be used by the player. As such there can be little doubt that Hex LLC would love to get PVE released ASAP, but I understand where you're coming from Banquetto.

We're just going to have to wait for an official announcement, while it's easy to start to think that their focus has never been on PVE and it becomes easier to feel that way (despite assurances to the contrary) the longer this goes on, we just have to trust in our benevolent Hex overlords.