IS CDPR ruining its good name w/ Gwent?

[Mystikast]

IS CDPR ruining its good name w/ Gwent?

Hey all,

Long time witcher fan and gwent (fan?) [not much anymore] since beta. CDPR has one of the best names in the gaming industry - However, I can't help but think they are ruining their good name with Gwent. This game is quickly becoming a watered down mess that clearly doesn't know what it wants to be. It began as something unique -- now anything can go anywhere -- melee/siege/ranged are just 'words', the dark-esque style of the witcher series is gone.

Gwent has gotten worse over time and lost direction --- and I have lost faith in CDPR.

 

[iamthedave]

Then you had none in the first place and put unfair expectations on the team. They're delving into an extremely difficult environment that they've never tackled before, almost entirely because of interest they didn't expect, and have run into the sorts of difficulties literally everyone who's ever done a gaming card game has run into.

Midwinter was a cluster, yes.

They are still:

-More generous than every other allegedly f2p tcg
-More reactive to our feedback
-More responsive to our feedback
-Working on a singleplayer campaign which we have no reason to doubt will be good at this point.

 

[Mystikast]

Then you had none in the first place and put unfair expectations on the team. They're delving into an extremely difficult environment that they've never tackled before, almost entirely because of interest they didn't expect, and have run into the sorts of difficulties literally everyone who's ever done a gaming card game has run into.

Midwinter was a cluster, yes.

They are still:

-More generous than every other allegedly f2p tcg
-More reactive to our feedback
-More responsive to our feedback
-Working on a singleplayer campaign which we have no reason to doubt will be good at this point.

1) Generosity doesn't matter if the game isn't fun to play
2) Reacting positively or negatively? The game has gotten worse.
3) Same as 2
4) 'No reason to doubt will be good'? How about how badly they've screwed up gwent? That gives me doubt.

 

[Snake_Foxhounder]

Speaking of generosity, they nerfed rank up rewards to next to nothing. Just like the level up rewards. So there's that.

They might have lost some "respect"/faith but it's not the be all- end all.

I believe what we're seeing with Gwent is a matter of creativity vs financial viability. It looks like the management is clamping down on devs to make everything more accessible. I believe that's the reason each patch introduced a watered down version of what Gwent was. As a F2P game Gwent needs to generate profit and the best way to do that is to make the game as accessibe as possible. Meaning toning everything down so casuals can/want to play. It's an unfortunate state of affairs but we'll just have to wait and see how it turns out in the end.

 

[iamthedave]

1) Generosity doesn't matter if the game isn't fun to play
2) Reacting positively or negatively? The game has gotten worse.
3) Same as 2
4) 'No reason to doubt will be good'? How about how badly they've screwed up gwent? That gives me doubt.

1) Yes, yes it does.
2) It's called a messed up patch. That happens.
3) Pros would disagree broadly. The competitive system for Gwent was formed enormously based on their feedback.
4) But... they haven't. They released one screwed up patch. Their speciality is single player experiences. So why would the single player experience - their speciality - not be good? Or has the Gwent team's teething troubles with a genre they've never touched before tainted your faith in their ability to make single player experiences, which they've proven to be near-unrivalled at creating?

EDIT: Pardon the double post. Tablet messed up.

Speaking of generosity, they nerfed rank up rewards to next to nothing. Just like the level up rewards. So there's that.

They might have lost some "respect"/faith but it's not the be all- end all.

I believe what we're seeing with Gwent is a matter of creativity vs financial viability. It looks like the management is clamping down on devs to make everything more accessible. I believe that's the reason each patch introduced a watered down version of what Gwent was. As a F2P game Gwent needs to generate profit and the best way to do that is to make the game as accessibe as possible. Meaning toning everything down so casuals can/want to play. It's an unfortunate state of affairs but we'll just have to wait and see how it turns out in the end.

Even with those nerfs the game is still BY FAR the most generous tcg that has ever been made.

Honestly, seeing all the complaints is just an argument for never being generous in the first place. We still get enough scraps and kegs from day to day playing to construct decks in no time. The rewards they gave before were - honestly - ludicrous on top of general play rewards and now with quests on top.

But your general point is on point I think. There's no way the Gwent team didn't know the Midwinter patch wasn't ready. Hopefully the utter disaster it's been will convince management not to interfere so much going forward, for the long term good of the game.

 

[oOxhaosOo]

I dont think so, ok they have balance problems ( most card games have them) and tryed some things they should maybe talked about before.
Things like that happen all the time and they try to talk with us about it.

Then you had none in the first place and put unfair expectations on the team. They're delving into an extremely difficult environment that they've never tackled before, almost entirely because of interest they didn't expect, and have run into the sorts of difficulties literally everyone who's ever done a gaming card game has run into.

Midwinter was a cluster, yes.

They are still:

-More generous than every other allegedly f2p tcg
-More reactive to our feedback
-More responsive to our feedback
-Working on a singleplayer campaign which we have no reason to doubt will be good at this point.

Iamthedave has right with this and we just should try not overreact about this.

Its not like they go EA mode and try to sell every pixel.

 

[Snake_Foxhounder]

1. It does, to a degree. But if people don't want to play the game, giving stuff away for free won't help. Besides, they're reducing rewards.

2. People have had isues with the last few patches, this one was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Remember the gold immunity patch and how a lot of golds were made useless? So do a lot of people.

3. Quite frankly, I'm not sure you should base your game on 10 people. They're the same ones that praised the inclusion of RNG cards, only to "boycott" Gwent and the RNG stuff this pach. Besides, they're not enterely objective, being involved with CDPR somehow.

4. Again, and I can't say this enough, there's NOTHING worse for a product (in this case a game) than having yesmen for fans. "It'll be ok" and "it's not too bad" brought us a lot of crap in the industry. It's because of fans like that that day one dlc, microtransactions and broken games at launch are the norm. This doesn't necessarily apply to CDPR but the industry in general.

Tl;dr

It's not the end of the world, they're still working on the game and at least somewhat listening to feedback. That doesn't mean they hould be exempt from criticism. So please refrain from shilling. It isn't doing anyone any favours.

EDIT:

Speaking of generousity; I don't know or care about other CCGs, so I go by what I know. Games like Metal Gear Online 2. A game so stingy with rewards that it's almost painful. So I see Gwent as a game with a good model. At the start of Open beta, I milled all but 2 factions, including leaders. I focused on NG. As of today, I have an almost full NG collection ( don't have a few Golds I don't want) and a full ST collection, including having to craft leaders. And Monsters is coming along nicely. And I usually play for 1 daily keg, IF that. It doesn't take much to get a collection going. That was before the patch. Now we'll see. Thing is, if we go "meh" at this and they see it as OK, next patch introduces even less. So I'm being cautious.

 

[iamthedave]

1. An excellent argument for why they shouldn't bother with generosity in the first place.

2. Yes, people have histrionically claimed the sky is falling on every patch. The gold immunity issue as hotly debated and was mostly a positive. A lot of golds were useless before the patch and after, so that is a null argument. That is simple card balance.

3. The pro scene is very important for a game's long-term health, and balance should usually be based around competitive play. Balancing around the worst/least skilled players does a game no favours. Especially when Gwent is meant to be more skill-based.

4. I'm not a yesman and very few people on this forum are. In fact, the majority are overly negative and refuse to engage in any positive discussion at all.

tl;dr

I'll give criticism when it's warranted. Don't passive-aggressively accuse me of shilling because my opinion happens to differ from your own. Or would you like to be lumped in with the histrionic 'sky is falling' people who react to every slight change like it's a direct attempt from CDPR to ruin their lives? You want to see me be critical, look at my opinions on the new leader cards and Eist in particular. But I'm not going to fill the forum up with pointless and useless negativity that tells CDPR absolutely nothing on their game that is in beta, that we're playing supposedly to help them.

 

[Philologus]

1. An excellent argument for why they shouldn't bother with generosity in the first place.

2. Yes, people have histrionically claimed the sky is falling on every patch. The gold immunity issue as hotly debated and was mostly a positive. A lot of golds were useless before the patch and after, so that is a null argument. That is simple card balance.

3. The pro scene is very important for a game's long-term health, and balance should usually be based around competitive play. Balancing around the worst/least skilled players does a game no favours. Especially when Gwent is meant to be more skill-based.

4. I'm not a yesman and very few people on this forum are. In fact, the majority are overly negative and refuse to engage in any positive discussion at all.

tl;dr

I'll give criticism when it's warranted. Don't passive-aggressively accuse me of shilling because my opinion happens to differ from your own. Or would you like to be lumped in with the histrionic 'sky is falling' people who react to every slight change like it's a direct attempt from CDPR to ruin their lives? You want to see me be critical, look at my opinions on the new leader cards and Eist in particular. But I'm not going to fill the forum up with pointless and useless negativity that tells CDPR absolutely nothing on their game that is in beta, that we're playing supposedly to help them.

I'm going to preface my statements by expressing disdain for your "Yes-man" attitude. Try to be objective, and please try to be logical.

1) What are you talking about? How is it "an excellent argument" for not being generous? If less people play AND CDPR lessens the rewards, do you really think it will have a good impact on the game?

2) Wait a minute.. you acknowledge there were/are broken golds before the immunity patch, and then go on to say that removing immunity "doesn't matter" because those cards were useless anyway. Yeah.. your logic makes total sense. :/ Really Dave, try to think before you type. The LOGICAL thing to do is make those gold cards useful, not make them even more worthless in competitive play.

3) I don't know of the pro-players outside of some LifeCoach. However, I do know they play the most efficient decks, not necessarily the most creative. Right now, this game is all about mindless point-spamming. (Maybe something you're familiar with?) There is little leeway to be creative and beat one's opponent with deep strategy.

Let me be blunt: Gwent is to MtG (even back when it first came out) as Rock-Paper-Scissors is to Chess. Get it?

4) Of course you're "not a yes-man". Of course.. in reviewing your posts, I don't see how anyone could think you're a "yes-man". /s

 

[Riven-Twain]

Moderator's reminder to all: Keep it friendly, please. Difference of opinion is no reason to call others names.

 

[Snake_Foxhounder]

1. They shouldn't be generous because people don't want to play after a messed up patch? I don't get tis train of thought.

2. Gold immunity made a lot of golds useless, without actually balancing them out. Ciri was used as carryover. Now she gets taken out by thunder. Tibor is useless. Interacting with golds is great. Not balancing golds that still work for old patches is not.

3. This is what I have mixed feelings on. Marketing is what sells games. You get a bunch of good players together, people watch them and in turn want to play the game. What I disliked is how balancing was tied to tournaments. Patches are delayed because a tournament is around the corner. I think the core game should be balanced first, before focusing on esports. At least don't let it affect balance patches.

4. Not from my experience. Even the reddit posts were mostly constructive. This forum is a good place for that. While you see threads like "I'm quitting Gwent" and "CDPR sucks" occasionally, most threads about issues are constructive.

Sorry if the post came across as passive-aggressive. I was direct. A fan can still be a fan and still say "I don't like what you're doing here." I don't want to put down a person over a game, so my apologies if you were offended. I just don't appreciate "give it time" responses to fans' concerns. Maybe it wasn't your intention but it came across as too defensive.

 

[ZenaRose]

CDPR of course doing good job, but they can do it much better. Devs just need to balance overpovered 45% playrate decks like Brouver earlier than 1 month like now. Patch was 19 december and will be fixed after Gwent open 21 january. So it takes 1 month to balance obviously broken deck!
Better than hearthstone but still BAD game supporting! 1 month of no-brain game is too much to be CDPR gloryboy for me

 

[iamthedave]

1. They shouldn't be generous because people don't want to play after a messed up patch? I don't get tis train of thought.

2. Gold immunity made a lot of golds useless, without actually balancing them out. Ciri was used as carryover. Now she gets taken out by thunder. Tibor is useless. Interacting with golds is great. Not balancing golds that still work for old patches is not.

3. This is what I have mixed feelings on. Marketing is what sells games. You get a bunch of good players together, people watch them and in turn want to play the game. What I disliked is how balancing was tied to tournaments. Patches are delayed because a tournament is around the corner. I think the core game should be balanced first, before focusing on esports. At least don't let it affect balance patches.

4. Not from my experience. Even the reddit posts were mostly constructive. This forum is a good place for that. While you see threads like "I'm quitting Gwent" and "CDPR sucks" occasionally, most threads about issues are constructive.

Sorry if the post came across as passive-aggressive. I was direct. A fan can still be a fan and still say "I don't like what you're doing here." I don't want to put down a person over a game, so my apologies if you were offended. I just don't appreciate "give it time" responses to fans' concerns. Maybe it wasn't your intention but it came across as too defensive.

1. Not quite the point I was getting at. Gwent - I think unarguably - is the most generous game of its type ever put onto the market. It practically shotgun blasts you with free kegs, scraps and meteorite powder. They recently just ran a weekend where every keg you opened gave you a premium card; ordinarily expensive things you can't get without a lot of meteorite powder. Has hearthstone ever done anything that generous in its entire lifespan? (Genuine question, I only played HS for a year or so) Yet all of this unneeded generosity is apparently worthless because of one bad patch and a couple of middling ones? If people are going to be so soured so easily, then why bother with the generosity in the first place? We already know people will keep playing because other games, more and less successful use less kind models and thrive.

2. You are right, but gold immunity didn't simply ruin cards. It made plenty better as well. I think its clear CDPR's testing team isn't on top of everything and they don't always seem to appreciate all the consequences of decisions they take. But the gold immunity patch was overall a positive and made for more interactive gameplay in general. Some golds need buffing and changing, there's nothing wrong with that.

3. I agree and disgree. It annoys people more because they have to wait. But feedback from better players, who understand how the game works fundamentally and who have a better insight on what is going on and why it's happening tends to be more useful. The wait sucks, but I think it results in better patches overall.

4. Your post did, and thanks for the apology, which is duly accepted.

 

[nunqmuo]

Oookay. I think I'm gonna post my unneeded opinion on the state of Gwent.

Before I start I want to say that I'm a big fan of the Witcher universe. Read books and played games multiple times. And I'm also a fan of eralier version of Gwent.

So to the state of the game...

... And the state of Gwent is a mess.

With each patch the game being simplified and dumbed down. Even the cards names. LoL. The faction almost lost it's uniqueness. Remember when graveyard shenanigans was a SK thing? Well... Now all factions have interactions with GYs. Remember when ST ambush was a thing putting pressure and forcing your opponent to think and taking risk? Well... Now we have ambush cards that are worse version of other cards, predictable and susceptible to pass. Remember a Swarm decks being monsters exclusive? I can keep giving examples but I think you got the idea. A lot of cards are the same by it's nature with only difference in arts and slight variations in numbers. Most of unique factions gameplay mechanics are gone or nerfed into the the ground they might not exist. Powercreep is a thing. With each patch an average value of card (mostly bronzes) is increasing. And that means that control decks (which I play almost exclusively) became almost obsolete. 30+ opener into pass with nothing to control? Easy. 2ca off the bat.
​​​​You just can't keep up with points-vomiting decks. Especially if there is nothing to control cause many key cards have on deploy effects. 100+ new cards. Great. Except most of them are rehashed version of old ones. Not even talking about balance. Coinflip, silver spies...Yeeeah... Disastrous misleading cards descriptions.
I sea a lot of people praising generosity of the game. It's very shortsighted. At first glance it might look good but if you like the game (and I'm still do...kinda) you should be worried. If the game is too generous it means there's no incentive to pay money for kegs. And no money no profit for the cdpr. No profit? Abandoned game.
Thronebreaker. Hm... Isn't it supposed to be released already? Yeah... The devs get quite ok with delays... End season smth smth. Ok. Back to Thronebreaker. I'm sure ..almost.. it'll be great. But I don't think people playing card games doing it for single player experience. Still gonna buy it for them new cards.

I could go into much deeper details but don't think its necessary in this thread.

All in all. I really don't like the direction the Gwent go. If there any at all. Seems like devs don't have a vision of what their game is supposed to be. But I hope I'm wrong and the game won't be dead before it's goes final. I really do.

Best regard.

P.s. thanks, Sheva007. yeah. Was half asleep at the moment of posting. I forgot to write about agility of units. Rows concept is useless right now. Melee, ranged,siege....yeah... might as well call em a b c right now.
Prior if you know the decks well you was able to predict your opponents turns and play proactively and was rewarded for that. Not it's gone. And gold immunity removal, of course. I'm not strictly against it. But the devs forgot to adjust gold cards accordingly. Making a lot of golds without strong deploy effects not viable and worse than some bronzes. It's actually funny. Cause there are bronzes better than silvers. Silvers better than golds. Golds worse than bronzes. Good times.

​​​​​​

​​

 

[Sheva007]

All units being agile, gold inmunity removed, rendering them useless, and the increase of RNG patch after patch is making Gwent a watered down HS copy.

Yes, its still in beta.

yes, there is still time.

No, it wont get better. Patch after patch it goes from bad to worse. There is little to no hope. The Developers already Warned us too be "open minded", meaning "we are going to destroy the game you love in order to try and catch some of those sweet , sweet childs playing hearthstone, but please, dont leave us since you are all we have atm!"

anyone saying the increase of RNG, and the removing of CORE mechanics in order to make the game more casual friendly is good for the game, its clearly out of his mind.

end of story.

And before you say "no, thats your opinion", no, its not an opinion, its the brutal truth.


If CDPR keep walking the path they have taken, in a couple of years se will remember GWENT as the game with Infinite potencial that "failed because it turned out that there was already a RNG/childish game in the market, called hearthstone".

just wait and see.

 

[iamthedave]

Patch after patch it goes from bad to worse.... yet literally last patch was the most enjoyable and diverse meta the game has ever seen.

This is the exact mentality I was talking about. Every single patch 'the sky is falling' 'the game is doomed'.

The Midwinter patch contained some mistakes. I think every single person agrees with that. I absolutely refute the idea that this means Gwent as a game is completely screwed. Wait until the next major patch. Wait until we see what they actually do with the feedback they're receiving. CDPR have earned a little patience.

For context: I am a regular player of For Honor, a game that hasn't received a major balance patch in about four months and has issues that haven't been addressed since the game was released.

To take the stance that CDPR 'only cares about your dollars' or don't care about Gwent, is absolute absurdity. They clearly care about the game and the players. Just compare their behaviour to that of every other major publisher in the industry in similar situations.

If CDPR keep releasing bad patches and hasty updates like Midwinter, yes, the game is doomed. Can we at least see if they've learned from the experience before throwing them under the bus?

 

[Mancoon1980]

It has slipped a bit and I get irritated but it can be fixed..

I'd love to see rows come back.

a option to turn on full card names.

different environments from the game such as under the three with gremist, different taverns etc. With background effects

more weight to cards in general, such as having different effects play when a cards is dropped, racially big cards with a timer, example being succubus tempting with each turn.

an adult feel to the game, right now Gwent thinks it's hearthstone and this is bad.

I'm actually ok with rng even though it can be annjying, as it provides some variety to everyone playing netdecks.

I keep holding onto the hope Gwent will become it's bestself.

 

[Sheva007]

.. yet literally last patch was the most enjoyable and diverse meta the game has ever seen.

YES!! YOU ARE SO RIGHT!!!

Except no, its a blatant lie. The "oh the meta is so diverse, í cant believe my eyes" feeling last 2 weeks, until the dust settles and ypu realise the meta swifted from decks A and B to decks Y and Z.

 

[Philologus]

Patch after patch it goes from bad to worse.... yet literally last patch was the most enjoyable and diverse meta the game has ever seen.

This is the exact mentality I was talking about. Every single patch 'the sky is falling' 'the game is doomed'.

The Midwinter patch contained some mistakes. I think every single person agrees with that. I absolutely refute the idea that this means Gwent as a game is completely screwed. Wait until the next major patch. Wait until we see what they actually do with the feedback they're receiving. CDPR have earned a little patience.

For context: I am a regular player of For Honor, a game that hasn't received a major balance patch in about four months and has issues that haven't been addressed since the game was released.

To take the stance that CDPR 'only cares about your dollars' or don't care about Gwent, is absolute absurdity. They clearly care about the game and the players. Just compare their behaviour to that of every other major publisher in the industry in similar situations.

If CDPR keep releasing bad patches and hasty updates like Midwinter, yes, the game is doomed. Can we at least see if they've learned from the experience before throwing them under the bus?

The MidWinter patch contained "some" mistakes? That's like saying Eredin is only a "bit" evil.

The meta is more diverse? Wth are you talking about? Provide evidence, please. Dave, too many of your posts contain grandiose statements that can't be verified. The meta is different after MW patch, but it's still ruled by a handful of decks. And the "sky is falling" because the game is being dumbed-down to appeal to the LCD. Maybe you like that;? Evidence of the dumbing-down is present in the form of more cartoonish effects, more cards that spam boosts, and the diminished value of golds combined with the crazy boost to that of bronzes.

You defend CDPR, and I understand the emotional motivations. However, this can't be the same CDPR that took so much care with The Witcher series. Two patches in a row, this game has been stripped of complexity in favor of point-spamming. Of course, this brings in more of the brain-dead crowd who feel a sense of accomplishment and pride in blind net-decking. It's a good short-term business model, i guess.

And I have yet to hear a sufficient answer to the following: How do two bad patches get by play-testers?

 

[iamthedave]

Did I say the Meta 'is' more diverse? Read what I post, not what you think I post.

This is definitely the same CDPR that handled the Witcher series. They're handling a game in a genre they've never tried before, probably never looked at before, because people really liked a random aside they included in the main Witcher game. Why is it such a surprise that they're having issues? And why is it such a surprise when every single TCG has gone through these same troubles? Hearthstone had terrible patches as well. And how long was The Witcher 3 in development again? How long was Gwent in development as a standalone game?

Now it may be my emotional, illogical self talking here - you be the judge - but perhaps having half as much time to polish Gwent has something to do with it being less polished than The Witcher 3. Just a theory. Try it yourself, see how it handles.

'Effects' have nothing to do with dumbing down. That's mechanical, and creative. Hence why create has posed such a problem and the shorter card names are so controversial (I agree that shortening the names was a bad idea and have said so several times in various posts; of course, you already know that, having 'reviewed my posts' right?)

Golds diminished? That's funny. Golds are the heavy hitters in almost every single deck. Including dorfs (Ithlinne and Iorveth: Meditation usually, sometimes Ciri: N). Not that many bronzes have been boosted 'crazily'. Mostly it's a point here and a point there. The massive plays are still in the gold/silver range, even factoring in Agitators and their ilk. Unless you can wheel out a bronze-only play that comes close to Hattori/Barclay/Paulie/Skirmisher? Or equal to Bran into Mork/Olgierd/Cerys? But please, wheel out the decks that don't run golds due to how weak they are, in favour of an all-bronze line up.

I'd bet money that they didn't properly play test the midwinter patch. It was clearly rushed out the door and the signs there are clear as day. What's the other patch you're referring to?

Also, you mistake my intentions. I'm not defending CDPR, I'm calling for giving actual feedback instead of pure venomous negativity, which can have only one of two effects: 1. CDPR stop paying attention to the forums because they're not getting useful feedback from them or 2. They start reacting to a confusing mess of messages that involve little discussion and are based entirely on emotion. I'm not sure which is actually worse.

As to your supposedly terrifying question... patches get by playtesters constantly, in games all over the world, all the time. Why do you even need to ask? Sometimes the playtesters miss things. Sometimes they don't but get ignored. Sometimes they find out so much that needs fixing the developers don't have time to implement it all before posting date. I suspect in this case CDPR creative was overridden by CDPR management, as other posters have suggested, so that Gwent could generate some cash over Christmas. My hope is that the pressure will now recede and the team can properly focus on fixing things. We'll see in a month or so if they do it.