Why Gwent is not popular?

[BoYoDes]

But maybe at a certain point people should understand that beta will not return and keep repeating "beta was better!!"...

Well, it was better.

#TheNumbersDontLie

Also I would like to point that since the SY Faction was introduced, I see the same thing happening as with when HC launched - a big bump and than a hard fall.

With all due respect devs - you are doing something wrong. AGAIN.

 

[hachri80]

But this thread is not about which version of Gwent was better! This question will not be solved and a lot of players (me included) are just tired of reading these posts over and over again in almost every thread.

 

[Guest 4305932]

Spoiler: meme

This is your level. Op discussion is interesting, you are ruining it with this pointless bragging about beta.

 

[vickssan]

Spoiler: meme

View attachment 11010286

This is your level. Op discussion is interesting, you are ruining it with this pointless bragging about beta.

That was funny as hell I hope nobody feels offended! Nice meme

 

[Shabman]

LOL the same people that say "if you don't like it don't play it" have a problem with people mentioning how Beta Gwent was the far superior product and gaming experience.

To which some of us might reply: if you don't like "these posts", don't read them!


P.S.: Cool meme though

 

[4RM3D]

the same people that say "if you don't like it don't play it" have a problem with people mentioning how Beta Gwent was the far superior product and gaming experience.

It's not as black and white as this. People talk about beta like it was one stage, one version, while beta had many iterations with lots of changes. And nowhere during this time was the game ready for continued competitive play (even though CDPR did try).

The most straightforward (and shortest) statement one could make about Gwent is that, in (early) beta, the game was more faithful to the original game and paid its price by stagnation. Even for that moment in time, when the game could have been solid, it was not build to last, not for a competitive CCG, at least.

A trading card game is always evolving, the moment it stops is the moment the game will wither. This actually isn't a big deal for singleplayer games because they are not made to keep you playing, but it's different for online games, which require an active player base. Gwent Beta could have been turned into a decent Living Card Game, which you can play with friends or offline against the AI. However, for continued (competitive) online play, the game requires an ever-evolving meta and the best way to achieve that is by releasing expansion packs. This is something which would have been far more difficult with Gwent before Homecoming.

Most people forgot about this and just look at the best of times. People tend to focus on one aspect of an experience, which either makes it a fond memory or a painful one. As time passes, that aspect gets reinforced, while everything surrounding it gets muddled; nostalgia googles as it's usually called when speaking about positive things. This is worsened made more complicated by the fact that Gwent is based on the beloved mini-game in the Witcher, which could not be properly converted into a competitive online CCG, as mentioned above, not without changing (too) much of the original game.

So, Gwent beta was better? Sure, people can hold that opinion. They have fond memories, but I do would like to refresh their memories regarding some of the... issues:
- Complete cookie cutter archetypes with little to no variance, like NG Alchemy and SK Craiteswords [and a few nasty ones:]
- Nekker Consume
- NG Handbuff
- Resilience Dwarfs (when buffs persisted between rounds)
- Casino Dwarfs
- Too much thinning, which also broke the design space
- Faction passives (cool, but unbalanced and not good for the design space)
- Coin flip with unfair advantage because of tempo plays [made worse by:]
- CA Spies (also Brouver + Cleaver) [and:]
- Wardancer
[Going back further to early beta:]
- Chaining mechanism, most noteworthy, Shani which was usually an instant win in a short round 3
- Weather archetype
- Monster Consume (before the row limit with 200 units on the board)
- Henselt's Golden Army

That's enough for now.

 

[Ulubey0]

- Too much thinning, which also broke the design space
- Faction passives (cool, but unbalanced and not good for the design space)

You mention design space often but I don't think you understand what it means. You're using it as just some buzzword. How did thinning limit design space? Many old tutors/thinners (like old slyzard, drummond warmonger, She-troll etc) offered unique synergies and helped manage your deck by creating access to your cards. If anything they increased the skill cap of the game.

- Nekker Consume

There were more than a dozen ways to play consume! I remember Lifecoach crushing it with 35 card consume.
You could splice it with beasts or deathwish. That archetype was pure freedom.

- Coin flip with unfair advantage because of tempo plays [made worse by:]

People use this as some kind of excuse to say Beta was flawed, but why couldn't they just add tactical advantage in Beta? They could have just introduced that one mechanic, and then all the sudden that argument disappears... but they never even tried to fix coinflip.

Most of your other points were just balancing issues. You are coming off as saying a lot, but understanding very little about the previous game.

 

[4RM3D]

People use this as some kind of excuse to say Beta was flawed, but why couldn't they just add tactical advantage in Beta?

It was one of the reasons and adding TA might have helped. Either way, it would only have been part of the solution. I have said nothing about Homecoming. Maybe the devs didn't need to go that far, but something had to be done, at the very least.

You mention design space often but I don't think you understand what it means. You're using it as just some buzzword. How did thinning limit design space? Many old tutors/thinners (like old slyzard, drummond warmonger, She-troll etc) offered unique synergies and helped manage your deck by creating access to your cards. If anything they increased the skill cap of the game.

Not all tutors were bad and some had an interesting design, like Slyzards. However, the accumulation of tutors was unhealthy. Besides thinning, it added "phantom" points. For example, Elven Mercenary could play spells, with decks usually including Thunder. Playing Thunder from hand would be bad because you're losing points, meaning you also want to tutor it. However, all bronze had to have the same "power level", which conflicted with tutorable cards. This is what, indeed, limited the design space, a term which I am not using as a buzzword.

Part of the aforementioned problem would have been solved using the provision system because now you can fine-tune tutor cards to the "proper" power level. This also made tutor cards less desirable because you're paying a premium for consistency. However, it is still an improvement.

Speaking of the provision system, it's another example that gives the devs more design space. No longer is there a need for all bronze cards to have the same strength (same with gold cards). This not only allows a wider variety of cards, but they can also more easily be tweaked. Though, granted, I don't think the devs have used the full potential of the provision system.

Beta definitively had its charms and I do miss certain aspects. However, I rather have a balanced game than a faithful game.

 

[Guest 4305932]

LOL the same people that say "if you don't like it don't play it" have a problem with people mentioning how Beta Gwent was the far superior product and gaming experience.

To which some of us might reply: if you don't like "these posts", don't read them!


P.S.: Cool meme though

Thanks, sadly you missed the point. But I think i will add "far superior product and gaming experience" to the next meme.

Meanwhile a discussion not about beta gwent became a discussion about beta gwent once again because people feel the need of repeating the same things over and over again. At this point I think everyone understood that. No matter how much you will try to pass your idea as the objective truth with statement like
"Beta Gwent was the far superior product and gaming experience" or insulting other accusing them of "understanding very little about the previous game", beta gwent is gone. You behave like those kids who can't/don't want to play anymore and decide to break all toys. It's pure ressentiment.

 

[Nerys]

This is your level. Op discussion is interesting, you are ruining it with this pointless bragging about beta.

@BoYoDes gave you a solid argument with numbers. Current numbers in terms of playerbase in game and viewerbase on twitch are worse than it was pre Homecoming so we can assume that Open Beta was better and more fun than Homecoming (in opinion players who left). Many players and streamers lost interest in Gwent after Homecoming and you can't deny that. Homecoming didn't attract too many new players, streamers and viewers.

I am still playing in Gwent and supporting it with my money but I am trying to be realistic and in my opinion Homecoming isn't better than Open Beta. Homecoming is different game, it has some nice features but it is lacking in the FUN area and numbers clearly show that. I don't think that we will have more players than we had in Open Beta. 9 months have passed and do you feel that Gwent is booming or something? You can pretend that everything is allright and Gwent has bright future but I don't think that it is a thing.

Not sure about you but when it comes to e-sports I am concerned when the studio (CDPR in this case) goes on radio silence since March until July about e-sports. For me it is a sign that game (Gwent in this case) is not doing so well and in my eyes it shows that CDPR have doubts about e-sport in Gwent. We still don't know anything about World Masters and Gwent Masters season 2. These aren't the signs of game doing good. Same with spectator(observer?) mode and twitch extension. We saw spectator mode in the end of the March and since then we know completely nothing when it will be available atleast for people who want to organize and stream e-sports events. Same with twitch extension, we heard that CDPR wants it and we still know nothing when it will come.

When I see stuff like this I have Heroes of the Storm flashbacks from last December when Blizzard decided to drop e-sports there and popularity of the game decreased heavily since then.

Of course I have hope that Gwent will be growing in next months but when I see stuff like in my previous paragraphs then I prefer to be realistic or even pessimistic.

 

[4RM3D]

@BoYoDes gave you a solid argument with numbers.

I want to point out that just throwing numbers around isn't an argument by itself, not without giving your interpretation thereof, which BoYoDes didn't really do, but you did. When you present it like that, it actually gives the argument some weight. Though, I would still like to remind people that, even when the numbers might lead to an obvious conclusion, it's never the whole truth.

 

[Guest 4305932]

@BoYoDes gave you a solid argument with numbers. Current numbers in terms of playerbase in game and viewerbase on twitch are worse than it was pre Homecoming so we can assume that Open Beta was better and more fun than Homecoming (in opinion players who left). Many players and streamers lost interest in Gwent after Homecoming and you can't deny that. Homecoming didn't attract too many new players, streamers and viewers.

Thinking about numbers in a vacuum is not a solid argument. The assumption that Beta was a better game only because his numbers is shortsighted.

 

[Nerys]

So in your opinion Gwent Homecoming in general is more fun than Open Beta and this is why we have less players, viewers, streamers and it is less popular than ever? Fine .

Logic and common sense...

 

[Nerys]

The assumption "it's popular so it must good" is wrong. You are right, i can't really argue with numbers when this numbers are taken out of the context. Streamers? Oh yes let's forget about streamers behaviour, let's forget about how many tried to jump on Artifact wagon and then let's use the number to try to enforce my argument. This is intellectual dishonesty.

Players numbers, oh yes yes let's use player numbers. Let's take numbers at it's peak, forget about the numbers being in decline even in fall 2017.

And last but not least, we should not forget about Midwinter aka the day Rethaz wake up and decided to destroy the game because beta was p-e-r-f-e-c-t. Nothing in beta could have been the cause of the first disaster.

And so on.

P.s.
I don't have problem to recognize that for many players game was more fun during beta. Sometimes even I miss the tutor chains for example. The difference between me and you is that i can divide what is "fun for me" from "what is good for the game". You can't or simply don't want.

Game is fun for me so who cares about everything else. What? The new expansion is a disaster? Must be Rethaz fault! I have fun so game is perfect.

Sorry but you clearly don't know how to talk with people. You didn't give me a single argument why Homecoming is more fun than Open Beta. I gave you some and they were numbers. You didn't back up your statement with something logical. You just brang some loud transparents with "Rethaz was bad". I should pinpoint that I was talking about period since sacking Rethaz and when Gwent was in fixing state until April when CDPR gave up on fixing Open Beta and came with completely new game. After May patch it was period of draught (June-October) so I won't include it in Gwent golden era.

 

[4RM3D]

One thread has already been put on ice and this one is on a collision course towards the same fate. So, less personal attacks and more constructive feedback, please.

 

[Nerys]

@Kallor.. Maybe you missed the thread title but I will copy&paste it here for you:

WHY GWENT IS NOT POPULAR?

My argument for "Gwent is not popular" was "because Homecoming is less fun than Open Beta" and then going further because Homecoming is less fun then we lost many players, viewers and streamers. So it is logical smaller numbers mean smaller popularity.

And then you came with this:

I don't have problem to recognize that for many players game was more fun during beta. Sometimes even I miss the tutor chains for example. The difference between me and you is that i can divide what is "fun for me" from "what is good for the game".

So losing numbers and popularity is good for the game?

 

[4RM3D]

As mentioned, fun is subjective. Some players have fun with Usurper disrupting the opponent, while others rather try to win with the most unique combo they can find. Precisely because fun is subjective, it's not a good argument and it can only be used to describe your personal feelings. Don't assume that other players have the same reason for playing (or leaving) the game. A more interesting discussion is why the game is more (or less) fun now. What makes or breaks the game for you?

The topic of the thread implies that we need to talk in general. However, we cannot make a case because we do not have all the information. What happens is that people grab whatever they can find to validate their claims. The most noteworthy argument are the numbers and the drop in players.

Like I have mentioned before, numbers never tell the whole truth. The numbers show we have less players, but it doesn't tell us why. Too many assumptions have been thrown around about the (lack of) fun and quality, but those are still mere assumptions. A game being more popular doesn't say anything about the quality or fun of said game. There is likely to be some correlation, but that has to be determined first.

I'll close this post by giving a few examples why the numbers could be skewed. The player base was already dropping during beta. If the devs would have continued with the beta, the numbers could have been even lower. Furthermore, when you try to please everyone, you will please no one. This means that, while less people are playing the game, they might be more satisfied overall. From a business perspective, maybe there are even more paying customers, which we cannot tell. Lastly, there could be external factors like a new competing game entering the market. I am not saying that any of this applies to Gwent because we do not know, but it could still be a possibility and it would be nice for players to keep this in mind.

 

[Nerys]

Players base was dropping during beta after Homecoming announcement (April) and in drought period (June-October). So basically when CDPR said "we don't want to support this version of the game, please wait for the next version". Homecoming was a big gamble and it didn't work out as well as CDPR wanted. They basically scrapped what they did for 2 years and threw it into the trash and then they came up with new game - Homecoming. I don't remember player base dropping before April's announcement.

1. It is just my opinion
Why I have less fun with Homecoming? Because it is sluggish compared to Open Beta. Gameplay is slower and some animations are very slow for no reason. You have to wait for every animation before you do next action. Queueing abilities would help here. It makes games too long. In Open Beta I was doing very often 42 rounds. I was stopping at 3rd threshold of gold rewards. In Homecoming I did 42 rounds once or twice, my max per day right now is 18 rounds.

Another argument is decreased number of mechanics like swap, strengthen, less carry over, spies (they were problematic but it was fun aspect to play around card advantage, now it is less fun). Probably we lost some more but I can not recall. We had more freedom I would say. Decks like NG buff when you were picking strengthened card and then using spotters etc. Same with scoia'tael swap. Even Sabbath cheese. Consume was totally different archetype, we had stuff like SK Veterans or Bran with Berserker Marauders. We had flavourful abilities like Coral (Transform a Bronze or Silver unit into a Jade Figurine), every Harald's skull did something else not just "do 2 damage".

I would have to compare card by card Open Beta to Homecoming but I am pretty sure that most of the cards which had fun abilities were turned into "buff X amount" or "damage X amount". It felt wrong.

Next argument is that "we have too many chiefs and not enough indians" as someone said in some topic. I know that CDPR is trying to fix this situation right now by buffing bronzes but it took them 9 months to realise that. In Open Beta you wanted cards that will fit to your combo. Of course there were tutors but right now you don't want to have bronze cards in hand because they have lower value than gold cards and there is not much about combos with bronze cards in tier 1 decks (except Syndicate where they understood that it is important to have good bronze cards).

2. It is just my assumption
I am not saying that Homecoming isn't fun. I am still playing, I wouldn't play if it wasn't fun for me - I am saying that for me it is completely different game and it is less fun than Open Beta and it might be the case why so many players/viewers/streamers left Gwent so in the end - why it is not popular.

 

[vickssan]

So losing numbers and popularity is good for the game?

Yes and No, like 4RM3D said

This means that, while less people are playing the game, they might be more satisfied overall. From a business perspective, maybe there are even more paying customers

I think he puts the nail in the coffin with that statement and there is another part that I wanted the players to explore and that's the marketing campaign of HC because there is still an unexplored territory in terms of Homecoming Gwent - market and community wise. Open Beta was advertised through popular streamers, YouTubers and lots of reviews! For HC - none of that, so Homecoming was left with the Beta player base with some small exceptions and that left a mark on the community and while HC is a good game a lot of people that were emotionally attached to the Open Beta version could not swallow the sudden change!
Again "fun" is subjective! You said:

Consume was totally different archetype, we had stuff like SK Veterans or Bran with Berserker Marauders. We had flavourful abilities like Coral (Transform a Bronze or Silver unit into a Jade Figurine), every Harald's skull did something else not just "do 2 damage".

That for example turned me off Beta Gwent personally, because of that constant flooding then transforming and then oooops 1 card wins you the game... The rounds were flying by and sometimes you just watch how the other person is playing Gwent while you just sit there getting your ASS kicked! I didn't like Beta Gwent and for me is not comparable, however, I can see why people like that kind of playstyle and how it is fun for them. But don't generalize your opinion, you have people that support your point of view and that's nice but don't speak like it is a FACT. I am liking where Gwent is headed right now, there is a tournament ahead of us and a new platform to play our favorite game on, so let's hope for the best!

 

[Nerys]

@vickssan https://forums.cdprojektred.com/ind...-is-not-popular.11010967/page-2#post-11649673

You didn't read my post about e-sports. 3rd paragraph.

but don't speak like it is a FACT

I am stating my opinion (why for me Open Beta was more fun than Homecoming) and those were my arguments in response to @4RM3D , other stuff (why gwent is not popular) is just assumptions as I said earlier but you have to read posts to understand that and then respond.