Jobs Support Register

300 Hours In... My Review + MTX Suggestions

+
Hi I've been playing since Beta. This is what I think about GWENT:

This is What's Brilliant: The food cap system. Oh what an elegant solution to the the problems that so many other card games have. For example the Sihil card can single handedly win a round on its own. Even if artifact destruction is all over the meta, what's the harm of tossing it in knowing that maybe it might steal a round or two every now and then? Basically I'm saying that in a vacuum Sihil might be considered generically good, in anyone's deck. So generically good that it may have become an auto include card. Except for one thing. It costs 15 food supply from your deck. Let's stop and ponder whethe batantly overpowered or generically good Hearthstone cards such as Dr. Boom or Sylvanas Windrunner would have ever been a problem had THAT game been so clever as to implement a food supply system the way that GWENT has. Even MTG has certain rush decks and control decks that are absolutely UNBEATABLE if you pick the wrong deck to play against them with. This is because there is limitless card quality allowed when building decks. Players simply throw all their best cards into a pile and press play. In GWENT, you have to decide, much like the owner of a sports team, you have decide who your star players are going to be, and who your role players and backups are going to be. It is brillaint. It is literally the best thing about GWENT.

Beta vs Homecoming: I prefer Homecoming because in Beta, there was too much whizz bang pow poof going on from Deploy effects.Trying to guess when to use a Scorch for example just felt hopelessly imprecise. In fact too much of the time the entire game would boil down to who could draw and play all their Gold cards and who could guess when the right moment was to use their Scorch. It was too simple. All the strategy bottlenecked around Gold Cards and Scorch. HC is better in every way. It IS slower and more plodding. But this is the FIRST SET!!! These are LITERALLY the BASIC CARDS!! ANd as Basic card designs go, they are all BEAUTIFUL to look at, interesting and generally BALANCED. Remember some card games have literally given up on anything resembling balance. But GWENT is not one of those and I love it!~ These current cards are a wonderful foundation for more flashy and weird cards to be released later on down the line.

The UGLY: MTXs in this game are just terrible. CDPR you have one of the most iconic videogame characters in history, Geralt. And you've not centered any of your MTX around him, whatsoever?!?! Like, what are you thinking? ! And I've seen Geralt in a bathtub inside of OTHER games... so why the hell can't my commander be Geralt in a bathtub inside of GWENT? In fact, why can't my battlefiend skin be Yennefer's bedroom, Triss's bedroom, or the prison cell where Geralt was being interrogated? IHow about that castle where the dragon was blowing everything up?? mean, what's more SWAG than that instead of generic dreary battlefield grey, vs generic dreary battlefield brown?! I know you didn't plan on Geralt being a commander, but it's kind of silly NOT to have him as one. Same goes for Yennefer and Triss. It's downright negligent not to. IMO.

Anyway this is the most rewarding game to play. When I lose I feel like it's my own damn fault. Not RNG. Not like in Hearthstone where he who spends to most money has the most powerful deck. As a beta tester I have tons of cards. But sometimes I just win games with the most basic cards there are. Because people lexpect gold bombs, but then if that gold bomb never arrives they end up holding onto removal and counters for too long and then you can win anyway. There is a lot of other nuances that I really love about this game. The game designers are brilliant! Anyway I rate GWENT a 8/10. Only an 8 because the MTX are bad and you guys need another set featuring flashier cards. But for right now the foundation is incredibly solid. Stick with it CDPR. The quality of this game will speak for itself in the longrun.
 
You lost me at "flashier cards". How could the premiums get any better and what cards have you seen that look better than that?
 
You lost me at "flashier cards". How could the premiums get any better and what cards have you seen that look better than that?
I wasn't referring to the way the cards look. I was referring to what the cards DO. Like for instance, I feel like in the next expansion Monster cards should actually behave in a more MONSTEROUS fashion. GWENT focuses too much on the militiary aspect of the humans. There needs to be more civilians and noncombatants so that monsters can gain stregnth by victimizing the non-combatants. But then as the monsters prey on humans, their bounty will increase and so the enemy witchers will become more powerful. And just other such things like that.

Btw here are some examples of MTX I'd be excited for:

Commander Skins:
Geralt in a Bathtub
Geralt getting his hair cut by a barbor
Veiny Geralt with Glowing Eyes
Drunken Geralt
Several Sexy/Badass Outfits for Triss and Yennefer commanders
Succubus Commander skin for Monster faction
Hapless farmer and farmer's wife for Northen Realms

Battlefield Skins:
Yennefer's Bedroom
Triss's Bedroom
Several notable Thronerooms
Alchemist Hut
Elven ruins with Portals
Frozen reskins of all of the above.
 
Last edited:
... in Beta, there was too much whizz bang pow poof going on from Deploy effects.Trying to guess when to use a Scorch for example just felt hopelessly imprecise. In fact too much of the time the entire game would boil down to who could draw and play all their Gold cards and who could guess when the right moment was to use their Scorch. It was too simple. All the strategy bottlenecked around Gold Cards and Scorch...
Hm...
 
These do not sound like they would fit in the game. Some other game, yeah, but not GWENT.
2 things I have to say to that:

1. If GWENT is good enough for Witcher 3, then why isn't Witcher 3 good enough for GWENT? Every MTX I mentioned is Witcher canon.

2. Most people wouldn't have thought that hiding in a cardboard box or floating enemy units away with balloon rockets woud have made sense in covert espionage action adventure game. I think 'manly' games like these should always have a healthy sense of levity in them.
 
^ Very true.

Most of the items on the lists would make no sense in a battle between two armies, which is what the game is.
Bathtub Geralt? No way. Alchemist hut? Nope, won't work.
 
I thought this was a card game tho... I thought Geralt was aware that it was a card game. I'm confused. Because if it's REAL why would Geralt: Yrden be aiding the monsters?

And one last thing, if you are concerned about the lore behind Geralt who is a paragon of neutrality, well... justice and neutrality, it is entirely possible to have custom faction just for Geralt. How? Well maybe his card pool would include all non gold faction creatures of the humans OR Scoia'tel, excluding spies and machines and soldiers or faction specific witchers save for Letho would would be a part of Geralt's faction. Geralt's Commander ability would be one time use only and it would allow him to create a gold human OR non-human ally from any of his available card pools and to boost it by 4 and then play it. See? He's still Mr. Neutrality. ;)
 
Last edited:
Btw here are some examples of MTX I'd be excited for:

Commander Skins:
Geralt in a Bathtub
Geralt getting his hair cut by a barbor
Veiny Geralt with Glowing Eyes
Drunken Geralt
Several Sexy/Badass Outfits for Triss and Yennefer commanders
Succubus Commander skin for Monster faction
Hapless farmer and farmer's wife for Northen Realms
Thanks. But no thanks.
 
The OP is actually totally justified in asking for his skins and Geralts in bathtubs.

If you want to market this game to casuals, then market it to casuals. But pick a branding strategy already! Who is in charge of marketing here? Burza? Or is it the art director? Is there actually someone at CDPR who is responsible for taking this game in a coherent direction and to connect it to a demographic?

Your target market is obviously not the people who helped test your game, or there would never have been a need to cut out one row, redesign everything, turn the game into a "battlefield", make games more draw-dependent etc etc. You obviously thought you could turn Gwent into something with wider appeal by changing it to resemble other popular card games, so that their players would find it more familiar and easier to get accustomed to.

Your game, your problem. However, you are quite mistaken in thinking you will be able to retain your identity while making this game like its competitors. Your casuals will ask you for Geralt in a g-string, for cards like Yennefer's Dimeritium Undies, furry units and other things you might have never imagined. And you better be ready to deliver.

Because guess what? Your casuals don't have time to waste like us hardcore fans - they know what they want and it's on you to give it to them. They don't care about your fancy artsy "ohhh look we've made a battlefield, ohhhh loook it's so darkkkk" - they, again, know what they want and they have no remorse in getting out if they don't get it (in all fairness, the OP is more than a casual so maybe what I'm saying does not apply).

That's the problem with this Gwent project nowadays - there is no vision. You want to get your Hearthstone and Artifact players, but you still want to retain your art concept. This is why the game is stuck somewhere in between, not being neither cow nor donkey, but gradually disappearing into complete irrelevance.

Plz figure out your target audience, CDPR. Or you'll have a dead game on your hands.
 
I wasn't referring to the way the cards look. I was referring to what the cards DO. Like for instance, I feel like in the next expansion Monster cards should actually behave in a more MONSTEROUS fashion. GWENT focuses too much on the militiary aspect of the humans. There needs to be more civilians and noncombatants so that monsters can gain stregnth by victimizing the non-combatants. But then as the monsters prey on humans, their bounty will increase and so the enemy witchers will become more powerful. And just other such things like that.

Btw here are some examples of MTX I'd be excited for:

Commander Skins:
Geralt in a Bathtub
Geralt getting his hair cut by a barbor
Veiny Geralt with Glowing Eyes
Drunken Geralt
Several Sexy/Badass Outfits for Triss and Yennefer commanders
Succubus Commander skin for Monster faction
Hapless farmer and farmer's wife for Northen Realms

Battlefield Skins:
Yennefer's Bedroom
Triss's Bedroom
Several notable Thronerooms
Alchemist Hut
Elven ruins with Portals
Frozen reskins of all of the above.
Wow ... just wow. Seriously? Is that what current Gwent players desire now .... ?!?! I really don't know what to say anymore.

Gwent has drifted away so far, soooo far away from me. It feels so alien now.
 
The OP is actually totally justified in asking for his skins and Geralts in bathtubs.

Your game, your problem. However, you are quite mistaken in thinking you will be able to retain your identity while making this game like its competitors. Your casuals will ask you for Geralt in a g-string, for cards like Yennefer's Dimeritium Undies, furry units and other things you might have never imagined. And you better be ready to deliver.

That's the problem with this Gwent project nowadays - there is no vision. You want to get your Hearthstone and Artifact players, but you still want to retain your art concept. This is why the game is stuck somewhere in between, not being neither cow nor donkey, but gradually disappearing into complete irrelevance.

Plz figure out your target audience, CDPR. Or you'll have a dead game on your hands.
Here's the problem with what you've said, mate. I'm not a casual Witcher fan. Witcher 3 is my number 2 favorite game of all time. And I own the first and second games too. And I distinctly remember that in the first game you could sleep with prostitutes and then collect a card with a nude image of them on the front. Hm! Hm! HMMMM! So it's funny you bring up women's underwear to point out what casuals would want when honestly it DOES sound EXACTLY like something you would have found in the original Witcher game. But the casual Witcher fans might not remember very much about the first game...

The irony here is that YOU SEEM TO BE TAKING WITCHER WAY TOO SERIOUSLY!!! It's not a historically accurate docudrama. It's a fantasy role playing series where you get to play as "The Most Interesting Witcher in the World". The first scene of Witcher 2 and 3 was Geralt and his current gf lounging in a bedroom. The first scene of the game is literally Geralt in a Bathtub. IT'S CANON. And maybe you don't realize it, but in one of the Soul Calibur games, Geralt made an appearence as an extra character. And during the ad campeign they showed a scene of Geralt in a Bathtub as part of their ad. So it's officially a meme. Not to mention a very important scene. It has nothing to do with a g-string. I have no idea why you'd even bring up something that isn't canon vs something that IS.

And
 
The first scene of the game is literally Geralt in a Bathtub. IT'S CANON.
IMO the games, as great as they are, are not canon. Only the books are.
Anyway, Geralt is not a leader and probably never will be. He is not an army general, or a king.

Also, GWENT is not an MMO (which is apparently where the abbreviation MTX originates from) and I seriously doubt CDPR would turn it into a major microtransaction fest. It's not their style -- thankfully.
 
Here's the problem with what you've said, mate. I'm not a casual Witcher fan. Witcher 3 is my number 2 favorite game of all time. And I own the first and second games too. And I distinctly remember that in the first game you could sleep with prostitutes and then collect a card with a nude image of them on the front. Hm! Hm! HMMMM! So it's funny you bring up women's underwear to point out what casuals would want when honestly it DOES sound EXACTLY like something you would have found in the original Witcher game. But the casual Witcher fans might not remember very much about the first game...
I think you're looking at this game in a way completely different from a lot of other Gwent players. For me personally the draw of the game was it's based on the Witcher, a franchise I enjoyed, and involves strategy and thought. The second component here is the more important aspect. If it was merely a Witcher themed card game designed to throw as many Witcher related concepts into it things would be different. Frankly, I wouldn't play it.

As neat as the ideas on pushing card art more toward Witcher game concepts are it's not something I need or desire. These are cosmetic changes. They don't really enhance the strategy or thought aspects of the game play. The strategy and thought aspects are the focal point of Gwent, IMO. I wouldn't oppose any of these ideas though. I just wouldn't care or would spend 3 seconds caring before moving on to actually playing the game.
 
IMO the games, as great as they are, are not canon. Only the books are.
Anyway, Geralt is not a leader and probably never will be. He is not an army general, or a king.

Also, GWENT is not an MMO (which is apparently where the abbreviation MTX originates from) and I seriously doubt CDPR would turn it into a major microtransaction fest. It's not their style -- thankfully.
Wow. Well you're really putting one of us at a disadvantage considering this is the Witcher game forum and not the Witcher book's. From the game's perspective, Geralt IS a leader. He's a father figure and a mentor. But not only that, he is the standard bearer for the Witchers at Kaer Morhen. When rulers and peasants alike think about the witchers they talk about Geralt of Rivia, chiefly. In a way you could call him the Witcher King. Okay I'm stretching it. But he does rub shoulders with royalty so often he almost is royalty himself.

My point is, in every game he becomes the fulcrum of the most unlikliest of coalitions. And LEADS the people to do what needs to be done. I think Geralt as a multi-faction Leader would actually make perfect sense because it's canon. But also because when Witcher game fans try the game, I think they'd feel more attached to Leaders taht they actually feel attached to. I chose Skellige because that was section of Witcher 3 had overall, the coolest characters, even though the rest of the game is also awesome, but still I don't feel any attachment to any of the Leaders that are available. And I know who they are! I'd rather play as Yennefer or Geralt, personally. So yeah, from a marketing standpoint seeing Geralt as a multifaction Leader would be good too.

But honestly, I don't care that much about it. But I do think that other gamers might.
 
Wow. Well you're really putting one of us at a disadvantage considering this is the Witcher game forum and not the Witcher book's. From the game's perspective, Geralt IS a leader. He's a father figure and a mentor. But not only that, he is the standard bearer for the Witchers at Kaer Morhen. When rulers and peasants alike think about the witchers they talk about Geralt of Rivia, chiefly. In a way you could call him the Witcher King. Okay I'm stretching it. But he does rub shoulders with royalty so often he almost is royalty himself.

My point is, in every game he becomes the fulcrum of the most unlikliest of coalitions. And LEADS the people to do what needs to be done. I think Geralt as a multi-faction Leader would actually make perfect sense because it's canon. But also because when Witcher game fans try the game, I think they'd feel more attached to Leaders taht they actually feel attached to. I chose Skellige because that was section of Witcher 3 had overall, the coolest characters, even though the rest of the game is also awesome, but still I don't feel any attachment to any of the Leaders that are available. And I know who they are! I'd rather play as Yennefer or Geralt, personally. So yeah, from a marketing standpoint seeing Geralt as a multifaction Leader would be good too.

But honestly, I don't care that much about it. But I do think that other gamers might.
Makes one wonder if you have even played the games. In what universe does it make sense to make Geralt a leader??
 
Makes one wonder if you have even played the games. In what universe does it make sense to make Geralt a leader??
Does being a Leader mean that you have to have a certain number of subordinates? If that's the case then I suppose Cyclops was never the leader of the X-Men and I suppose the Justice League never had a leader because there just wasn't enough members. Geralt is the Leader of 'getting shit done' and I defy you to think of the witchers of Kaer Morhen as anything less than a group of superheroes. After what he pulled off in the third game by pulling in all those different factions in order to defend Ciri against the Wild Hunt, I don't understand how you would see him as anything OTHER than a Leader. He sounded his horn and lo and behold dwarves were fighting next to elves fighting next to sorceresses fighting next to witchers, fighting next to Nilfgaarians fighting next to Northern Realmers - all thanks to Geralt's leadership. What do you mean that he isn't a Leader? I don't understand what you're getting at.

Geralt of Rivia is the Leader of the Kaer Morhen multi-faction coalition. It's like being the Pope, of Rome. But instead of a church you had the Avengers. But instead of Avengers you have Witchers.
 
Last edited:
After what he pulled off in the third game by pulling in all those different factions in order to defend Ciri against the Wild Hunt, I don't understand how you would see him as anything OTHER than a Leader. He sounded his horn and lo and behold dwarves were fighting next to elves fighting next to sorceresses fighting next to witchers, fighting next to Nilfgaarians fighting next to Northern Realmers - all thanks to Geralt's leadership. What do you mean that he isn't a Leader? I don't understand what you're getting at.
I mean... All of those characters either had a vested interest in Geralt, Ciri or both. I wouldn't count NG (actually letting Radovid win my current play through explicitly so Emhyr can eat shit :)... don't care if the plebs suffer immeasurably as long as Emhyr dies). Not sure I'd count Avallac'h either since I question whether his motives were entirely altruistic. In other words, for the most part these characters don't decide to follow Geralt because of his amazing personal charisma. They either owed him, were friends/involved with him and/or cared about Ciri. I could see how the game might create the impression it was due to Geralt being a leader though.

All of the above assumes these characters weren't dead and the steps needed to get them to show were satisfied. Neither is a safe assumption.

I never got the "leader" impression for Geralt from the games either. Granted, this doesn't mean such a view is right or wrong. Just a difference of opinion.

In terms of leading the Witchers.... That job fell to Vesemir if anyone.

All of that said.... Geralt as a leader in Gwent wouldn't be an idea I'd oppose.