The new board reminds me of chess played with large pieces on the ground in a park. It feels like now you play as your leader who meets up with the opposing leader to play a card game. Instead of using small cards on a table in a tavern the leaders play with large cards on the ground in for example a monster den or overgrown courtyard.
Yup, there's also leaders like Radovid who have a scene inspired from the game. Emhyr's background shows just how cruel and vindictive he is, especially the premium. Not to mention Henselt's background card art
See, getting powder for the cards was never in question either until now. It was a fact until it wasn't. I really hope the full milling value remains a thing, but I do think it might not be, well, entirely full
Yup, there's also leaders like Radovid who have a scene inspired from the game. Emhyr's background shows just how cruel and vindictive he is, especially the premium. Not to mention Henselt's background card art
Exactly! At the bare minimum I hope to see those cards in the game.
You've formulated that question wrong. Anyhow, I actually like the new borders. The old ones were too thick and too prevalent.
Good God, what have you done to Eithne?
Now for some reason, I can't log in with my regular GOG account (Shabeel), so I made another one just to express how shocked I am at what I'm seeing in regard to Homecoming.
I am a dedicated CDPR fan, who has supported $$ pretty much everything Witcher-related that came out, who has spent thousands of hours immersed in the Witcher universe (Witcher games, books, etc.), and who - so far - was quite happy shutting up and letting the pros do what they lovingly do. But I am afraid I must say something now.
I am a casual Gwent player, who likes to experiment with all kinds of decks and to see how they fare against some of the more established archetypes. I loved Witcher 3 Gwent to bits, and decided last winter to give online Gwent a try hoping to relive the same thrill with the added promise of more cards and beautiful artwork. So far, so good. I have to say, I've been having a pretty good time.
What you must understand, dear devs, is that Gwent is not Hearthstone or any of those other card games you're trying to compete with. It didn't just spring out of the blue (I mean no offense to those games, of course), it is ROOTED in something, it has an emotional context, and that is its strength, that is its originality. Naturally, some things will feel familiar, some will feel unfamiliar, exciting, repulsive, etc.. There is a vast spectrum of emotional reactions players will have whenever you change anything. And you must know that these emotional factors are extremely powerful when it comes to choosing what to invest your time in, and whether to purchase. They are much more profound and important than having bigger artwork, or cool effects, or a "battlefield".
Which brings me to a brief summary of my problems with Homecoming:
1) The cartoonization of this game's art style:
Eithne is a fair example of this. Gone is the dignified, serenely beautiful, rather cruel, fascinating character which the current artwork portrays (I dare you to look at it and not see the depth of her, not to mention - as someone else said - the context which the artwork provides), we now have a Papuan charicature (no offense, again, to Papuan culture which absolutely fascinates me), not unlike the Arena Eithne, dressed in some underwear made of flowers and shooting arrows.
This is symptomatic of everything that is happening with the current art direction. I personally find the leaders and "battlefields" (as if Gwent was ever meant to be played on the ground) completely garish, but maybe you could say that's just my personal taste.
What I find truly, truly worrisome is this constant misreading of your fanbase. Yes, there were many fans who wanted the gaming interface to be more exciting, but I don't think anyone had "Gwent meets HOMM" in mind, with little 3D heroes looking like those figurines you get with Premium Editions of whichever game. There were many elegant solutions and ways to spruce up the interface without resorting to drawing lines on the ground in some generic graveyard or fantasy forest and having the players play their cards in the dirt. (note: honest question - if I play SC and my opponent Monsters, will we be playing in the graveyard or the fantasy forest? Or will I see myself in the forest, and they in the cemetery?)
Mark my words CDPR, if you want to seriously compete on the market with other card games, PLAY YOUR STRENGTHS, do not try to be more like them, because you will not succeed in attracting their fans thus. And when I say play your strenghts, and when you say "we want to make the game darker", it should be obvious that "darker" does not mean reducing the brightness on your artwork or putting a filter over your cards. Dark is all about emotions, and bright colours can be darker and more frightening than black-grey tones. It's all about how you set it up - and that's where the major work should have been done.
2) Not being straightforward about extremely divisive changes, such as two-rows:
Let me begin by saying NO ONE WANTED TWO ROWS. I am not shouting, I am merely emphasizing a most important point. The vast majority of people by any measure (forum, internet at large, you probably had your own polls - I hope (?)) were against this change, for a very simple reason. Gwent in its most familiar state in which many encountered it - whether Witcher 3 or today's Gwent - had 3 rows and that is what is familiar and comfortable for people. Imagine cutting out the pawns' row in chess, because hey! it's boring, they can only move one square at a time, and they get in the way of the really cool pieces that can move across the board with ease. People would justifiably hate it! The only fans who were willing to accept a row being cut were those who saw it as a tradeoff - or sacrifice - in which we would let go of a row, but the remaining two would somehow be infused with new meaning.
It is now becoming clear that this was a false hope. Rows had loads of meaning in Witcher 3, when you were forced to play most cards on specific rows - opening up many possibilities for dealing with your opponent, especially weather effects which were quite powerful back then. Rows have less meaning now - since you are free to play cards wherever you want - but that doesn't mean they are completely meaningless. For instance, I have a beautiful little movement deck (with Eithne, my favorite leader by far), in which I enjoy setting up two pit traps (one from deck, one repeat with Eithne), forcing my oponent to crowd his remaining cards into the free row - I then play Nivellen and cruelly enjoy seeing all the cards land on pit traps while my bowmen are shooting at them. Not so fun with 2 rows. Same for my endless spawning of Crow's Eye, hitting three cards each time - and all kinds of fun effects and mechanics which just feel good in threes. My post is getting quite long already so I will not carry on with my 3 row nostalgia. Suffice to say, for me - and many people - 3 rows have meaning, because that is what they know and that is the game they came to love.
You are free to make whatever game you want, but please don't play on people's feelings and call it "Homecoming" when it is anything but.
Please stop saying the new 2 rows have meaning, when it is simply choosing between 2 abilities. That's almost dishonest. Please acknowledge the fans that you alienated with this divisive move, and admit that 2 rows had nothing to do with "meaning" and everything to do with 3 rows not fitting with your new "art style", which seems to be the main focus of what you're doing.
Personally, I will play the new game and pretty much anything CDPR will put out because that is the degree of my love for you and what you do, but I ask you to please, respectfully stop referring to this new game as "Homecoming", and to be more transparent in your communications about why you made certain decisions, and - if I dare - to apologize to the fans you have upset with some of the changes in this upcoming version of Gwent. You may not believe me, or you may call me a doomsayer, but a vast, humongous number of players are disappointed with where this game is going, and apologizing to them might just make the difference between keeping them and losing them for good.
Hope I have not dampened your spirits, and I wish you continue to make beautiful things.
Thank you CDPR!
Now for some reason, I can't log in with my regular GOG account (Shabeel), so I made another one just to express how shocked I am at what I'm seeing in regard to Homecoming.
I am a dedicated CDPR fan, who has supported $$ pretty much everything Witcher-related that came out, who has spent thousands of hours immersed in the Witcher universe (Witcher games, books, etc.), and who - so far - was quite happy shutting up and letting the pros do what they lovingly do. But I am afraid I must say something now.
I am a casual Gwent player, who likes to experiment with all kinds of decks and to see how they fare against some of the more established archetypes. I loved Witcher 3 Gwent to bits, and decided last winter to give online Gwent a try hoping to relive the same thrill with the added promise of more cards and beautiful artwork. So far, so good. I have to say, I've been having a pretty good time.
What you must understand, dear devs, is that Gwent is not Hearthstone or any of those other card games you're trying to compete with. It didn't just spring out of the blue (I mean no offense to those games, of course), it is ROOTED in something, it has an emotional context, and that is its strength, that is its originality. Naturally, some things will feel familiar, some will feel unfamiliar, exciting, repulsive, etc.. There is a vast spectrum of emotional reactions players will have whenever you change anything. And you must know that these emotional factors are extremely powerful when it comes to choosing what to invest your time in, and whether to purchase. They are much more profound and important than having bigger artwork, or cool effects, or a "battlefield".
Which brings me to a brief summary of my problems with Homecoming:
1) The cartoonization of this game's art style:
Eithne is a fair example of this. Gone is the dignified, serenely beautiful, rather cruel, fascinating character which the current artwork portrays (I dare you to look at it and not see the depth of her, not to mention - as someone else said - the context which the artwork provides), we now have a Papuan charicature (no offense, again, to Papuan culture which absolutely fascinates me), not unlike the Arena Eithne, dressed in some underwear made of flowers and shooting arrows.
This is symptomatic of everything that is happening with the current art direction. I personally find the leaders and "battlefields" (as if Gwent was ever meant to be played on the ground) completely garish, but maybe you could say that's just my personal taste.
What I find truly, truly worrisome is this constant misreading of your fanbase. Yes, there were many fans who wanted the gaming interface to be more exciting, but I don't think anyone had "Gwent meets HOMM" in mind, with little 3D heroes looking like those figurines you get with Premium Editions of whichever game. There were many elegant solutions and ways to spruce up the interface without resorting to drawing lines on the ground in some generic graveyard or fantasy forest and having the players play their cards in the dirt. (note: honest question - if I play SC and my opponent Monsters, will we be playing in the graveyard or the fantasy forest? Or will I see myself in the forest, and they in the cemetery?)
Mark my words CDPR, if you want to seriously compete on the market with other card games, PLAY YOUR STRENGTHS, do not try to be more like them, because you will not succeed in attracting their fans thus. And when I say play your strenghts, and when you say "we want to make the game darker", it should be obvious that "darker" does not mean reducing the brightness on your artwork or putting a filter over your cards. Dark is all about emotions, and bright colours can be darker and more frightening than black-grey tones. It's all about how you set it up - and that's where the major work should have been done.
2) Not being straightforward about extremely divisive changes, such as two-rows:
Let me begin by saying NO ONE WANTED TWO ROWS. I am not shouting, I am merely emphasizing a most important point. The vast majority of people by any measure (forum, internet at large, you probably had your own polls - I hope (?)) were against this change, for a very simple reason. Gwent in its most familiar state in which many encountered it - whether Witcher 3 or today's Gwent - had 3 rows and that is what is familiar and comfortable for people. Imagine cutting out the pawns' row in chess, because hey! it's boring, they can only move one square at a time, and they get in the way of the really cool pieces that can move across the board with ease. People would justifiably hate it! The only fans who were willing to accept a row being cut were those who saw it as a tradeoff - or sacrifice - in which we would let go of a row, but the remaining two would somehow be infused with new meaning.
It is now becoming clear that this was a false hope. Rows had loads of meaning in Witcher 3, when you were forced to play most cards on specific rows - opening up many possibilities for dealing with your opponent, especially weather effects which were quite powerful back then. Rows have less meaning now - since you are free to play cards wherever you want - but that doesn't mean they are completely meaningless. For instance, I have a beautiful little movement deck (with Eithne, my favorite leader by far), in which I enjoy setting up two pit traps (one from deck, one repeat with Eithne), forcing my oponent to crowd his remaining cards into the free row - I then play Nivellen and cruelly enjoy seeing all the cards land on pit traps while my bowmen are shooting at them. Not so fun with 2 rows. Same for my endless spawning of Crow's Eye, hitting three cards each time - and all kinds of fun effects and mechanics which just feel good in threes. My post is getting quite long already so I will not carry on with my 3 row nostalgia. Suffice to say, for me - and many people - 3 rows have meaning, because that is what they know and that is the game they came to love.
You are free to make whatever game you want, but please don't play on people's feelings and call it "Homecoming" when it is anything but.
Please stop saying the new 2 rows have meaning, when it is simply choosing between 2 abilities. That's almost dishonest. Please acknowledge the fans that you alienated with this divisive move, and admit that 2 rows had nothing to do with "meaning" and everything to do with 3 rows not fitting with your new "art style", which seems to be the main focus of what you're doing.
Personally, I will play the new game and pretty much anything CDPR will put out because that is the degree of my love for you and what you do, but I ask you to please, respectfully stop referring to this new game as "Homecoming", and to be more transparent in your communications about why you made certain decisions, and - if I dare - to apologize to the fans you have upset with some of the changes in this upcoming version of Gwent. You may not believe me, or you may call me a doomsayer, but a vast, humongous number of players are disappointed with where this game is going, and apologizing to them might just make the difference between keeping them and losing them for good.
Hope I have not dampened your spirits, and I wish you continue to make beautiful things.
Thank you CDPR!
I hope those cards can be crafted , no paytowin please.1. You unlock 20 card fo multiplayer when you purchase TB
Man, I'm sorry but I feel really underwhelmed with this. I don't know what it is. It's just not as appealing. I really hope the game doesn't end up being boring.
Also, that 2 month wait is such a turn off for console players like myself. Things aren't looking well for Homecoming in my opinion.
Also, that 2 month wait is such a turn off for console players like myself. Things aren't looking well for Homecoming in my opinion.
I'd argue that's not true. They said that there will be full refund ever since the CDPR exec's letter about homecoming and they weren't fully sure on how to do it. They did decided on the scraps+powder, then changed their mind. But again, all within the full refund rule.Yup, there's also leaders like Radovid who have a scene inspired from the game. Emhyr's background shows just how cruel and vindictive he is, especially the premium. Not to mention Henselt's background card art
See, getting powder for the cards was never in question either until now. It was a fact until it wasn't. I really hope the full milling value remains a thing, but I do think it might not be, well, entirely full
Well structured sentences with clear arguments and proper paragraphs while being critical, yet remaining respectful to the devs. These forums need more kind of posts like this.
Does anyone know if there will be servers running the old version for consoles, in between the time Homecoming launches on PC up to the December 4th console release? Or will they have to shut 'em down for those 6 weeks?
Console users will have access to the "old" Gwent during the transition period.
What we've seen so far - let's be fair - is a small portion of what's to come. Granted, I too am somewhat taken aback by the 3D leaders, and it comes across as a less consistent art style and atmosphere. However, I'm waiting to see if these elements make more sense in the context of the new game as a whole. Clearly the team has been working hard to shake things up and create something they can sustain and build upon. Though I still love the game in its current state, it apparently was not working out. It was absolutely disappointing, but it's kind of irrelevant now to speculate on the reasons why the team felt they could not sustain that version of the game. Bottom line: Gwent, as we know it, is ending. It's sad, but what can you say? I had tons of fun playing it.
I'm as nostalgic as anyone, but having something new is also exciting. Right now, the things we don't know far outweigh the things we do know.
I hope that as a community we can, at the very least, wait until all the cards are on the table(I couldn't resist). We don't even know how many cards there will BE. For all we know, those were some of the most basic, vanilla cards in the game. With the siege row gone, many of the machines could have been scrapped. There is apparently a new card type called "artifacts". How will those work? Are passive faction perks back? Why are we hitting an "End Turn" button now, and what does that imply? Who knows? The sky is the limit for new mechanics and features in this new format. We're not playing cards in a tavern anymore. Okay. What possibilities does that open up?
If we're gonna give them a chance, let's give them a chance. I have to think of this as something brand new. The developers have shown that they are willing to listen to the community and make changes. However, they also need to have a singular vision for what comes next. That means letting them execute on that vision. Maybe they haven't presented these changes in the best possible way. But I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt that they have something worth waiting for.
I'm as nostalgic as anyone, but having something new is also exciting. Right now, the things we don't know far outweigh the things we do know.
I hope that as a community we can, at the very least, wait until all the cards are on the table(I couldn't resist). We don't even know how many cards there will BE. For all we know, those were some of the most basic, vanilla cards in the game. With the siege row gone, many of the machines could have been scrapped. There is apparently a new card type called "artifacts". How will those work? Are passive faction perks back? Why are we hitting an "End Turn" button now, and what does that imply? Who knows? The sky is the limit for new mechanics and features in this new format. We're not playing cards in a tavern anymore. Okay. What possibilities does that open up?
If we're gonna give them a chance, let's give them a chance. I have to think of this as something brand new. The developers have shown that they are willing to listen to the community and make changes. However, they also need to have a singular vision for what comes next. That means letting them execute on that vision. Maybe they haven't presented these changes in the best possible way. But I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt that they have something worth waiting for.
Got mixed feelings about this video. I'm kinda intrigued by new graphics, or maybe I'm just slightly getting used to it already, hard to deal with the fact that this is the new Gwent, but hey whatever.
Now into some suggestions: CDPR, can we please have a video of actual gameplay, rather than graphics? I mean, don't get me wrong, graphics is essential topic, but we all love Gwent for its gameplay and we want to see what have you got prepared for us. All cards that have been shown so far, me personally, I found them so bland and boring. "Draw that to hit this, wait a turn and hit that, get your head out of the window and sneeze in order to hit that." All about damn hitting something. Show us some synergies, some interactions. I hope you haven't removed tutors, I really really, REALLY hope you did not do that.
And now into particular topic that made me absolutely furious. Console version...Right...One extra month? Are you serious?! I mean, common, what kind of spit in the face is that? Thanks for your kegs offer, but I would rather purchase kegs myself and play the game in the same time as everyone will. But I have to give you a credit, for at least offering something in return, most companies wouldn't even do that, they will be like: "Hey, you gotta wait for one month more, deal with it". So thanks for that one way, or another. Good thing about it though, our PC barons can do all theorycraft and new deckbuilding for us, while we're (console plebs) doing Hatiko impersonation
Now into some suggestions: CDPR, can we please have a video of actual gameplay, rather than graphics? I mean, don't get me wrong, graphics is essential topic, but we all love Gwent for its gameplay and we want to see what have you got prepared for us. All cards that have been shown so far, me personally, I found them so bland and boring. "Draw that to hit this, wait a turn and hit that, get your head out of the window and sneeze in order to hit that." All about damn hitting something. Show us some synergies, some interactions. I hope you haven't removed tutors, I really really, REALLY hope you did not do that.
And now into particular topic that made me absolutely furious. Console version...Right...One extra month? Are you serious?! I mean, common, what kind of spit in the face is that? Thanks for your kegs offer, but I would rather purchase kegs myself and play the game in the same time as everyone will. But I have to give you a credit, for at least offering something in return, most companies wouldn't even do that, they will be like: "Hey, you gotta wait for one month more, deal with it". So thanks for that one way, or another. Good thing about it though, our PC barons can do all theorycraft and new deckbuilding for us, while we're (console plebs) doing Hatiko impersonation
Last edited:
Its ok if you want to use this look for gwent and thronebreaker specifically and im sure many people would love the new 3D look but please please give us an option for the 2D look as it is currently. With the current design, it looks and plays perfectly for the type of experience most of us want out of this game.
Row specific abilities is quite a bit of meaning compared to what we have now. Then there is reach which you forgot to mention. That is multiple layers of row depth. First you have to play the card on the row that has the ability you want to use and then you can only interact with your opponent based on which row you are on. That is meaning. That isn't being dishonest.
In my opinion Reach is the best ability that they have shown so far. However, they have also shown strong counters to it.
For example, I place defensively Imlerith:Sabbath on the backrow. In principle, I'd like to trade off the chance of hitting my opponent last row with some more cover. However, Alzur's Thunder can kill him easily and a lot of cards that do damage disregard Reach: ekimmara can drain him, cyclops can hit him, Milaen can damage him, Pavko Gale ping ability has no Reach. Basically, placing Imlerith:Sabbath in the backrow seems to have no defensive purpose.
I would also argue that the concept of Reach could shine on a different board. Let's assume to have back the 3 rows. We could have siege machine able to hit far away with 5-6 Reach, melee units force to fight in the front row 1-2 Reach and archers having 3-4 Reach. That would open up a lot of options!
My hope is that there is some way to place your units out of Reach using for example fog or rain. But for that to work, we need to have Reach as a core mechanic of the game. Right now, out of the 32 cards that were shown only 3 of them have Reach and, if I'm not mistaken only 6 have row-related effects.
Well, Gwent is a card game, and a well designed aesthetic wooden board with a touch of classic will suffice ... but I guess I can accept the concept of a 3D leader commanding 2D cards by the side. I personally don't like about the aesthetics. Yes I understand there may be limits to design but the leaders, at their current state, don't seem as majestic as they are supposed to be. Since CDPR is going for the 3D concept, I think it'd be better for a leader to look less like a cartoon puppet.
If you look closely at how the visual effects pop from the leader, they're coming from beneath the models. So, maybe they're going to offer an option to use 2D cards in their place? Otherwise, why not use the 3D models to shoot effects onto the board. Eithne's bow animations are just for show in that video.
They must have known that 3D leaders would be a divisive idea, and I wonder if they just wanted to get it out there ahead of everything else. If they showed us a ton of features at once, people would fixate on the leaders, and ignore 90% of what they showed, and call the whole thing "garbage".
Either way, I'd rather have some bumpy presentations like this than have the BS corporate PR-bot speak that you get from most companies.
They must have known that 3D leaders would be a divisive idea, and I wonder if they just wanted to get it out there ahead of everything else. If they showed us a ton of features at once, people would fixate on the leaders, and ignore 90% of what they showed, and call the whole thing "garbage".
Either way, I'd rather have some bumpy presentations like this than have the BS corporate PR-bot speak that you get from most companies.