Why the silence [Reviews & Roadmap]?

[nedders]

The fact that they took some decision on their own doesn't mean they didn't listen to the players or made things to improve the game.
On the contrary, you don't improve a game just by listening to the fan, as a game developper, you have to take some personal decisions as well.
And it's pretty clear that they took player's opinions into account, the coinflip fix is what a lot of peoples requested (not only the fact of fixing it but TA as a concept were suggested many times by the community), same thing with Orders (a lot of peoples, starting by me, requested to add activated ability into the game) and weather ticking for a set amount of turns...
And those are just a few examples, a lot of things they changed or added to HC were suggested on this very forum.

So 1,000,000 people say "don't go for two rows", but when 3 or 4 say "add orders" they listen?

You're way off the mark, bud. They designed a game that was there to make profit - Thronebreaker - and for cost-effectiveness created an "online" game that's exactly the same. This isn't a community thing, it's a profit thing. Gwent couldn't have been making much, else they wouldn't have burned it to the ground. Thronebreakers probably made 1000x what Gwent Kegs ever made for them.

Solution? CDPR will just keep making standard games. If this iteration of Gwent makes money for them, they might keep it going. If it doesn't, they'll kill it. But what this is NOT about is an online card playing community.

 

[RVG1926]

Midwinter deja vu all over again.

1) people don't like it
2) mods say how much they enjoy the new game
3) cdpr openly admit it failed
4) mods admit it failed
5) repeat

 

[Alexander_Volgin]

Haven't streamers always been a small minority in terms of number of viewers? This game has been in a niche segment for far too long. New graphics should bring it to the mass market, which is rquired for its long term survival.
You have been whining about the way devs have been making nerfs/changes in the past. Now you got an almost perfect solution for broken mechanics by introducing resource system. You wanted frequent balance patches, you got it, recently artifacts were nerfed, now we get an additional balance patch early december.

I personally think that you critics are the number 1 reason that holds this game back. The reviews are one of the many reasons that attract new players, and given your poisonous recomendations it's no wounder why the growth prospects looks dim.

I personally have high hopes for this game, new expansion will launch soon, and many more additions are to come, given the newly established core of the game which is solid for future adjustments.
I hope you guys disappear from the forums for good, if you dont like it, leave it.

 

[Shabman]

I was talking about the definition of failure, while you are... wait a minute, I am having a déjà vu here.

Please, tell me what constitutes as a failure?
Homecoming is not Gwent, so the game is a failure to you? Okay.
The player base has dropped too much, so the game is a failure to John Doe? Sure.

Great, all irrelevant. I was originally replying to someone who stated HC has failed, like it was a fact, while it's not that simple. Especially, if you want CDPR to acknowledge it. Gwent is a failure when CDPR thinks it's a failure. And when they acknowledge it, we have something to discuss. Until that time:




On a final note, let's flip the discussion. Thronebreaker was the most popular game on GOG for a while. Maybe you're thinking: "Nice, the game is pretty successful" while, at CDPR HQ, the CEO thinks: "What, only 2 million copies sold!? We projected 3 million by now. What a failure."

Appearances can be deceiving. The end.

Just thought I'd mention that, in fact, Thronebreaker underperformed in terms of sales, according to the devs. Which is why they haven't yet decided if they want to make another installment in the Witcher Tales series. And which is why they decided to release on Steam (to catch a bigger audience). I can dig up the article for you if you haven't seen it already.

Which, strange enough, gives me some amount of hope for the future of Gwent. Because if money IS a factor - and it makes sense that it is - then maybe we'll have something more similar to old Gwent back, when the money people realize that Homecoming is making less money than old Gwent, and that more $$$ is to be gained by rolling back.

Or they might just bin the whole thing. I sure hope not.

 

[Gen_Liu]

So 1,000,000 people say "don't go for two rows", but when 3 or 4 say "add orders" they listen?

You're way off the mark, bud. They designed a game that was there to make profit - Thronebreaker - and for cost-effectiveness created an "online" game that's exactly the same. This isn't a community thing, it's a profit thing. Gwent couldn't have been making much, else they wouldn't have burned it to the ground. Thronebreakers probably made 1000x what Gwent Kegs ever made for them.

Solution? CDPR will just keep making standard games. If this iteration of Gwent makes money for them, they might keep it going. If it doesn't, they'll kill it. But what this is NOT about is an online card playing community.

It's funny how things are even black or white for you.
Of course it's about profit but it doesn't mean they're not listening to players. You can combine both (in fact you should).

Also, just as a remainder, a lot of peoples were asking CDPR to change everything with their game, claiming that Gwent was going nowhere and should be redone from scraps (ironically some of them are the same complaining about the game changing too much now). The safest move from CDPR would have been to ignore them and keep improving the old formula. What CDPR did was extremely risky.

Make your own conclusion but to me, it feels like CDPR care about making things properly and creating a good game...but yes I know, I'm completely wrong, they're evil, they only care about money, alien are watching us in the shadow...

 

[jgolden234]

I feel like the same argument keeps happening on each new thread. Some people are angry and want old gwent back so they fuss about every detail. Other people like homecoming and are sick of the whining and say so. The angry people fuss at anyone that says something positive, the positive homecoming.people defend themselves, and.round and round and round.....

Is anyone else getting dizzy? I am kind of surprised the mods haven't started merging a these threads.

And on topic of this thread (maybe on topic? I kind of forgot what it was) we can't determine the success of homecoming until it has launched for everyone. You can't expect the same size player base if half can't even access it yet.

 

[4RM3D]

Things are not as simple as that. And i'm not trying to prove i'm right and you as wrong. I just think many here are making a desperate effort to deny whats in front of us.

*snip*

Fair enough.

Midwinter deja vu all over again.

1) people don't like it
2) mods say how much they enjoy the new game
3) cdpr openly admit it failed
4) mods admit it failed
5) repeat

Hah, but not quite. Midwinter played a pivotal roll which has lead to Homecoming. With Midwinter, the devs sprinkled Gwent with a bit of Hearthstone, without actually changing Gwent. It was like mixing water and oil; a blurry mess that slowly created a divide. I didn't need to wait for the devs to acknowledge that. We like to be optimistic, but I couldn't be with Midwinter, unlike with Homecoming.

 

[flyhy]

It's funny how things are even black or white for you.
Of course it's about profit but it doesn't mean they're not listening to players. You can combine both (in fact you should).

Also, just as a remainder, a lot of peoples were asking CDPR to change everything with their game, claiming that Gwent was going nowhere and should be redone from scraps (ironically some of them are the same complaining about the game changing too much now). The safest move from CDPR would have been to ignore them and keep improving the old formula. What CDPR did was extremely risky.

Make your own conclusion but to me, it feels like CDPR care about making things properly and creating a good game...but yes I know, I'm completely wrong, they're evil, they only care about money, alien are watching us in the shadow...

Sure they listened to a couple that fit their chosen direction for the game to make it more casual and mobile phone friendly, but that doesn't equate HC as the result of the community's requests or fixing problems. I don't recall that the people who asked Gwent to be overhauled, to be changed from root up, being the majority. Many people wanted changes, mostly balance, or getting rid of that Sabbath abomination or anything that resulted in the Sabbath situation, but not fundamentally change everything what Gwent was. And HC artifacts are pretty much equivalent to the Sabbath situation, and it also inherited some of the problems that old Gwent had. HC is NOT a product that was in effort to fix old Gwent. It is a new game for a new direction.

Also, we are not criticizing what a business does. It is reasonable for a business to make moves to amass profit in the scope of legal agreements or whatever the piece of paper says. However, as the op pointed out in page 1, it is an unethical and immoral practice to take money then proceed to change the game, start over, for their own goal, to a new start that no player ever asked for.

I get it. Some people like it, and some don't care. But the fact is, HC is completely different that doesn't leave a reminiscence of old gwent except the card art. HC isn't what I supported and paid hundreds of dollars for. So let's stop pretend HC is a product of care for the community. CDPR cares to make a good game. That is true. No one is saying CDPR is running a scam business, but what makes a good game is highly subjective, and we are not obliged to like everything CDPR makes.

Oh yes. Finally, how dare we criticize god almighty wonderful CDPR. It is interesting that you criticized others for perceiving it either black or white while you yourself perceiving criticism against CDPR is merely calling them evil.

I feel like the same argument keeps happening on each new thread. Some people are angry and want old gwent back so they fuss about every detail. Other people like homecoming and are sick of the whining and say so. The angry people fuss at anyone that says something positive, the positive homecoming.people defend themselves, and.round and round and round.....

Why are you even here? What I find funny is that some people come to a thread that's obviously gonna be about "negativity" and when counter argued their "positivity" with "negativity," they immediately leaves snarky comments complaining that people are complaining. What's the point?

 

[Mancoon1980]

Midwinter deja vu all over again.

1) people don't like it
2) mods say how much they enjoy the new game
3) cdpr openly admit it failed
4) mods admit it failed
5) repeat

Midwinter was nothing in hindsight compared to homecoming 76 though

 

[Gen_Liu]

Sure they listened to a couple that fit their chosen direction for the game to make it more casual and mobile phone friendly, but that doesn't equate HC as the result of the community's requests or fixing problems. I don't recall that the people who asked Gwent to be overhauled, to be changed from root up, being the majority. Many people wanted changes, mostly balance, or getting rid of that Sabbath abomination or anything that resulted in the Sabbath situation, but not fundamentally change everything what Gwent was. And HC artifacts are pretty much equivalent to the Sabbath situation, and it also inherited some of the problems that old Gwent had. HC is NOT a product that was in effort to fix old Gwent. It is a new game for a new direction.

Also, we are not criticizing what a business does. It is reasonable for a business to make moves to amass profit in the scope of legal agreements or whatever the piece of paper says. However, as the op pointed out in page 1, it is an unethical and immoral practice to take money then proceed to change the game, start over, for their own goal, to a new start that no player ever asked for.

I get it. Some people like it, and some don't care. But the fact is, HC is completely different that doesn't leave a reminiscence of old gwent except the card art. HC isn't what I supported and paid hundreds of dollars for. So let's stop pretend HC is a product of care for the community. CDPR cares to make a good game. That is true. No one is saying CDPR is running a scam business, but what makes a good game is highly subjective, and we are not obliged to like everything CDPR makes.

Oh yes. Finally, how dare we criticize god almighty wonderful CDPR. It is interesting that you criticized others for perceiving it either black or white while you yourself perceiving criticism against CDPR is merely calling them evil.

Except you flat out didn't understand my message.
I've never said that critisizing CDPR is evil. In fact, I do it myself. If you pay attention to what I post on this forum, you'll realize that I give my share when it stands to critisize what they do and the choice they made (when I disagree with them obviously).
What I was talking about is you saying things like "CDPR make games for profit, not for players" (I simplify, I'm not gonna find and quote every line again).
It seems like you can't think of any alternative between making money and listening to players and therefore see everything in black or white. That's what I meant when I said that but no worry, you can critisize CDPR as long as it's constructive and you keep to facts.

...And that's the issue I have here. I love how peoples are like "they did things only for profits" or "they don't listen to peoples" when they have litteraly no proof and even less knowledge of what they say.

Also, the fact you're not happy with the game doesn't mean everyone is and even less that everyone should be.
And I'm sorry but if you look at the game in general, it's much closer to what the comminity asked in general. The coinflip has been fixed, the faction identity has been restored with mechanics and gameplan unique to each of them, the game feels more mature and they added or adjusted game mechanics the way some peoples proposed on the forum.

So of course, if you're disappointed with the final product, you'll see things differently, obviously but it's the drawback of rfeworking everything to the core and the risk it represents (as I said, that was a huge risk and definitely not what you're doing if you want only to make profits).

 

[4RM3D]

And I'm sorry but if you look at the game in general, it's much closer to what the comminity asked in general.

The coinflip has been fixed, the faction identity has been restored [...]

Oh, this is going to be criticized, so I might just as well jump in before anyone else does.

Gwent had a better faction identity and it felt more unique. However, at the same time, it was too restricted (and thus obvious), which resulted in a lot of decks being the same. In Homecoming, at least, there are more variations of the same deck. Ironically, that's not because of better faction identity, but because of less faction identity. Though, I suspect that with the coming expansions, the increased card pool will fix this (identity crisis).

As for the coin-flip, it's still not fixed and I don't think it ever can be properly fixed. However, Homecoming did greatly improve it, by giving some more room for the opening play to unfold; not without it's downsides, though.

 

[nedders]

Except you flat out didn't understand my message.
I've never said that critisizing CDPR is evil. In fact, I do it myself. If you pay attention to what I post on this forum, you'll realize that I give my share when it stands to critisize what they do and the choice they made (when I disagree with them obviously).
What I was talking about is you saying things like "CDPR make games for profit, not for players" (I simplify, I'm not gonna find and quote every line again).
It seems like you can't think of any alternative between making money and listening to players and therefore see everything in black or white. That's what I meant when I said that but no worry, you can critisize CDPR as long as it's constructive and you keep to facts.

...And that's the issue I have here. I love how peoples are like "they did things only for profits" or "they don't listen to peoples" when they have litteraly no proof and even less knowledge of what they say.

Also, the fact you're not happy with the game doesn't mean everyone is and even less that everyone should be.
And I'm sorry but if you look at the game in general, it's much closer to what the comminity asked in general. The coinflip has been fixed, the faction identity has been restored with mechanics and gameplan unique to each of them, the game feels more mature and they added or adjusted game mechanics the way some peoples proposed on the forum.

So of course, if you're disappointed with the final product, you'll see things differently, obviously but it's the drawback of rfeworking everything to the core and the risk it represents (as I said, that was a huge risk and definitely not what you're doing if you want only to make profits).

Sir, with respect, we live in the Capitalist age. Everything that happens runs on money. What the respondent, and I, were saying is that it is well within CDPR's rights to create what they want in the pursuit of $$$. They're a clever bunch and did amazing things with the Witcher series, so they earned that right. They will want to create great games - because great games sell, they make $$$. They don't do it so they can get a plaque that says "congrats on making a good game".

And neither he nor I state that "everyone" isn't happy. Clearly you're ok with it, and that's fine.

The point that has been made ad infinitum is that there was a game called Gwent which was tested for 2 years. During those two years people paid a lot of money, and made contributions towards improving the game - a developers heaven. For whatever reason, CDPR threw all of that away in favour of releasing a game (Thronebreaker) with an "online" feature (HC). This forum is full of people who spent time talking about Gwent (Beta), so isn't it somewhat understandable that there will be significant amounts of vitriol for both time and money wasted, as the end result was a baffling mess of new features very few people ever asked for?

Maybe I'm not seeing it clearly, but even your points make no sense:

- Fixed coin flip? Changed, not fixed! Added situation with Mulligan doesn't help
- Faction identity? This game has very little real identity, it's 90% removal. Take NR - sure, lot of units have orders....but one of their leaders removes orders, many of their cards add 'zeal'. It's pointless, it's not an identity. Some of it is just weird - some odd Neutral cards, Filavandrel's synergy with dwarven cards/Brouver working with Elves!
- More mature? How does it feel more mature? It's about removing your opponents cards and praying to RNGsus that you get a good deal. It's like rock paper scissors - a game for 4 year olds.

Again, not trying to antagonise, but the positive noise around this game is nonsensical. You can't even argue the coin flip is fixed, it's an opinion. You can't state there's clear faction identity, because there isn't.

Very few people wanted:

- 2 rows instead of 3
- No tutors
- Spy removal
- No silver cards
- Less cards in hand
- No blacklisting
- Different mulligans

All in all it's one of the weirdest situations I've seen in gaming. I could sort of understand it if this version of Gwent was their first stab at an online card game - that's how bad it seems. But it's the "result" of 2 years extensive testing!!

EDIT: Apologies to 4RM3D, I was typing this at the same time!!!

 

[jgolden234]

Sure they listened to a couple that fit their chosen direction for the game to make it more casual and mobile phone friendly, but that doesn't equate HC as the result of the community's requests or fixing problems. I don't recall that the people who asked Gwent to be overhauled, to be changed from root up, being the majority. Many people wanted changes, mostly balance, or getting rid of that Sabbath abomination or anything that resulted in the Sabbath situation, but not fundamentally change everything what Gwent was. And HC artifacts are pretty much equivalent to the Sabbath situation, and it also inherited some of the problems that old Gwent had. HC is NOT a product that was in effort to fix old Gwent. It is a new game for a new direction.

Also, we are not criticizing what a business does. It is reasonable for a business to make moves to amass profit in the scope of legal agreements or whatever the piece of paper says. However, as the op pointed out in page 1, it is an unethical and immoral practice to take money then proceed to change the game, start over, for their own goal, to a new start that no player ever asked for.

I get it. Some people like it, and some don't care. But the fact is, HC is completely different that doesn't leave a reminiscence of old gwent except the card art. HC isn't what I supported and paid hundreds of dollars for. So let's stop pretend HC is a product of care for the community. CDPR cares to make a good game. That is true. No one is saying CDPR is running a scam business, but what makes a good game is highly subjective, and we are not obliged to like everything CDPR makes.

Oh yes. Finally, how dare we criticize god almighty wonderful CDPR. It is interesting that you criticized others for perceiving it either black or white while you yourself perceiving criticism against CDPR is merely calling them evil.


Why are you even here? What I find funny is that some people come to a thread that's obviously gonna be about "negativity" and when counter argued their "positivity" with "negativity," they immediately leaves snarky comments complaining that people are complaining. What's the point?

Why are you being rude? I was not rude or "snarky". I pointed out something I saw happening. Why is your default action to attack me? I don't appreciate that. I am allowed my opinion and thoughts in this forum just as you are.

Oh, this is going to be criticized, so I might just as well jump in before anyone else does.

Gwent had a better faction identity and it felt more unique. However, at the same time, it was too restricted (and thus obvious), which resulted in a lot of decks being the same. In Homecoming, at least, there are more variations of the same deck. Ironically, that's not because of better faction identity, but because of less faction identity. Though, I suspect that with the coming expansions, the increased card pool will fix this (identity crisis).

As for the coin-flip, it's still not fixed and I don't think it ever can be properly fixed. However, Homecoming did greatly improve it, by giving some more room for the opening play to unfold; not without it's downsides, though.

That cartoon is awesome and pretty accurate

 

[flyhy]

Except you flat out didn't understand my message.
I've never said that critisizing CDPR is evil. In fact, I do it myself. If you pay attention to what I post on this forum, you'll realize that I give my share when it stands to critisize what they do and the choice they made (when I disagree with them obviously).
What I was talking about is you saying things like "CDPR make games for profit, not for players" (I simplify, I'm not gonna find and quote every line again).
It seems like you can't think of any alternative between making money and listening to players and therefore see everything in black or white. That's what I meant when I said that but no worry, you can critisize CDPR as long as it's constructive and you keep to facts.

...And that's the issue I have here. I love how peoples are like "they did things only for profits" or "they don't listen to peoples" when they have litteraly no proof and even less knowledge of what they say.

Also, the fact you're not happy with the game doesn't mean everyone is and even less that everyone should be.
And I'm sorry but if you look at the game in general, it's much closer to what the comminity asked in general. The coinflip has been fixed, the faction identity has been restored with mechanics and gameplan unique to each of them, the game feels more mature and they added or adjusted game mechanics the way some peoples proposed on the forum.

So of course, if you're disappointed with the final product, you'll see things differently, obviously but it's the drawback of rfeworking everything to the core and the risk it represents (as I said, that was a huge risk and definitely not what you're doing if you want only to make profits).

The argument was "HC is the result of the community's plethora criticism of Gwent" vs. "HC has nothing to do with old Gwent. It is a new game with a new direction." Somehow, you saw it as "profit" vs "people," as if we had been talking about a business can only make a game either for profit or for people. That is not what we are talking about.

I have a feeling you didn't read my post at all.

Post automatically merged: Nov 30, 2018

Why are you being rude? I was not rude or "snarky". I pointed out something I saw happening. Why is your default action to attack me? I don't appreciate that. I am allowed my opinion and thoughts in this forum just as you are.

I am incredibly baffled. I wasn't being rude or anything that meant to attack an individual. I pointed out something I read just as you were allowed your opinion.

 

[Gen_Liu]

- Faction identity? This game has very little real identity, it's 90% removal. Take NR - sure, lot of units have orders....but one of their leaders removes orders, many of their cards add 'zeal'. It's pointless, it's not an identity. Some of it is just weird - some odd Neutral cards, Filavandrel's synergy with dwarven cards/Brouver working with Elves!
- More mature? How does it feel more mature? It's about removing your opponents cards and praying to RNGsus that you get a good deal. It's like rock paper scissors - a game for 4 year olds.

You would be surprised to see how many very complicate games are "rock paper sissors". If you take fighting games for example, Virtua fighter is famous for being among most complicate and difficult game to master in this format, yet it's giant R/P/S...

Again, not trying to antagonise, but the positive noise around this game is nonsensical. You can't even argue the coin flip is fixed, it's an opinion. You can't state there's clear faction identity, because there isn't.

SC Dwarf handbuff/Elf movement, MO deathwish/consume, NR zeal/soldier, SK discard/self wound...just some examples.

I do agree that Filavandrel and Broover should have their effect reversed (same with Eredin and Woodland spirit) but there's definitely faction identities.

 

[Alexander_Volgin]

I know that might be percieved as unethical, but given all the negative review from beta players, wouldnt it be a great idea to delete them ? Atleast the posts that compare old gwent to new. I think we should end this discussion once and for all by sending a strong signal that these commentary are unwanted (Also delete pre-homecoming reviews). We are moving forward.

 

[Draconifors]

I know that might be percieved as unethical, but given all the negative review from beta players, wouldnt it be a great idea to delete them ? Atleast the posts that compare old gwent to new. I think we should end this discussion once and for all by sending a strong signal that these commentary are unwanted

Not going to happen. ALL opinions, provided they follow the rules, are allowed to be posted.
In fact, suggesting they shouldn't be allowed could be considered to be against the rules.

 

[Alexander_Volgin]

That I cannot argue, a similar post from me on the issue was deleted, so you guys are right on track. Well enjoy discussing this topic related to old and new gwent in the near future.

 

[ardeathwing]

I know it's maybe a bit too early to raise the topic 1 day after the December patch but still. Is there any chance we can get a roadmap anytime soon? Are there any planned expansions? A roadmap of events maybe? Something special for the holidays to plan around?

To be honest you can release 10 balance patches like this one and people still won't be happy. An expansion with a large set of new cards though...this is whole another story.

 

[DRK3]

Yes, i would also like to know when the first set of new cards is coming. I know CDPR still has a lot of issues to deal with it in these troubled times, but i hope we can get the first batch of new cards in 2-4 months.

And im guessing we wont have seasonal events anymore, just seasonal trees.