jack1974
Nov 16, 2016
I definitely will NEVER make a game like SOTW again. The end result was in my opinion good, but really not worth it
Harbinger1975
Nov 16, 2016
I definitely will NEVER make a game like SOTW again. The end result was in my opinion good, but really not worth it
I dunno, Jack. I really loved Seasons of the Wolf and Loren. I love a good long story that will make me think. Yeah, I do agree sometime filler quests can bit a bit blah. But a side quest that affects how you approach the main quest down the line is nice. Do you gain an ally or make an enemy who will help you in the end (see Sauzer). That kind of thing.
Pace675
Nov 16, 2016
I definitely will NEVER make a game like SOTW again. The end result was in my opinion good, but really not worth it
Have to agree with Harby here, Besides Loren SOTW is my favorite game. I just get disenchanted with games that make you grind to get to the good stuff (Points at DA:I loved to hate that game but played 600+hours), where I think people want a nice blend of action with the story, and grind 5 levels so you can just squeeze by to the next part.
Harbinger1975
Nov 16, 2016
But again. This is why with you Jack and the Winter Wolves team, I'm more than willing to wait for a great game than a shoddy one. I will gladly give a developer (Indie or otherwise) my money when they have earned my loyalty and respect with great games. You have. So to me, all the work you and your team do are certainly more than worth the effort even if it seems like it wasn't.
jack1974
Nov 17, 2016
I meant so complex, with the map, so many enemies/skills/items, etc. I think it was too much. Loren was still fun even if less complex. For sure I won't have a RPG with so many slots again. If you are alone, OK. But a party with so many inventory slots, is a bit crazy. That's just an example.
But there are already games that will be long. Roger Steel will be one of those. But I won't overcomplicate it unnecessarily.
Probably what I meant is that, don't overdo it. Like the iso map when most players wouldn't really care about it, etc
Jaeger
Nov 17, 2016
I actually, like the iso map, it made the towns and other environments more enjoyable to navigate than a bunch of text boxes. Besides, once you have the tilesets, I thought you can reuse them for future games.
Multiple slots for armor and accessories worked well for SOTW, given the random nature and multiple properties of each piece. That being said, an RPG get by fine with just one slot for armor slot and maybe a couple for accessories.
jack1974
Nov 18, 2016
I actually, like the iso map, it made the towns and other environments more enjoyable to navigate than a bunch of text boxes. Besides, once you have the tilesets, I thought you can reuse them for future games.
Yes though it was more complex to make, in particular the dungeon parts. As you can imagine is much harder than a simple 2d map with locations to click. I mean, I could still have a simple 2d town with locations to visit instead of text boxes. Would still look nice to explore, but without the mess of the iso map
Multiple slots for armor and accessories worked well for SOTW, given the random nature and multiple properties of each piece. That being said, an RPG get by fine with just one slot for armor slot and maybe a couple for accessories.
I guess depends on tastes in the end. For sure such a big variety of slots, combined with 8 party members, was a bit nuts
However I'm sure some players liked it!
AFTER SOME HOURS...
Well thinking about it better wasn't probably all the features in particular, but the time that took me to make and all the battle variations. The writer (following my instructions) made specific custom conditions for a lot of battles. Those took time to code and test. It's also the game with most variety of enemies (over 115 if I remember correctly, including some variants).
So yes when compared to Loren, PS1 or QoT, it's clearly those two aspects: too many skills, enemies and custom battle conditions. If I could reduce all those 3 aspects by half, then I guess I could do another SOTW style game
ElfenLied
Nov 19, 2018
If you plan to create another VN card game (which I really wish you did) I'd like to put out some things that imho would have made my experience with PS:CD even better than it already was. Note: this doesn't mean that these modifications would made it a better game:I am not really in the position to make such assumptions so I am only giving my opinion according to my personal tastes. Take my words for what they are then.
1) I wish I could have access to the battle info before the battle started. For example I found that for turn limited battles it was better to enter with a smaller deck composed almost by cards that gave you instant attack and with the breach feature. Battle where you had to resist #number of turns at the opposite require a deck with a lot of walls and rebuild cards. So, knowing these info in advance would have saved me the trouble to enter the battle each time, read the info, reload before the beginning of the battle and then create the appropriate deck.
2) Rather than having a bunch of new cards given to me now and then I would have preferred starting with a smaller deck and then having the new cards delivered one by one as reward at the end of each battle. Maybe a mix of stars/new cards as reward would have made the side missions (especially the ones not NPC-related) more appealing.
3) If you wish to rule out entirely the luck factor from the battles you could eliminate the draw and give the player the option to play the cards that he wanted from the selected deck, perhaps by giving him some restrictions on deck creation, in order to exclude the risk of having an initial card combo that makes every battle a cakewalk.
On a side note I am really sad to hear that you won't do another SOTW-like game. But hey, that sentence is 2 years old now, so maybe you've changed your mind in the meantime?
jack1974
Nov 19, 2018
Those suggestions are good. I have in mind another VN/Card game but I really MUST finish PS2 and Loren2, because they're super late. I am really thinking to make Undead Lily a card game and remove the draw thing, but have a sort of grimoire which you can use to summon any creature. Of course there would be limits, like max 1 legendary, etc. This requires some changes / tweaks to the card framework though, so I need to check if is possible/how long it would take
As for another SOTW-like game, I meant mostly spending 10 months in it, endlessly tweaking act 1 for 3 months and so on. It really wasn't worth it from time spent/money earned point of view
Cursed Lands took me about 6 months fulltime (but that included also writing, not just coding) and that was worth it, the game did very well. With PS2 I think the experience will be VERY similar to SOTW though
Franka
Nov 19, 2018
I'm not much of a fan of removing luck/draw. That simply makes it a puzzle game. While the puzzles in the Gwent Thronebreaker game are neat, there's no replay value, and it requires much more focused design when it comes to difficulty. Card balance would also be next to impossible, all cards within a certain rank/cost/whatever would have to be equal, or you'd just have cards that would never get played. (Of course bad cards also exist in PSCD, but you'd often have to put some in the deck and make them work for you if you drew them.) The random factor means you don't have to design quite as tightly for balance, because replaying a game will change everything. I think that's really helpful, as you don't have to worry quite so much about getting everything exactly right.
Anyway, I know the next card game is a long time coming. I'm thinking I should design one myself, but my coding skills are not good enough yet.
jack1974
Nov 19, 2018
The problem with the regular (random) draw, is that it makes balancing a bit impossible. The same battle can be ultra easy if you're lucky or ultra hard.
Now for someone who plays card games, it's normal (we all know this) but for newcomers it can lead to frustration (99% of the complaints for this game gameplay is about the luck factor).
I believe it's possible though, maybe simply you decide your deck, and then you can choose the cards to summon, but picking them from your deck. So you can't summon the same card more than its rarity for example. And there would still be some resource mechanics so you can't play the strongest card on first turn.
I'll make my usual 125093421 private tests before releasing the game of course
Franka
Nov 19, 2018
I am of course interested to see what you come up with, I just have my doubts that it'll lead to a fun card game.
jack1974
Nov 19, 2018
Luckily with a card game it's much faster to reiterate and find quicker if the gameplay is fun or not
(something not so simple with a RPG)
ElfenLied
Nov 20, 2018
I'm not much of a fan of removing luck/draw. That simply makes it a puzzle game.
Yes I think you are right. In that case perhaps the right balance could be obtained by doing only the initial draw rather than drawing some cards every turn. In that case there is still the luck/randomness factor but at the same time by having at his disposal all the drawn cards for the whole game the player can plan his strategy for the battle with more confidence.
Phase 1: Selection of the DECK (up to player) -------> Phase 2 Cards for the battle are drawn (up to luck) -------> Phase 3 Battle (up to opponents)
Of course for phase 3 there' still the matter of not knowing what cards did the opponent draw, therefore there is still a random factor even there, and no 100% winning strategy and perhaps there isn't any chance you can win if you made a real bad initial draw. Nevertheless, it's more comfortable to play knowing that the tide of the battle has more chances to be turned at every turn by a good/bad strategy rather than by a lucky/unlucky draw that you get halfway.
Card balance would also be next to impossible, all cards within a certain rank/cost/whatever would have to be equal, or you'd just have cards that would never get played. (Of course bad cards also exist in PSCD, but you'd often have to put some in the deck and make them work for you if you drew them.) The random factor means you don't have to design quite as tightly for balance, because replaying a game will change everything. I think that's really helpful, as you don't have to worry quite so much about getting everything exactly right.
Yes and no, because in PSDC you can still enter the battle with less cards than the deck's limit, therefore you can already exclude all the cards that could make things difficult for you, and consequently increase the chances that you'll always draw a useful card or a right combination of cards. In my playthrough I rarely started a battle with more than 15-20 cards in my deck, even for battles where up to 30 cards were allowed, with the exception of some Matricks' encounter in the end game, where rather than a strategy you just needed a lot of firepower.
While the puzzles in the Gwent Thronebreaker game are neat, there's no replay value, and it requires much more focused design when it comes to difficulty.
I haven't played Thronebreaker yet, therefore I can't say anything about it, but regarding Gwent in The Witcher 3 what really broke the balance for me were spies, which are not only the most OP cards but have also the perk to be available for 2 decks only (Northern Realm and Nilfgaard). Once that I had those decks set with spies + decoy + high damage cards I became almost invincible. Never touched a single time the other 3 decks, and I used to destroy every opponent that was using them. I think that it would be enough that they limited the use of some special cards to keep the balance, but in the end it was just a minigame therefore I couldn't expect it to be perfect.
Franka
Nov 20, 2018
Yes I think you are right. In that case perhaps the right balance could be obtained by doing only the initial draw rather than drawing some cards every turn.
That could work. I'd argue that building a good deck involves manipulation of luck, to the point where a bad draw only means changing your strategy, not an automatic loss, but I get that the common complaint from people who aren't used to deck building has to do with the randomness of draws.
Yes and no, because in PSDC you can still enter the battle with less cards than the deck's limit, therefore you can already exclude all the cards that could make things difficult for you, and consequently increase the chances that you'll always draw a useful card or a right combination of cards. In my playthrough I rarely started a battle with more than 15-20 cards in my deck
A possible strategy, especially if you reload and build your deck to suit the opponent. For the most part, I tried to keep my decks as close to an initial concept as possible, and that requires max cards for flexibility and to avoid running out.
I haven't played Thronebreaker yet, therefore I can't say anything about it, but regarding Gwent in The Witcher 3 what really broke the balance for me were spies, which are not only the most OP cards but have also the perk to be available for 2 decks only (Northern Realm and Nilfgaard).
Gwent has been completely redesigned a couple of times since Witcher 3. While there's still something akin to the spy mechanic, it's much more balanced now, as is the entire game. Thronebreaker is quite fun, though I don't feel the AI is good enough. I'll still take it over human opponents, I seem to always meet the worst scum possible.
jack1974
Nov 21, 2018
That could work. I'd argue that building a good deck involves manipulation of luck, to the point where a bad draw only means changing your strategy, not an automatic loss
Hehe go tell this to Hearthstone devs
I now basically play the first 4-5 turns, then I already know by then if I have any chances to win or not. I probably surrender over 50% of the matches, because I know no matter what I'll do, I cannot win. And I don't have time to lose playing a match already lost
jack1974
Nov 21, 2018
I don't know if you played it recently, but in practice I have the decks of the top 10 guys, and still can win about 50% of battles. Which means the other 50% is won/lost purely on luck
Franka
Nov 21, 2018
Nah, I stopped playing Hearthstone long ago. Way too much RNG and toxic players.
Desktop
Forums
Blog
Support
Patreon