My Feedback #2

Feedback and Suggestions
#8

Thing is, Faeria isn’t pay 2 win. Its just not. You don’t need to pay to get any cards. Faeria is the most skill testing card game I’ve ever seen. Better players will win regardless of their collection size. Its preciely because of this fact that a player like Cappuccino can create a brand new account, spend $0 on packs, and climb from rank 25 to god #18 in under 15 hours, playing only 54 matches. A player with the smallest collection reasonably possible was able to go 51 and 3. Whats more, Cappuccino actually achieved a higher elo on this account than he currently has on either of his accounts with full collections implying that a larger collection actually negatively impacts win rate.

It’s true that spending money will increase your collection size, and I’ll grant (contrary to evidence above) that a larger collection size will let you make more decks that are better than they otherwise would be, but claiming that the game is Pay2Win seems totally unfounded. Players absolutely don’t need to spend money in order to win. They don’t even need to grind. They just need to be skilled. As a rule, a better player with a worse deck will beat a worse player.

2 Likes
#9

Different expectations I guess, can’t have everything for free without some tradeoffs. You would like all the cards available to newbies I think? The game can only make money on cosmetics and pandora then. Sounds great but I am not sure if the game can survive on this business model. I guess they can put ads in game… :sweat_smile:

It’s free enough for me. Play for a month, then can win against top players if skilled. That’s good enough for me. Need time to learn the game anyway. Not everyone is an expert ccg player before playing Faeria.

#10

Even if they were, so many of their habits and so much of their theory just doesn’t transfer that it would still take them time to become skilled at the game.

#11

The definition of P2W is that you can pay money to improve your outcomes. Nobody argues you can’t pay money to get more cards in your collection, and very few would argue that that doesn’t, on average, improve your outcomes. It’s not a subjective thing, it’s a hard definition. Being able to grind to eventually achieve the same result doesn’t affect the definition.

I understand there are financial reasons to justify why this is used, but that’s irrelevant to whether it meets the definition. Again, it’s not a complaint.

[quote=“Galileus, post:6, topic:6286”]
I’m sorry, but compering a CCG’s art to H&S’s cosmetic equipment is stretching it A LOT. Unless PoE - while I was not looking - made ALL equipped items for free players look like sticks and rags. And I’m yet to see ANY game use such model.
[/quote]I’m guessing H&S = Hack & Slash?

Anyway, the basic gear is simple & functional. Plain vests, etc. Ordinary fireballs etc. You can add glows & effects to weapons & armor, change some models, alter skill effects, get cosmetic pets, etc. People appreciate this and they make good money from it - albeit most of it from a small subset of players.

[quote=“Galileus, post:6, topic:6286”]
And no, they will not switch to 3D engine. They might make another game in 3D, maybe a sequel too. But they will never ever switch to a 3D engine.
[/quote]Probably not, the art requirements are huge and very different - and performance will be poor for mobile devices. But that does mean they’ll look worse (to most people) than the ones that do (eg, the one that Steam’s pushing on me now is Shardbound).

One possible option would be to ensure the core game engine is very modular so that they can attach different renderers. Then they could simply license an existing 3D game’s rendering engine and 3D art - you could separately buy the alternate renderer and they would split the money between them. That’s likely still a ton of work, but far less than doing it themselves.

I think I will put the bugs in a separate post so they’re not skipped by devs.

#12

I don’t like repeating myself, but here goes.

Comparing a PvP CCG to a H&S PvE where you can get all fancy gear and don’t get it thrown in yer face that you didn’t pay to get better VFX for everything is a stretch. A lot. Yes, people get cosmetics because they are optional and do not affect most of the game. Your proposition affects all of the game’s visuals and is not worth the money. People do not appreciate overblown, overpriced and scummy models. And since you promote cutting art, thus giving non-premium consumers a cut of the experience, it’s a scummy model. You don’t offer improvements, you offer baseline for money.

Art doesn’t scale. There is a good look for that firestorm VFX, and you want to cut it into pieces and sell them separately. Either low levels will be underwhelming, or the high ones will be overblown. Because you put pressure on artists to make it graded.

And no, they will never go full 3D. Outsourcing art is all great and all, but it’s a dead end if you want to consider expansions. And no, you don’t buy an renderer, and you don’t even need to pay for engine. And yet, it’s insane amounts of work and money to throw at something. It’s a day 0 kind of decision, it’s too late, no, they will not switch to a 3D engine.

#13

As far as I know, Faeria is built in Unity, which is a 3D game engine.

In my opinion, games with nice 2D art don’t grow old visually, whereas games with up to date 3D art tend to be painful to look at within about 5 years, however great they might look to begin with.

I don’t think there should be any quality difference between free and premium content, but it’s not a huge issue for me as long as the free content is excellent. On that topic, the first (and thus far only) animated card back was $$$ only, but I don’t think it’s even close to the best card back. :slight_smile:

A veteran's view on Faeria and Incentives
#14

That is one definition, but it isn’t a particularly interesting one. The more interesting P2W claim is that people who pay get a significant advantage over those who don’t. This claim is simply false. Better players have an advantage over worse players. Their collection size is basically irrelevant. In fact, I’ve offered evidence in this very thread to suggest that players with a small collection actually have an advantage over players with larger collections.

1 Like
#15

The game is not P2W in fact. BUT has bad matchmaking. So beginners find it difficult to compete in stable meta. We force have top decks in ranked or get bad winrate.
AND the chance of getting epic cards from boosters is terrible.

#16

A couple weeks ago, I’ve spent half my gems on buying some battle chests in the store. I now regret my decision. Shortly before that, I took care to craft, or otherwise obtain, full sets of all Commons in the game, and as battle chests contain 4 Commons each, I had to disenchant most of them, for 1 memoria per card. From then on, I only bought the chests with gold, averaging one chest per day, and getting 4 memoria and one card from each. Suits me very well!

As I couldn’t care less for Mythics, and prefer to actually See the cosmetics I’m buying, I will save up my gems for Goki and individual cash shop cosmetics. If this isn’t the Exact Opposite of P2W, I don’t know what is :slight_smile:

#17

It’s true that the mythic cards could be a lot cooler, and maybe something for the future is the mythic cards could have special effects for when you play them or attack with them, but in the mean time i’ll just cash them in for memoria. Faeria is clearly a F2P model not F2W. I’ve never felt like I couldn’t climb the ladder if I wanted too, I just generally prefer playing solo. I have yet to spend a single dollar on this game, and I almost have a full set. Although, my one regret is that I will never get the cool Bom-R cosmetic set. but that’s an entirely different topic.
My point is that Faeria does a lot of things right, and misses a lot of the pitfalls that other F2P games fail to avoid (such as becoming P2W or ads or a shop that bleeds you dry for the tiniest of changes). I’m actually honestly considering getting the adventure pouch so that I can have all the new solo content as soon as it comes out. Me! the stingiest Free-2-Player I personally know am considering spending money on this genuinely fantastic game! I think it says a lot for the quality of a game when Free-2-Players want to spend money on it when they don’t have to.

3 Likes
#18

I can only sign underneath that, since I’m in the same boat. I rarely pay for cosmetics and am stingy when it comes to that… unless I think they are good price/quality ratio. Then I will drop money for silly stuff I don’t need (or sometimes want, really). And Faeria is one of these games.

1 Like
#19

[quote=“Galileus, post:12, topic:6286”]
Comparing a PvP CCG to a H&S PvE where you can get all fancy gear and don’t get it thrown in yer face that you didn’t pay to get better VFX for everything is a stretch. A lot.[/quote]I don’t get why - on both those counts.

Why does the genre (CCG vs H&S) make a difference? The biggest one I can see is that it takes a lot more work to create the H&S bonus content. But the rationale is the same - the core game mechanics are exposed in a visually decent way that lets you play to your full potential, and if you want extra eye candy from your actions then you can pay. What makes you think the genre matters here?

Who is throwing it in your face? the opponent or the game? If you really get annoyed by your opponent’s actions looking better than yours then I believe (from being in countless discussions on these issues (including a IRL workshop)) you’re in the minority. Think of your opponent as funding the game you’re playing.

I’m not sure what you mean by “cutting art”. I’m not suggesting free customers get worse than what we’ve got now - or that new content should be made at a worse level than what it is now.

[quote=“Amaznazaz, post:13, topic:6286”]
In my opinion, games with nice 2D art don’t grow old visually, whereas games with up to date 3D art tend to be painful to look at within about 5 years, however great they might look to begin with.
[/quote]Hmm, for me it’s the opposite. All those pixel-graphics games look terrible now at high resolutions. And 3D games are often built to scale so your 5 years later GPU will be able to run everything maxed at ultra-high res at a perfectly smooth framerate.

There needs to be a compromise somewhere. Either everyone pays, free players get worse cosmetics, or (like now) free players get worse game-affecting stuff.

[quote=“Ramora, post:14, topic:6286”]
That is one definition, but it isn’t a particularly interesting one. The more interesting P2W claim is that people who pay get a significant advantage over those who don’t.[/quote]Apart from “significant”, what’s the difference in those definitions?

[quote=“Ramora, post:14, topic:6286”]This claim is simply false. Better players have an advantage over worse players. Their collection size is basically irrelevant. In fact, I’ve offered evidence in this very thread to suggest that players with a small collection actually have an advantage over players with larger collections.[/quote]You gave one name, which is not much evidence. And then you said:

[quote=“Ramora, post:8, topic:6286”]
It’s true that spending money will increase your collection size, and I’ll grant (contrary to evidence above) that a larger collection size will let you make more decks that are better than they otherwise would be
[/quote]Which is exactly what I’m saying.

I think the issue is more apparent for certain play-styles. Rush games can do fairly well with basic units but long games is where the fancy rare cards start to shine. AoE is all epic/legendary. The cross-color epics are late-game and extremely cheap relative to similar units.

[quote=“Ramora, post:8, topic:6286”]
As a rule, a better player with a worse deck will beat a worse player.
[/quote]A slightly worse player with a far better deck will usually beat the better player IMHO. That’s been my experience and it has to be true at some level. I have got so much better results after adding Frogifies, Garudan, Aurora, and all 9 wishes.

#20

I’m sorry, but I ain’t going to point out differences in custom premium equipment in PvE game and premium WHOLE VFX OF THE GAME. As well as I will not respond to “art scales just as RPGs do!”, “my personal experience said you’re not important!”, or any other such nonsense.

This is stretching it way too far. At this point I cannot believe you are honest in this discussion, and as such, I have no interest in it’s continuation.

Do enjoy your bubble.

#21

Alternatively, the team could maintain their current standards and employ more staff to work on premium stuff. I hate compromise!

I guess if you can’t actually play new games the way they’re meant to look, it might not be so apparent. Most new games (not all, by any means, but certainly most) these days run just fine with full settings on a lower end of mid-range PC though, so I would expect more people to be up to date with graphical trends and not playing catch-up. I’ve just bitten the bullet to upgrade my 9 year old PC, even though it still runs most stuff on full, but it’s actually started to die of old age before games have really caught up to force my hand.

Maybe it’s just a matter of taste though. As an example, I still really enjoy Civilization II and I think it could come out tomorrow and look better than the average indy TBS, but I installed Civ III, eagerly anticipating a glorious marathon game with the vicious resource management that it brought to the table, but had to immediately uninstall when I booted it and it crashed my brain with its ugliness. I decided I’d just have to suck it up and play the slightly worse Civ IV instead, but that also proved too unbearably ugly and I just had to give up and put the whole thing on hold until the Civ VI makes it into a Humble Bundle.

#22

[quote=“Amaznazaz, post:21, topic:6286”]
Alternatively, the team could maintain their current standards and employ more staff to work on premium stuff. I hate compromise!
[/quote]I probably worded that wrong - by “free players get worse cosmetics” I meant strictly relative to paid players. The level of free player cosmetics could still be better (or worse, or the same) than it is now.

[quote=“Amaznazaz, post:21, topic:6286”]
Most new games (not all, by any means, but certainly most) these days run just fine with full settings on a lower end of mid-range PC though, so I would expect more people to be up to date with graphical trends and not playing catch-up.
[/quote]Depends on the game, and the developer’s mindset. IMHO they should avoid setting hard limits on top end settings when unnecessary. For example, for open world games draw distance doesn’t really need to be capped, and could be the whole world, and terrain detail can keep ramping up till the whole world is at maximum detail, giving a poly count that could reach trillions. Particle effects like fires can just keep ramping up the particle count (if they’re designed to be scalable effects so transparency might increase).

IMHO max settings are more often decided by consumer psychology - some people are put off buying a game they can’t run at max, regardless of how good it currently runs. It’s annoying.

[quote=“Galileus, post:20, topic:6286, full:true”]
I’m sorry, but I ain’t going to point out differences in custom premium equipment in PvE game and premium WHOLE VFX OF THE GAME. [/quote]Where did I suggest that? For both, most of the VFX is constant (world, UI, and much of the rest) and the art is simply amended to improve things. - You do want artists who know how to do this efficiently, though.

Ok, I didn’t explain “most RPGs scale it in some manner”. I guess we might have a different idea of what is meant by art scaling - I didn’t hear the term before and I don’t see it on google, so I just interpreted it myself. I’m just talking (here) about modifying the base - eg making a sword shinier with a fancier hilt, adding glows and particle effects, etc. Adding more decorations to textures, like gold seams or emblems. Basic color/hue adjustment. Things like that.

RPGs like WoW & Skyrim use this lots, as do many non-RTS games.

[quote=“Galileus, post:20, topic:6286, full:true”] … “my personal experience said you’re not important!”, or any other such nonsense.

This is stretching it way too far. At this point I cannot believe you are honest in this discussion, and as such, I have no interest in it’s continuation.

Do enjoy your bubble.
[/quote]That’s not a fair summary IMHO. I said my frequent duration participation in numerous discussions on this including a real-life workshop (and, I’ll add now, discussions with multiple devs) on the issue has shown that most people are more put off (including purchasing habits) by paid game-affecting stuff than they are about paid cosmetics. I never said your opinion was unimportant - I merely said it was, from my experience above, a minority opinion - which is an important detail in this discussion when evaluating whether something makes sense financially. There was no intent to insult or demean. And if you disagree with that, just tell us why you think I’m wrong.

I apologize if I assumed that you were “annoyed by your opponent’s actions” - it sounded like you meant that from above but rereading it you don’t explicitly state it. I want this to be a civil discussion.

I’m sure you know there are many people who have issues with game-affecting payments, so I don’t know what makes you think I’m not being honest in this discussion.

#23

This is why I do call you dishonest. You cherry pick your arguments, meaning I have to repeat them over and over, because you keep moving the goalpost so that yours can stand one post longer. You still did not back out from comparing your model to PoE, because that comparison is good for you and you will just shift goals around to make it stay, no matter how different they are - and how easy it was to draw a proper comparison straight away. You disregarded that.

The whole thing about games scaling it’s art? They don’t. Because why would they. Adding something is just a process of art, you don’t cut it and scale it to fit in few premium grades. Games that do have bad models and shitty stores. Yet you just drop big names so you can boost your credentials. As well as keep reminding me I’m in minority from your experience, that keeps on growing.

Sorry to say, I prefer a heated discussion in which I don’t feel like talking to a wall.

#24

[quote=“Galileus, post:23, topic:6286”]You cherry pick your arguments, meaning I have to repeat them over and over, because you keep moving the goalpost so that yours can stand one post longer.[/quote]Can you cite specifics? What “goalposts” are shifting? (and, what exactly do you mean by goalposts?). And what arguments am I ignoring by cherry picking?

I do see that “basic” could be misinterpreted in my original idea - I’ll admit it does kinda read that way, but I never intended to imply it was less than what you’ve got now. Apologies that that was less than clear. (Also, the “red arrows” was just me misremembering firestorm meteors as hellfire arrows).

[quote=“Galileus, post:23, topic:6286”]You still did not back out from comparing your model to PoE[/quote]I’m not planning on backing out. I believe it’s a good comparison. I gave reasons why I believe it. I admit it’s a very different game, with a very different graphical engine, and they have far more content than Faeria. But I don’t see why the same principle doesn’t apply. People who can access the entire game world using all the gear are still happy to pay for cosmetic changes.

The reasons you give for it being a bad comparison are things I disagree with:

  • You can get all fancy gear. I didn’t respond to this before, but I’m saying you can get all fancy cards. Isn’t that similar?
  • You “get it thrown in yer face” I don’t see this. I don’t see people complaining about this happening either. I see the opposite. And I’m routinely involved in this issue.
  • It’s the whole VFX of the game vs only some of PoE/H&S. I explained why I disagreed: “For both, most of the VFX is constant … the art is simply amended to improve things”.
  • It’s stretching things. Rebuttal just after the last quote.

So why wouldn’t I keep believing it.

[quote=“Galileus, post:23, topic:6286”]because that comparison is good for you and you will just shift goals around to make it stay, no matter how different they are - and how easy it was to draw a proper comparison straight away. You disregarded that.
[/quote]Can you show me a contradiction - rather than a clarification? Is that what you mean by “shifting goals”?

And, even if I did decide to change the idea (which I haven’t yet) based on the discussion, that’s actually part of the reason for having a discussion. It’s not a bad thing.

[quote=“Galileus, post:23, topic:6286”]
The whole thing about games scaling it’s art? They don’t. Because why would they. Adding something is just a process of art, you don’t cut it and scale it to fit in few premium grades. Games that do have bad models and shitty stores. Yet you just drop big names so you can boost your credentials.[/quote]Are you claiming those games (WoW, Skyrim) don’t reuse and amend content? Or are you claiming they have bad models? Also, is there a difference between “dropping big names” and providing examples?

You used yourself as an example of why it was a bad idea. Am I supposed to not counter that because it might be taken as an insult? Or would you prefer I worded it that “I believe the majority of people are more concerned with …”, rather than directly saying you’re in the minority. That’s pretty much the same but I guess it’s more civil.

Are you claiming you’re not in the minority? Are you claiming to have experience to know whether or not you are?

Are you a developer or part of the games industry? I am both.

If that’s so, then I’ll say this:

  • You need to accept that people sometimes don’t write things perfectly the first time and that they have the right to clarify them.
  • You need to not run from the debate by saying “I will not respond to X”.
  • You need to read the words written on the forum rather than the ones formed in your own head.
  • And if you really prefer (or don’t mind) a heated discussion you might want to appear less sensitive.

I prefer civil discussions primarily because mods take down heated ones. Also, people forget to actually make arguments when it’s too heated.

1 Like
#25

[quote=“Xaxazak, post:24, topic:6286”]Are you claiming you’re not in the minority? Are you claiming to have experience to know whether or not you are?

Are you a developer or part of the games industry? I am both.[/quote]

What a model example in shining armor you are.

I’m tempted to answer. I won’t, because I will not fall so low.

Nevertheless, I see no reason talking to someone who brings up his upbringing as an argument. So you’re a noble, good for you. Enjoy your bubble.

#26

[quote=“Galileus, post:25, topic:6286”]
What a model example in shining armor you are.
[/quote]You said you wouldn’t respond to “my personal experience said you’re not important!” which I claimed was a misrepresentation. I had to reiterate what I said, which included stating my experience.

You then decided to criticize my claim of experience. I am entitled to defend myself when you criticize me. So I explained my roles.

[quote=“Galileus, post:25, topic:6286”]
“dishonest”. “bubble”. “cherry pick”. “you just drop big names so you can boost your credentials”. “talking to a wall”
[/quote]Of course you won’t because you can’t fall up.

[quote=“Galileus, post:25, topic:6286”]
Nevertheless, I see no reason talking to someone who brings up his upbringing as an argument.
[/quote]Ok sure. But I didn’t mention anything remotely related to upbringing so you can keep talking.

#27

That went too far and I’m sorry for that. It’s been a long week and I’m on the edge. While I disagree, I do not think this disagreement is worth such escalation, even though it might seem I feel much stronger about that. End of the day, dev or not, I do recognize you as a hard working and very positive member of this community, and I’m failing miserably to give that fact the weight it deserves.

Should’ve ended with just disagreeing a long ago. And fact remains, I fail to properly rely my point, which would surely flow way better over a pint of beer. Will argue with you on some other point I can rely better, at some other time, If you won’t mind!