This is off-topic. We are talking about generally accepted masterpieces. HS is not in any list. Here is a list, for example, ranked for user rating (so people's opinion). There is no way, HS has not designed the history of games (it is only a good card game, nothing more) and Metal Gear has not designed only the stealth action but the whole industry.
OP post is riddled with jumps. Clearly set out to be in some way scathing toward HS as is often seen on these forums despite people having the option of just not engaging with the game if they have such a bad view of the game.
Having played Snap, I can categorically say it's not even comparable. For one it isn't really a CCG at its core, it's more of a mobile game with a CCG overlay. The "cards" do minimally interesting things, compared to some of the board states and interactions that can happen in HS/MTG etc..
OPs construction of language and basis for what they're talking about is incredibly rudimentary. I'd be open to more nuanced discussion than, here's some people who are currently rating Snap well compared to HS.
Because if Second Dinner announce a new game, very few people will care, when Activision Blizzard announces a new game all newspaper in the world will talk about it. So, if an unknown company without history can generate more interest with a game than two big titles coming from the biggest gaming company in the world, it is astonishing. It is astonishing how Activision Blizzard is doing a poor work.
Second Dinner didn't announce Marvel Snap, Disney did. The biggest media franchise in the world.
Just downloaded and tried marvel snap. Its very simplified and there is no where near the creativity or strategy that hearthstone has. Younger players will like it, but older ones will choose hearthstone.
I am a Beta playing (Oct. 2013), never miss a day,Hearthstone 'whale'. Since Marvel Snap has come out, I've logged into HS twice. Also, instead of the thousands of dollars I've spent playing HS, I've spent a total of $2.99 on Snap. All in all, I'd say Snap works great as a game, do to it's quickness and simplicity. I can knock 1, maybe even 2 games of Snap, just during a commercial break. Now that works for me... :p
I tried to not reply to the negative posts of shipmen for quite some time, but this is it for me and I will step on the boat too. This is again another example of having a point of view and searching the internet for pictures or articles as long as needed until you find something, *anything*, that even remotely supports your point of view.
The image in the first post is comparing apples with pears. First of all it compares the more broader searchterm Marvel Snap with the game hearthstone and the game diablo immortal. This causes the image to have a higher interest for marvel snap and a lower for the other two. (There is also a pretty big note in the middle of the screen explaining this, which is conveniently ignored) If I run the same comparison but filter the search on ‘games’ this effect will be somewhat mitigated and you’ll see that marvel is around the same interest as hearthstone and still below Diablo immortal. (See picture, I applied the same terms, but they are in Dutch)
Secondly, if you are really interested in comparing the two games (so this is not relevant for you Shipmen, because you are only trying to bash hearthstone) you should compare how the games did during launch (see other pictures, one for last 5 years, one for 2004 - now), because everybody knows that during launch people search a lot more for information on the game (I also searched how to best spend my gold, credits, etc..) You will see that marvel snap has a very, very long way to go. If the interest of marvel snap keeps growing and retains for a period you’ll have a point, but the conclusions in the first post are just nonsense.
Personally, regarding snap itself, I really like the ‘snap’ mechanism in the game to double the cubes I can understand that people who are interested in shorter, simpler, games are interested in marvel snap. For me, after playing hearthstone and snap for the last couple of days, I notice that my interest in snap is already declining because of its simplicity and estimate that in a couple of weeks it will be off my radar entirely, but you’ll never know…
Out of curiosity, why are you playing strategy games for speed? You don’t play chess expecting to cram in a game during a commercial, do you? What does it matter if you play four games an hour or 8? Is it because you want to grind as quickly as possible?
It’s weird to me when people complain that Hearthstone games last for too long, as if it’s a given that they shouldn’t.
There’s a lot of wrong things with HS and they could use a better design team asap. But I personally don’t find the argument of: « Why are you playing chess when you play five games of Marvel Snap? » Like, so what? Who cares if you’re playing 20 games or 1 as long as you’re having fun.
Must be a generation thing where everything needs to be shortened now for consumption, the Twitter Effect. Same thing with Marvel, THE AVENGERS ASSEMBLE OMG 2 KEWL!
As for the comparison, it’s incredibly faulty and illogical and the reasons have already been stated. Hearthstone can be extremely frustrating but providing unfair and faulty arguments doesn’t do much apart as exposing flaws in one’s character.
Out of curiosity, why are you playing strategy games for speed? You don’t play chess expecting to cram in a game during a commercial, do you? What does it matter if you play four games an hour or 8? Is it because you want to grind as quickly as possible?
It’s weird to me when people complain that Hearthstone games last for too long, as if it’s a given that they shouldn’t.
There’s a lot of wrong things with HS and they could use a better design team asap. But I personally don’t find the argument of: « Why are you playing chess when you play five games of Marvel Snap? » Like, so what? Who cares if you’re playing 20 games or 1 as long as you’re having fun.
Must be a generation thing where everything needs to be shortened now for consumption, the Twitter Effect. Same thing with Marvel, THE AVENGERS ASSEMBLE OMG 2 KEWL!
As for the comparison, it’s incredibly faulty and illogical and the reasons have already been stated. Hearthstone can be extremely frustrating but providing unfair and faulty arguments doesn’t do much apart as exposing flaws in one’s character.
If you are replying to my post, I didn't start playing Snap for the speed of the game. As a long time HS player, I knew Snap was coming, and I wanted to give it a try. I have been pleased with how fun AND fast games are. As far as this being an age/generational, "Twitter Effect" issue for wanting quick games, I have 6 kids, the youngest of which is 21 years old. Hell, I even have 2 grand-kids. So it's not a generational issue with me, anyway.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The world outside is so big, but it's safe in my domain Because to you I'm just a number and a clever screen name..."
I THINK FOR MYSELF, THEREFORE.... I'M AN ATHEIST !!!
Calling Snap independent is just intentionally misleading. They are a new company, yes, they don't depend on other companies, yes, they work with marvel, not under marvel, but the team is far from indie devs. After Brode, lots of former HS designers joined the team, and they had a huge talent scouting a few years back. These are not people completing Unity tutorials and thinking they are game developers, they know what they are doing and they are as legitimate, and probably even more legitimate, than the current Hearthstone team.
The game didn't seem appealing to me. I don't mind short games, but this one seems just like all the other freemium mobile games, be it aesthetic or method of monetisation. I just don't see a reason playing games like that, no matter how pretty they look. And I completely lost interest in Marvel since the oversaturation of Superhero movies that has been happening for decades now. So thematically, gameplay and visually it has no appeal to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is off-topic. We are talking about generally accepted masterpieces. HS is not in any list. Here is a list, for example, ranked for user rating (so people's opinion). There is no way, HS has not designed the history of games (it is only a good card game, nothing more) and Metal Gear has not designed only the stealth action but the whole industry.
https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=game&sort=user_rating,desc
Curiosity: Marvel Snap is even ranked by the people more than HS like now.
Ehh.... to be fair 15 Votes is a extremely low sample size....
Yes. Sure. The game is new. On Steam the vote is anyway similar.
OP post is riddled with jumps. Clearly set out to be in some way scathing toward HS as is often seen on these forums despite people having the option of just not engaging with the game if they have such a bad view of the game.
Having played Snap, I can categorically say it's not even comparable. For one it isn't really a CCG at its core, it's more of a mobile game with a CCG overlay. The "cards" do minimally interesting things, compared to some of the board states and interactions that can happen in HS/MTG etc..
OPs construction of language and basis for what they're talking about is incredibly rudimentary. I'd be open to more nuanced discussion than, here's some people who are currently rating Snap well compared to HS.
Second Dinner didn't announce Marvel Snap, Disney did. The biggest media franchise in the world.
Just downloaded and tried marvel snap. Its very simplified and there is no where near the creativity or strategy that hearthstone has. Younger players will like it, but older ones will choose hearthstone.
You can tell Ben was involved because your deck starts with some shitty vanilla minions that get immediately power crept by the collectible ones
I'm playing at a pretty high collection level and there are very few of the early minions that I don't see.
I am a Beta playing (Oct. 2013), never miss a day,Hearthstone 'whale'. Since Marvel Snap has come out, I've logged into HS twice. Also, instead of the thousands of dollars I've spent playing HS, I've spent a total of $2.99 on Snap.
All in all, I'd say Snap works great as a game, do to it's quickness and simplicity. I can knock 1, maybe even 2 games of Snap, just during a commercial break. Now that works for me... :p
"The world outside is so big, but it's safe in my domain
Because to you I'm just a number and a clever screen name..."
I THINK FOR MYSELF, THEREFORE.... I'M AN ATHEIST !!!
More Marvel crap for the bafoons, that's a skip.
I tried to not reply to the negative posts of shipmen for quite some time, but this is it for me and I will step on the boat too. This is again another example of having a point of view and searching the internet for pictures or articles as long as needed until you find something, *anything*, that even remotely supports your point of view.
The image in the first post is comparing apples with pears. First of all it compares the more broader search term Marvel Snap with the game hearthstone and the game diablo immortal. This causes the image to have a higher interest for marvel snap and a lower for the other two. (There is also a pretty big note in the middle of the screen explaining this, which is conveniently ignored)
If I run the same comparison but filter the search on ‘games’ this effect will be somewhat mitigated and you’ll see that marvel is around the same interest as hearthstone and still below Diablo immortal. (See picture, I applied the same terms, but they are in Dutch)
Secondly, if you are really interested in comparing the two games (so this is not relevant for you Shipmen, because you are only trying to bash hearthstone) you should compare how the games did during launch (see other pictures, one for last 5 years, one for 2004 - now), because everybody knows that during launch people search a lot more for information on the game (I also searched how to best spend my gold, credits, etc..) You will see that marvel snap has a very, very long way to go. If the interest of marvel snap keeps growing and retains for a period you’ll have a point, but the conclusions in the first post are just nonsense.
Personally, regarding snap itself, I really like the ‘snap’ mechanism in the game to double the cubes I can understand that people who are interested in shorter, simpler, games are interested in marvel snap. For me, after playing hearthstone and snap for the last couple of days, I notice that my interest in snap is already declining because of its simplicity and estimate that in a couple of weeks it will be off my radar entirely, but you’ll never know…
It‘s something new. People wanna test it. Some will stay, some will leave. Not more not less.
I myself won‘t play it. Saw it in a vid from dane. Not interested.
Sorry but having a high collection level and still playing against players running vanilla characters is not a good thing.
Out of curiosity, why are you playing strategy games for speed? You don’t play chess expecting to cram in a game during a commercial, do you? What does it matter if you play four games an hour or 8? Is it because you want to grind as quickly as possible?
It’s weird to me when people complain that Hearthstone games last for too long, as if it’s a given that they shouldn’t.
There’s a lot of wrong things with HS and they could use a better design team asap. But I personally don’t find the argument of: « Why are you playing chess when you play five games of Marvel Snap? » Like, so what? Who cares if you’re playing 20 games or 1 as long as you’re having fun.
Must be a generation thing where everything needs to be shortened now for consumption, the Twitter Effect. Same thing with Marvel, THE AVENGERS ASSEMBLE OMG 2 KEWL!
As for the comparison, it’s incredibly faulty and illogical and the reasons have already been stated. Hearthstone can be extremely frustrating but providing unfair and faulty arguments doesn’t do much apart as exposing flaws in one’s character.
If you are replying to my post, I didn't start playing Snap for the speed of the game. As a long time HS player, I knew Snap was coming, and I wanted to give it a try. I have been pleased with how fun AND fast games are.
As far as this being an age/generational, "Twitter Effect" issue for wanting quick games, I have 6 kids, the youngest of which is 21 years old. Hell, I even have 2 grand-kids. So it's not a generational issue with me, anyway.
"The world outside is so big, but it's safe in my domain
Because to you I'm just a number and a clever screen name..."
I THINK FOR MYSELF, THEREFORE.... I'M AN ATHEIST !!!
I played it. Reminded me of Hearthstone Mercs a bit in that there didn't seem to be much going on. Uninstalled pretty quickly.
It's more like a simplified Gwent.
Mercs is more like Pokemon, only shit.
When those vanilla characters are part of a deck that can overpower others, yes it is. It shows that even they have a place and deck.
I wont join that discussion, just droping this comment.
If you use Marvel as your brand, you cant be independant.
Calling Snap independent is just intentionally misleading. They are a new company, yes, they don't depend on other companies, yes, they work with marvel, not under marvel, but the team is far from indie devs. After Brode, lots of former HS designers joined the team, and they had a huge talent scouting a few years back. These are not people completing Unity tutorials and thinking they are game developers, they know what they are doing and they are as legitimate, and probably even more legitimate, than the current Hearthstone team.
The game didn't seem appealing to me. I don't mind short games, but this one seems just like all the other freemium mobile games, be it aesthetic or method of monetisation. I just don't see a reason playing games like that, no matter how pretty they look. And I completely lost interest in Marvel since the oversaturation of Superhero movies that has been happening for decades now. So thematically, gameplay and visually it has no appeal to me.