Hearthpwn

Quote from Xynot >>

 

Quote from Bac0nL0rdes >>

 

You completely missed my point.

 

 Easy to do since you don't have one.

 

Quote from Trollbert >>

 

Quote from Bac0nL0rdes >>

 

Quote from koatam >>

Game design isn't a science and everyone has the ability to tell what they like and don't like. 

 

 But there's a huge difference between not liking something and criticizing it as bad game design.

 

 A game is to have fun.  If you aren't having fun the game is poorly designed for you.  If lots of people aren't having fun and some are it's a niche game.  If lots of people are having fun and suddenly stop after an update to the game it was a bad design choice.

I'm actually having a blast in Hearthstone right now, just your argument is full of more holes than a block of swiss cheese.  I'm sorry if that analogy was too hard for you.  I'm a cook so I don't expect you to understand cheese if you are not.

Quote from Vestrogen >>

 

Quote from Bac0nL0rdes>>

Quote from Vestrogen>>

After rereading the argument, it is even more ridiculous than I first thought.

Here is why: we would consider airplane pilots to be experts at flying planes. It is their job, much like the way Team 5's job is game design. According to this argument, if a pilot makes a mistake and crashes a plane, we are in no position to criticize them because they're experts. Likewise, if a game developer (or team of game developers) makes a mistake in their design, we aren't in a place to criticize them? This is just plain wrong. You hold experts accountable for their mistakes. A pilot's job is to make sure passengers get from one place to another safely. A game designer's job is to make sure they design their game in a way that encourages enjoyable experiences in the player base. If they fail to do that, the players are in a place to complain.

My argument was never written to be applicable in other situations; in fact, I never said that it was viable in any scenario other than this one. I'm simply using it here and not going beyond the realm of game design. Not to mention that the comparison you're suggesting is so outlandish that it doesn't even make logical sense. Pilots have to deal with everything in the moment, and go to pilot school to learn exactly what they need to do to successfully fly a plane. It's all paying attention to everything happening and remembering to do the right thing at the right time. Game designers go to a college to learn how to make a thing for people to entertain themselves via their technology gadgets. (You've officially been subjected to my sense of humor. I apologize deeply.)

Game designers also have the ability to fix their mistakes, so if something does end up slipping through the cracks, they are able to fix it later on once it has been confirmed to be an issue. Airplane pilots can only reasonably make one mistake in their line of work, and when they do, it becomes a national headline. I've never seen a CNN story about Corridor Creeper was insanely broken before the patch (a statement that I fully agree with and has actually been addressed in an interview with one of the lead game designers). Then again, I don't really watch the news, so take that with a grain of salt.

How is that outlandish in the realm of this argument? I'm not talking about it in any deeper sense beyond what their basic function is as professionals and when it is acceptable for consumers to voice their displeasure with them. Further, I am not talking about the consequences of failure (but it was a fun discussion about Corridor Creeper on CNN).  If a worker does not do their job, people can criticise them for failing to complete their basic professional function. The fact that game developers can fix their mistakes is completely irrelevant since Team 5 has done nothing in terms of rebalancing cards from the WW expansion and probably won't for some time. Somehow claiming that their professional status shields them from criticism is false and honestly ridiculous. Your post gave me a good laugh, though, so at least there's that. Have a good one, man and don't bend over backwards too hard trying to defend your original "point."

Quote from TheHolyLight >>

Dumb fucking logic, fanboy. 

Quote from koatam >>

Game design isn't a science and everyone has the ability to tell what they like and don't like. 

Quote from Vestrogen >>

After rereading the argument, it is even more ridiculous than I first thought.

Here is why: we would consider airplane pilots to be experts at flying planes. It is their job, much like the way Team 5's job is game design. According to this argument, if a pilot makes a mistake and crashes a plane, we are in no position to criticize them because they're experts. Likewise, if a game developer (or team of game developers) makes a mistake in their design, we aren't in a place to criticize them? This is just plain wrong. You hold experts accountable for their mistakes. A pilot's job is to make sure passengers get from one place to another safely. A game designer's job is to make sure they design their game in a way that encourages enjoyable experiences in the player base. If they fail to do that, the players are in a place to complain.

Quote from Xynot >>

 

Quote from Bac0nL0rdes >>

 

You may not have to be a meteorologist in order to know that it's raining, but you DO have to be a meteorologist to know if it's going to rain.

 Not true, I have a gadget that tells me what the weather will be like that day.  If there is a sun, it's going to be sunny and if there are clouds with little drops, that means rain.  It actually works much better than the weather people, so I do know if it is going to rain despite my lack of meteorological credentials.

 

Quote from Trollbert >>

Thinking you need to be specifically educated in something to have a valid opinion is a huge fallacy in itself.  

Example:  Recently I saw an article about an urban planner criticizing LeBron James’ comments on the government’s treatment on poor urban areas because he was a basketball player and saying he knew more because he went to college for this.  The guy grew up rich and never lived in these neighborhoods.  James grew up there and personally funds a lot of schools and works with community leaders to improve the area.  I would argue experience in the area far outweighs formal education.

On topic I feel like 20 years of playing card games allows me to assess a game well enough.  I don’t have insight into future expansions but I can look at the current meta and see some problems that should be addressed before the next 3 or 4 months. 

Quote from MattMurdock77 >>

 

Quote from kindapowerfulwizard >>

 

Quote from MattMurdock77 >>

The ole “let’s complain about the complainers” post. Like death and taxes. 

 'Tis the season.  This one's pretty good though (well articulated and generally polite), as far as complaints go.  They'll eventually get to know the cycle and fall into the fatalistic apathy that keeps me coming back for more.

 Except for the fact that he believes you have to have professional experience to criticize game design. That’s quite possibly the dumbest thing I’ve seen on here. Sometimes things are obvious. You don’t have to be a weatherman to know it’s raining. 

 

Quote from koatam >>

While I agree that team 5 gets a lot of undeserved flak, the idea that you need to have extensive experience in the field you intend to criticize is fucking stupid.

Quote from MattMurdock77 >>

The ole “let’s complain about the complainers” post. Like death and taxes. 

So, SO often, whenever a card is revealed or a change is announced, or when a new deck rises out of nowhere and dominates the entire meta, there's always a ton of people spurting some nonsense like, "Blizzard doesn't know what the fuck they're doing; they're ruining the game; this card is trash and will never see play; this is strictly worse/better than a previously existing card; the game is terribly designed." Though it should be known that, on average, nobody knows how semicolons work, so this is an obvious paraphrasing.

I mean, the "will never see play" thing is a can of worms in it of itself, and all I'm going to say in that regard is that all of these statements are just objectively false.

Quick PSA here: NEVER CALL ANYTHING "BAD GAME DESIGN" UNLESS YOU HAVE TAKEN A COURSE IN GAME DESIGN OR ARE CURRENTLY TAKING ONE.

This isn't an "appeal to the authority" counter-argument, it's an "appeal to the experts," and there is an actual difference. Appealing to the authority would be like agreeing with your senator/president/elected official simply because of the office they hold. Appealing to the experts is honestly the only way we can possibly get any meaningful conversation out of non-subjective topics.

Honestly, the constant stream of negativity from some people is honestly just preposterous. If you're doing nothing but focus on the bad, then you're actively ruining your own enjoyment of an otherwise enjoyable game.

Just because other people are complaining too doesn't mean you're the one in the right. There are millions of players online at any given time, and the vast majority of them spend plenty of time simply enjoying the game and having fun with decks that they enjoy to play.

And leave games like Gwent and Shadowverse out of the conversation. They are entirely different property and don't need to be mentioned on a website dedicated to a game that isn't even related. And even if you do feel "compelled" to bring them up, remember that all CCG's have their own faults; don't act like one game is 100% better than any other.

If you feel like ignoring everything I just spent the time to write in order to tell me to go fuck myself, or if you want to act civil by refuting or adding on, feel free to leave your thoughts.

Hey, there are some cards in the big card search collection that need updated photos. These are the ones I noticed.

Grommash Hellscream, Raging Worgen, Warbot, Amani Berserker, Bloodhoof Brave, Aberrant Berserker, Angry Chicken, Spiteful Smith, and Tauren Warrior all no longer have their Enrage keyword, so that should probably be changed accordingly.

Prince Malchezaar has been updated with the "Start of Game" text similar to Genn Greymane or Baku the Mooneater.

Candleshot has been changed to be more obvious that the hero is immune while attacking and not the weapon.

Ice Block, Molten Giant, and Coldlight Oracle have all been moved to the Hall of Fame, and as such should probably have the photos updated to include the HoF watermark.

These are the only obvious ones that I noticed.

It’s so funny looking through all of the comments calling this card complete trash, and yet it has basically become a staple in Miracle Rogue. Just goes to show how horribly wrong people can be.

IT'S A MEME.

GET WITH THE MEMES.

I guess your observation skills are not...

Perfectly Balanced.