[SUGGESTION] Re-Think first 5 Minutes

The first 5 minutes of CardHunter (the part where you 'borrow' your brother's deck and play against the green dragon dude) are both overwhelming (by submerging you into the deep end of mechanics) and underwhelming (in terms of the abilities of your champions and the epic-ness of the battles).

I see what you guys are going for - a first 5 minutes that grips a player and excites them for the game. I don't think this game does that though. I spent the intro thinking "I really don't understand what's going on" and then when it was revealed that you were played with an OP deck against mid/late-game enemies, I had this moment of "This is what I have to look forward to?"

Honestly, it was the tutorial proper (when you start out with your own deck and your own warrior dude) that made me more excited to play. Learning and understanding the mechanics and envisioning how they could be applied was great for my anticipation levels.

Interested in hearing what the rest of the community felt about the intro.

 

I'd have to agree. I think the intro becomes too much too fast, unless you are familiar with this sort of game. When you get by that, you're let down at the cards you have vs. what you had previously.

Having been familiar with tactic and CCG games myself, I didn't have too much of an issue with it -- but it did seem a little odd. Watching friends over skype however, they had a ton of questions and didn't really understand why when they started at level one they were so weak, assuming that where they started was something of a norm.

 

Alright. Are you folks prepared to have me talk WAY longer than anyone wants to hear? Again? Because I feel an essay coming on.

See, posts like this show that I come from different assumptions than other people. Trying to explain my disagreement in simple terms just doesn't work. Here's my deal:

I often come across reactions of displeasure, or shock, or outright anger, and my first response is "Yeah, you've never heard of this before?" Usually it's for social stuff. We all learned about "social phenomenon X" in elementary school, so when I'm an adult and I see someone going "Ugh! Did you know that Bob follows social phenomenon X?!" I blink at them. All I can say is "This stuff is old news: didn't you know that some people like X?"

And I, like you, have played a lot of videogames. I, like you, have played games that start off with a "high-powered intro," such as fantasy games giving you max-level characters with literally every spell unlocked for a "final cataclysmic confrontation!!!" before you move on to the REAL game. This stuff is old news.

What really matters, of course, is that the game be good at what it's trying to be (and that "what it's trying to be" be something interesting, but we know they've achieved the latter). So when you criticize the intro, DangerRose, please understand me: I'm going to look past any hint of "you shouldn't do a high-powered intro" and dissect it down to the basic components. When I do this, I'm NOT IGNORING YOU: I'm trying to see if there's anything specifically wrong with the intro that MADE YOU dissatisfied with it. Because, after all, this particular "gaming phenomenon X" isn't that unusual, and "some people like X."

Okay?

In part, I wrote that essay not just to you . . . but to the person who wrote a dark mirror of your concerns. Did you see this post? In summary:

. . . Do you see? Some people like X, but in your case you like "Y": the character-building at the start of the game. You'd rather Blue Manchu skip X and go straight to Y. This (former) user hates X, sure, but also hates Y! (Just keep reading in that thread. Wow, the hatred for Y.)

Now, at this point, I know what you're thinking: deleting the intro would solve both problems. Obviously, that (former) user had a different issue, but presumably wouldn't have exploded without the intro, right?

The problem is that "some people still like X." In fact, tons of people do, and it's a standard way to start a game. You may be unaware that this intro came from their early gameplay demo: something to hand to new users at a convention, serve as literally the only thing they played, and hopefully impress them enough to tell their friends. The popularity shows that Blue Manchu is unlikely to remove X.

If they choose to keep it, then the only thing to do is makes sure it's "good at what it's trying to be."

With me so far?

Because, as you feel it isn't "good at what it's trying to be," I can finally respond to your post.

(Feel free to call me long-winded, boring, and off-topic.)

Perhaps. Now tell me: is it any different from RPG's where you start with, literally, every spell in the game at your disposal?

So let's pin down specifics. This encounter was scripted (it ain't random) to teach newcomers how to play while standing there at a convention. You (and the angry (former) user) say it was hard to understand: did you deviate from "expectations"? Did you try unusual strategies that took you away from the enemy, or actions opposite to Gary's advice? When you looked at the screen, was there really no "correct choice" each turn?

Because let's not forget that people at a convention . . . had the developers right there to provide clues. And folks like me have followed the project for years. Thus, for everyone else (yourself included), the intro needs to be calibrated so they can enjoy it.

And here, I have to say, there's nothing that can be done. That was a coincidence of how you felt, and other players won't find things the same way.

Personally, I like the idea of a gameboard that could be redrawn--and the whole "dragon tearing down the wall" thing was an excellent way to show the freedom possible in an electronic board. I felt I could look forward to normal play (not end-game play) that was this interesting. And things like Arcing Spark? Likewise pretty cool, and I looked forward to using it soon (not at the end).

Not only that, but ask yourself: what do you need in order to be impressed? Flashier animations? This game is defined by flying cards, drawn terrain tiles, and so on, like a weird souped-up tabletop game. Higher-damage attacks? If you've never seen them before, you don't know what "normal" and "high" are. One of the most important parts of impressing people with a strategic game is the strategy, and Arcing Spark (plus Teleport Other, plus Acid Jet, and so on) totally did that for me.

Does your opinion change if I tell you that Card Hunter will go up to level 50? This map, therefore, was not halfway to the top. (It was in the 20's, right?) If you didn't think it felt "strong," there's more still to come.

. . .

Yup, no one on the entire forum is going to read this post.

 

I skimmed it. But I couldn't really tell what point you were trying to make other than that you don't like OP's opinion.

---

I'll admit while I didn't think the intro was terrible, playing with characters that weren't "mine" wasn't nearly as fun even though it was a glimpse at high level play. I will say though I was ecstatic to find Acid Jet cards for my own wizards, because I kept thinking back on that encounter and moping about how lame Acid Blast was in comparison. (Even now that I've finished the campaign, I still think Acid Blast is junk; One square and no initial damage is tough. At least Hot Spot deals enough damage to justify the effort to trap things on it.)

Is there a way to replay the intro encounter without just making a new account? I don't really have extra beta keys to try that with, and even if I did I'm sure everybody out there who still wants one would kill me for using it for that.

 

May I request that if you have no idea what I said . . . don't assume I was "being critical," or "ticked off," or "just not liking something"?

And if you want to know my point, just start reading from when I quote DangerRose. It reads like a normal post. That whole "essay" stuff was lead-up.

 

I agree with the OP but then I am one of those people that dislikes "thrown in at the deep end" intros.

Everything else after that was great though. I though the first few tutorial missions were well done and the first 7 levels that I've seen have slowly introduced new tactics and complexity. I think it's well paced and hard to stop playing (it's 5am. I haven't done that in a long time). I would ditch the opening segment though.

 

His point was that there is a difference between questions of taste and questions of quality. This specific intro has been in front of a lot of people, and got a very positive response, so it's going to be hard to get traction with "I didn't like it", and it might be more constructive to focus on ways to improve it.

For example, a more constructive suggestion might be to add a 'skip intro' option, for people who prefer not to be thrown in the deep end. Gary could probably offer a choice without too much disruption (although I haven't seen any UI for offering a choice like that), and if Melvin storms in after the player opts not to use his party, then he still gets to look like a jerk, and all is right with the world.

For the record, I really liked the intro, although I'm still hanging out for the closure of getting back to that point and walloping Greenfang with my own crew, to give it some closure.

 

Perhaps a button on the under-utilized left-hand-side, opposite where "Pass" currently is. A button that says "Gary, I don't know what I'm doing." Then there are various options for what happens after pressing it.

However, even that button would need to be unobtrusive (and probably have a different label), else it would encourage people NOT to have fun beating up Greenfang, learning about loot and inventory, and all the other tutorial features.

Perhaps the basic "skip tutorial" button that's already under the options menu could be reprogrammed to have a "catch" here: if anyone clicks it during Greenfang, it skips only the Greenfang section, and does not skip the regular tutorial where you develop your own characters.

(Also, thank you if you read a single thing I wrote.)

 

Personally, I found the tutorial sections a lot less boring than some other games, and like the casual, meta, laid-back approach of this one.

 

I enjoyed the intro and wasn't confused at all, but then I've been games with similar mechanics for over twenty years now and old school console JRPG's are fond of the "throw you in the deep end" style intros. And I loved curb stomping that dragon my first try.