Jump to content



Photo

Anything on the horizon?


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 abersen

abersen

    Member

  • Members
  • 18 posts

Posted 12 January 2012 - 02:25 AM

Hi,

does anyone know about expansions planned?

Or has this one sold too bad?

Happy dungeoning!

 

 

 



#2 Steve-O

Steve-O

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,538 posts

Posted 12 January 2012 - 12:41 PM

Haven't heard anything about expansions for DQ.

Y'know, I remember a time when a game that got an expansion must've sold well.  Now, apparently, games that don't get expansions must've sold badly.



#3 Rawrz

Rawrz

    Member

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 12 January 2012 - 01:57 PM

Games like DungeonQuest have a sharp dividing line of people who hate it or love it.  If I took a guess I would say that most gamers today would hate it, instant deaths, tough victory conditions, etc, all of which aren't a part of todays more balanced and generious RPG or board game enviroments.  I myself, love it, being a child when alot of games where like this.  Even if this game doesn't sell enough for them to make expansions, there will be plenty of fans like myself who will make some themselves.



#4 Tromdial

Tromdial

    Member

  • Members
  • 580 posts

Posted 19 January 2012 - 04:28 PM

I for one love this game too. So very darkly hilarious. The instant-surprise kills are always due to a bad roll, so there's a chance to live... a chance :P

None of my friends hate this game. We laugh about it every time we play because it's absurdity to survive is so insane. The variants really make the game your own: however you believe the game should run, you can houserule it that way. I play with about five different variants, including monsters drop a treasure card when fought and killed. I promise you if you like a good laugh, the game is challenging and fun. I also keep high scores from those who manage to escape (few do). lol



#5 Steve-O

Steve-O

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,538 posts

Posted 20 January 2012 - 12:33 PM

Tromdial said:

I for one love this game too. So very darkly hilarious. The instant-surprise kills are always due to a bad roll, so there's a chance to live... a chance :P

None of my friends hate this game. We laugh about it every time we play because it's absurdity to survive is so insane. The variants really make the game your own: however you believe the game should run, you can houserule it that way. I play with about five different variants, including monsters drop a treasure card when fought and killed. I promise you if you like a good laugh, the game is challenging and fun. I also keep high scores from those who manage to escape (few do). lol

QFT.

My wife and I played this game last weekend and we were in stitches the whole time about how close we were to death.  It was hilarious and nerve-wracking at the same time.  In one game (yes, we played several in a row), my poor character kept getting stuck on cave-ins.  It was ridiculous, every tile I drew brought me back towards one of the two cave-in tiles I had encountered.  Just when I thought I was free, I drew a cave-in from the dungeon deck!  GAH!

THAT'S why I love this game.  There are lots of things I might like to see in a theoretical expansion, but certainly not anything that makes it easier to survive.



#6 Tromdial

Tromdial

    Member

  • Members
  • 580 posts

Posted 20 January 2012 - 06:48 PM

Dungeonquest, Rune Age, Android, and Gears need expansions. idc if DQ and Android just get PoDs, just need some new stuff to some great games.



#7 JCHendee

JCHendee

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,811 posts

Posted 21 January 2012 - 04:02 AM

Rawrz said:

 

Games like DungeonQuest have a sharp dividing line of people who hate it or love it.  If I took a guess I would say that most gamers today would hate it, instant deaths, tough victory conditions, etc, all of which aren't a part of todays more balanced and generious RPG or board game enviroments.  I myself, love it, being a child when alot of games where like this.  Even if this game doesn't sell enough for them to make expansions, there will be plenty of fans like myself who will make some themselves.

 

 

I'd have to say there is another factor involved that most proponents of the game don't want to face. The more a game increases either complexity of play and/or upkeep (before and/or duing the game), the more the futility factor overrides enjoyment, especially combined with the randomness tilted toward failure and any skill involve being minimized for influence.

Pure randomness is fun, no doubt about it. There are times I don't want to think and just want to see what ridiculousness happens... such as Steve's cave-ins conundrum. But I've witness a fair number of players in a fair number of games over a fair number of years.  Futility that rises in equal proportion to effort leads to the dislike you mention when the effort involved doesn't increase the chance of success... or sometimes decreases it.  Even in the tile combat system of old, most groups I know went to a die roll system because it was faster... and less futile since success in combat doesn't really matter to this game.

The best example in the game is the card combat system. I think its wholly intriguing unto itself. But to most players, what's the point of all that, as well as tokens to be pulled for the monster's hit points, then placement and tracking... if one can die in an instant from drawing a tile or card? 

People don't like having to work twice as hard for half the standard chance of success.  This is where FFG's DQ failed compared to its predecessors... and I'm still sitting around watching it gather dust because no one in my shrinking circle of gamers will play it with me. It's sad, but fortunately there are other games... until maybe I can fix this mess... and maybe my circle forgets what it was like.

With all that considered, there's no viability or profit (more to the point) in an expansion for DQ3; the best we can hope for is tie-in games and expansions that might have extra cards in them for use in DQ. Even that might not help keep sales going for the base DQ product. And sales of the core product is first and foremost for investment in expansions.

 



#8 Steve-O

Steve-O

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,538 posts

Posted 23 January 2012 - 12:26 PM

JCHendee said:

People don't like having to work twice as hard for half the standard chance of success.  This is where FFG's DQ failed compared to its predecessors...

Having played the older GW edition of the game and the newer FFG version, I have to say I don't see any great difference in game play or survivability.  Aside from the combat system which, as you noted yourself, is equally bloated in both, it's essentially the same game.  Yes it is random to the point of negating most serious tactical considerations.  Yes it is harsh, and death comes swiftly.

It is not, however, futile.  Those who enjoy the game do so because they recognize that the journey is as much fun as the destination.  It's not about "winning," it's about seeing how far you can get in this truly, absolutely unfair challenge.  And if you do happen to beat the incredible odds against you (I believe some people have quoted a roughly 33% chance of surviving?) then you will have a story to tell for years to come, because that's probably how long it will take for someone else to beat your record. =P

I believe this would be the sharp dividing line that the previous poster was talking about.



#9 Tromdial

Tromdial

    Member

  • Members
  • 580 posts

Posted 23 January 2012 - 07:19 PM

Steve-O said:

JCHendee said:

 

...Yes it is harsh, and death comes swiftly.

It is not, however, futile.  Those who enjoy the game do so because they recognize that the journey is as much fun as the destination.  It's not about "winning," it's about seeing how far you can get in this truly, absolutely unfair challenge.  And if you do happen to beat the incredible odds against you (I believe some people have quoted a roughly 33% chance of surviving?) then you will have a story to tell for years to come, because that's probably how long it will take for someone else to beat your record. =P

Ditto. The journey is unfair and yet I return again and again.

And again, I played with my friend in DQ but we played it like 5 or 6 times today. Somehow, I managed to escape twice, one with a score under a thousand and the other was $4,550 (3rd highest score recorded). We were well pleased and would laugh at end map results. Krutzbeck secret passaged into a new tile at the edge of the map, and it was a collapsed room that had no search symbol in the corner! He and I agree to play again later this week. We conclude, even having us lost so many matches, that the game can be played a hundred times and it's never, ever the same and addictive. Seeing the end map results and experiencing the labyrinthine madness of DQ is too amazing. Hard for me to believe how unliked this game is when it delivers such diversity and wickedly-fun punishment. The ways you die and have the slightest glimmer of hope makes the replayability so high, especially when you do experience that moment of pure success.



#10 JCHendee

JCHendee

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,811 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 03:21 AM

Steve-O said:

JCHendee said:

 

People don't like having to work twice as hard for half the standard chance of success.  This is where FFG's DQ failed compared to its predecessors...

 

Having played the older GW edition of the game and the newer FFG version, I have to say I don't see any great difference in game play or survivability.  Aside from the combat system which, as you noted yourself, is equally bloated in both, it's essentially the same game.  Yes it is random to the point of negating most serious tactical considerations.  Yes it is harsh, and death comes swiftly.

You have purposefully dumbed down what I said.  The combat systems are not equal in complexity.  That is utterly false, and I think you know that as an experienced gamer. And the games are not equally bloated. DQ3 has more upkeep; not a lot but some.  The combat system is both more complex and has more upkeep. Then there's the addition of monster tokens, which must be arranged for draw of HPs (which were on the cards in DQ1), and then placed on the board (not in DQ1) and when draws for HP are depleted, the tokens must be redrawn from the board if another monster appears in a card draw.

For an experienced gamer, or especially an enthusiast of DQ over the years, this may not be a big deal.  For those who are new to or casually interested in  a new edition of the game, this is a moderate to big deal. Experience has shown this to me when comparing those who have both exp. and enthu. for the game and other who have only only one or neither of those concerning DQ.

There's not point to debating with those who are advocates and enthusiasts of the game.  My point was (and you know it) is that unless DQ3 attracts AND retains new players who've never played DQ1 or were not enthusiastic advocates of the game... then DQ3 will not have the sales to justify investment in expansions. And this is an expensive purchase for a basic board game, so the FFG will have to consider if sales will justify cost. And based on all of this, I don't see great hope for a commercially developed expansion.  And overall, I don't think it needs one.

Steve-O said:

It is not, however, futile.  Those who enjoy the game do so because they recognize that the journey is as much fun as the destination.  It's not about "winning," it's about seeing how far you can get in this truly, absolutely unfair challenge.  And if you do happen to beat the incredible odds against you (I believe some people have quoted a roughly 33% chance of surviving?) then you will have a story to tell for years to come, because that's probably how long it will take for someone else to beat your record. =P

Indeed, that was part of the original point, which doesn't exclude making a different one. Presonally, I have heard the notion of the tale to tell for years to come many times before.  But when it's a matter of dumb luck, well, I don't think it's as much fun to hear about as just taking note of for another laugh; it's not something to take seriously, especially as counterpoint for what I was really talking about.



#11 JCHendee

JCHendee

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,811 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 03:24 AM

Tromdial said:

We conclude, even having us lost so many matches, that the game can be played a hundred times and it's never, ever the same and addictive.

And yet another reason why....

  1. It appeals to certain players or fulfills a certain niche in a range of games for more players but...
  2. It neither needs nor will likely see a commercial expansion.

We just keep playing and having fun, if we can.



#12 Tromdial

Tromdial

    Member

  • Members
  • 580 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 08:19 PM

Oh yeah! For those who do or don't like DQ, try a non-FFG game called Galaxy Trucker. It also uses random tile draw too to build your ship and it is very, very fun.

In hindsight, FFG maybe should do another game that has random-tiles build something complex, yet more appealing than DQ's harsh rules. The new Infiltration game sounds similar to this, in fact (very excited about that).



#13 Steve-O

Steve-O

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,538 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 02:55 AM

JCHendee said:

There's not point to debating with those who are advocates and enthusiasts of the game.  My point was (and you know it) is that unless DQ3 attracts AND retains new players who've never played DQ1 or were not enthusiastic advocates of the game... then DQ3 will not have the sales to justify investment in expansions. And this is an expensive purchase for a basic board game, so the FFG will have to consider if sales will justify cost. And based on all of this, I don't see great hope for a commercially developed expansion.  And overall, I don't think it needs one.

No, actually, I didn't know that was your point.  I read through your entire post and somehow missed the fact that the underlying point was the probability of expansions.  That was my bad, and I do apologize for my mischaracterizing of your argument.

I agree that an expansion seems unlikely, and I also agree that DQ3 doesn't really need one.  If it happens, it happens, but I won't loose sleep over it either way.



#14 JCHendee

JCHendee

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,811 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 04:00 AM

There is one expansion combo I could get enthused about (if I can get anyone to play).  But it is the least possibility among all others. A package including

  1. new characters (and not reworked from other games),
  2. extra (new and duplicate) cards for some decks to decrease shuffling, and
  3. a handful of new special tiles never before seen, and...
  4. replacement cards for monsters with the HP already on them.

That last part would probably NEVER happen, but alternative ways to play in components as well as rules would be nice for me and mine.  Of course, one can always put out little cups for each type of monster token, draw for HP as needed, and then skip the whole placement approach and toss the token back in the cup when done.

The trick of including hero variations for other games inside DQ3 was nice, but now we're over it. DQ3 doesn't have the sales to be a bridge to other games in this way, but.... what if expansions for other games had DQ3 hero variations?  Don't know if this has been done, and maybe I've missed it if it has. What I'm suggesting is a reverse for the promotion trick done in DQ3 to perhaps have other games boost its sales. That might be a way to keep it alive, and then maybe see an expansion for it down the road.



#15 Tromdial

Tromdial

    Member

  • Members
  • 580 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 05:26 PM

Steve-O said:

I agree that an expansion seems unlikely, and I also agree that DQ3 doesn't really need one.  If it happens, it happens, but I won't loose sleep over it either way.

I stare sleeplessly up at my ceiling, holding my DQ box, asking, "Why don't they make that DQ expansion already?"



#16 Steve-O

Steve-O

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,538 posts

Posted 29 January 2012 - 02:47 AM

JCHendee said:

 

what if expansions for other games had DQ3 hero variations?  Don't know if this has been done, and maybe I've missed it if it has. What I'm suggesting is a reverse for the promotion trick done in DQ3 to perhaps have other games boost its sales. That might be a way to keep it alive, and then maybe see an expansion for it down the road.

 

 

I think the upcoming Descent 2e will be the first Terrinoth game release since DQ3 (base or expansion), so they haven't really had a chance to do this yet.  I agree it would be a way to drum up sales for DQ3, though I certainly haven't heard anything to suggest they're doing it.  They might not want to for fear of fans asking where the hero cards for other games are - particularly Descent 1e, which they almost certainly don't want to support anymore.



#17 JCHendee

JCHendee

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,811 posts

Posted 01 February 2012 - 02:11 AM

Yeah... hadn't thought of the issue of setting a precedent on crossgame cards. That could seed a general expectation that would make for some problems. but on the issue of Descent, it's still classified as part of the "Terrinoth" line... so maybe? But of course there's whole "version" problem again.



#18 Steve-O

Steve-O

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,538 posts

Posted 01 February 2012 - 02:34 PM

JCHendee said:

Yeah... hadn't thought of the issue of setting a precedent on crossgame cards. That could seed a general expectation that would make for some problems. but on the issue of Descent, it's still classified as part of the "Terrinoth" line... so maybe? But of course there's whole "version" problem again.

I would be very, very surprised if FFG ever publishes anything new for 1e at this point.  (Except hopefully answering that fan-made FAQ project, which they still hadn't, last I heard.)

They may yet do cross-promotions between the current Terrinoth games, but I imagine the idea of cross-promoting an OOP game will be something of a sore point for many people.  Look at all the heartache surrounding the four promo figs, and imagine what it would be like for newbies who just picked up 2e six months or a year from now, wondering how they can make use of these extra cards when none of the 1e boxes are anywhere to be found (for reasonable prices.)



#19 JCHendee

JCHendee

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,811 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 09:44 AM

Version, groan, another headache factor in this.  So I guess it's back to null on crossover characters... at least until the new Descent is in circulation. Then again, I don't see that doing much for DQ3 as talked about herein.  And back as well to the unlikeliness of a DQ3 expansion.



#20 anonymous

anonymous

    Member

  • Members
  • 40 posts

Posted 28 February 2012 - 12:08 AM

 It's sad there won't be expansion, especially as it seems this game was built with expansions in mind. What with only 6 heroes and most decks have 15 cards,






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS