Not to sounds all paranoid, Occam's razor, COVID-19, and all that, but it is a coinkydink that the streams were cancelled the same day that the shake-up happened and some prominent FFG people got laid off. 
 

I'm excited to finally see a true cooperative version of Descent since I almost exclusively play solo and never much liked the Overlord concept. I'm also glad to see them making this app driven, similar to LOTR-JIME (which is fantastic). However, I just absolutely hate the art style. That's not to say the artist isn't skilled (it certainly does look like Wizards/Heavy Metal/The Hobbit), it's just that I personally don't like it at all. It doesn't even feel like like Descent (or Terrinoth) to me when I look at it so maybe, as others have suggested, it would be better as a completely new IP if that's really the direction they want to go.
I'm also not crazy about the whole 3D component thing but that's not necessarily a deal-breaker for me.
The could absolutely be a deal-breaker, though. If this really is the final art style heading to production then I'm probably leaning towards passing on this one. We'll see.

Hello Everyone,
today I'm glad to announce, that the quests of "The Shadow Rune Project" are finally completed and implemented. As of today you are able to play a complete campaign Just grab the newest Valkyrie release (2.4.0.1 or later) and download the campaign inside the application to play it.
At this point I really want to thank all contributors to the project, but especially Tantum, who was the driving force behind keeping the project alive in the last year. He alone designed about half of the quests in the campaign, and the project would be far from done without him.
While the campaign is completely playable, there is still some work to do. Due to the number of quests and their complexitiy, it is pretty likely that there are some minor and major bugs, which could cause all sorts of problem. Due to this, I would be very grateful if you could post any issues you encounter at The Shadow Rune Github repository over here.
We are also planning to update some of the quests, add new features as soon as the are available in Valkyrie, and overall improve the balancing of the campaign. We are also open for suggestions.
Looking back to out first release, which was almost 2 and a half years ago, I'm really glad the project was finally completed. There were a lot of challgenes to face during development, but we made it
Thanks to everyone who still has passion for this game and wants to give the campaign a try.
For the record, here is our latest changelog:
- Added the missing quests "The Desecrated Tomb", "Blood of Heroes", "The Twin Idols", "The Wyrm Turns", "The Wyrm Rises", "Gryvorn Unleashed" and "The Man who would be King" by Tantum
- Completed implementation of the campaign phase (all quests are now playable!).
Important Note: Please use Valkyrie 2.4.0.1 to run the campaign. Older versions will run into an issue which leads to savegame corruption.

That probably explains your opinion more than the rest of your post. The vast majority of people talking about this game come from a background having played Descent 1st and/or 2nd editions.  You don't have any basis for comparison because you haven't played the previous Descent(s), and thus the 'fuzz' over Legends of the Dark doesnt make sense to you. Honestly, you are probably their target audience now.
 

Progress just for the sake of progress is never good. They had an amazing story, theme and game engine at their disposal and decided to literally threw it all away to make something bloated and over priced with what unfortunately can only be seen as distorted horrible game art compared to the standard.
There was a natural progression here, from Descent 1 to 2 then Imperial Assault. The next step building on all of that would have been fantastic. Instead we got this mess.

The problem is only one: when you're used to the old stuff and see a thing like this game (artwork being the most important point, imo). And then you were on high hopes to see something better, you see the 'new content' is actually worse. All the hype for this, was a cold bath for most of the people here.
I agree with your point of view about company, but nevermind the support for old stuff part.

Appearantly the game's target audience is mainstream gamers who wouldn't pay more than 60$ on a game or females.
 
Either way, you can't price a game right into the nerd/niche/enthusiast price range, but target it towards mainstream gamers, who will never fork out the money you ask for, because they don't care that much about board games or female boardgame nerds, who I suspect aren't numerous enough alone to make this game a success.

I felt like you when watching the unvieling.
"okay, I don't like that, but this won't deter me from buying the next descent" until I said that for everything but the new fatigue mechanic... and then saw the price tag.
After being totally dissapointed by how they handled Runebound 3E (2 scenarios in the core box and 4 additional scenarios and 4 additional heroes for 20€ each and the only big box expansion changes the underlying premise of the game turning it into a pure coop game, when it was a competitive adventure game at core) and subsequently stayed away form Heroes of Terrinoth until it has substantial content, which never happened, I'm not going to buy in a game with light content again, especially not for 175$, especially not when the game is intentionally and conceptually incomplete (just ActI).
 
Seeing how bad this game is recieved, it's hard to believe that FFG has not already dropped the game and is seeking to do damage control by repackage/downgrade components/cheap voice overs for narration etc. In the stream they did say that the material for map and terrain isn't final, so if we see cardboard terrain and map-tiles, we know they go for damage control and will drop this game as soon as possible and halt Descent production for the forseeable future, because "there is no demand". If they go for plastic, they have some confidence in the game.

For 60$ I'm okay with second grade artwork (like the elves left arm, and brynn's helmet) subpar graphic design and subpar gameboard and a game that is played on the app for 50% of your turn, standees etc.
 
For 80$ I at least expect miniatures for the heroes and good artwork on the gameboard.
 
For 100$ I at least expect quality artwork (surely nothing like the elves left arm), quality graphics design.
 
For 120$ I expect an artstyle that speaks to me - for example if this was going fully into psychadellic artstyle the current artstyle is clearly based on and not some kind of halfway compromise to appease to the mainstream, or at least an immersive visual presentation that fits the tone of the gameplay.
 
For 140$+ I expect a near perfect visual presentation or a lot of content with quality standards of 80-100$ games.
 
To me it looks like this game falls in the 60$ category and for some reason they added miniatures and sell this for 115$ more. Makes you wonder if they took feedback primarily from mainstream-gamers who typically won't pay more than 60$ for a game.
 
I'm still baffled how this Elf passed quality control. Have they fired all the visual and aesthetic literate people on their game-tester groups? I mean this Elf artwork is objectivly bad. The shading on the left arm is just wrong as it's supposed to be extended towards the viewer (front arm on the bow) and not dangling straight to the ground which makes it look like the elf has arm-proportions like orang-utans. For 80$ I wouldn't care, but for 175$ I do.

Almost 200 Canadian for a game where I can't stand the art.. this is going to be a tough sell. I'll reserve ultimate judgement for when I see some actual demos played. I've always enjoyed FFG's game mechanics so I have faith they did that part solid at least.
However I doubt it has as much life to it as Gloomhaven which is actually cheaper.. also doesn't require an app.
Is that app going to be supported for the next 20 years?

Judging by the reaction to this game (there are nearly no positive threads about this game neither here, nor on BGG) and the fact that all the artistic choices and app decisions tries to position this 175$ game as a mainstream game, everything but doing damage control for this game-line (like switching out a durable plastic game-board with cardboard) would be extremely bad for business.
 
Then there is the size of the gamebox which will make a lot of FLGS unwilling to display this game because it takes up too much shelf-space and sells too little (for 175$ it's like the most expensive game they are selling). This means this will remain a game you have to order through your FLGS (which means 6 months waiting time or more outside of US), you won't be able to just pick it up. This will require FFG to use a lot of stock room to store the huge game, making this game extremely costly to FFG beyond production. This will also position this game exclusively to the enthusiasts and niche gamers who do research on the internet instead of just going out and buying a game, yet as the hard evidence of all gaming board shows, they aren't really interested, probabaly rightfully so, because judging from all the components and visual design choices, this is targeted towards a mainstream audience.
 
To think FFG is spending a lot of resources to develop 2 new Descent games simultaniously when the Descent line is much less profitable than all their collective and living card games, is also unrealistic wishfull thinking, sry.
 
Long story short: FFG is going to try to cut losses on this game and not develop act II and III. Only get the game now, if you are content with not ever seeing act II and III or the conclusion of the story. If you have your doubts about spending 175$ on a narrative focused game with an uncomplete narrative, wait until act III (or act II if that is enough for you) is released and then buy the whole gameline (it will also be a lot cheaper then).
 
Imo, if you are truthfull to the fact that FFG is a business and primarily wants to make money, imo there is little reason to anticipate that there will be more releases in this game-line than the core game.

Yeah for sure. The new minis are excellent, especially if you are a painter. The new art is an absolute travesty. One of the main ways they will sell this game is terrinoth nostalgia. Messing up the art this badly won't help. They literally could have just re-used old art and people would have been happier.

Sorry to disillusion you, but FFG has been notoriously awful at communicating with their customers, much less listen to them.
Perhaps they would indeed rethink some of their choices if this game flops, but I fear Asmodee would rather cancel the whole line than give them a chance to return to the drawing board and redo it from scratch.
The sad thing is, there might be a lot of potential in this game, and the presentation really felt like this was a labor of love for the designers. But some of the choices are so far of from what Terrinoth has been for the past years I'm still baffled.

Based on the designer forum and what I've read, there is nothing in this new game to entice someone like me who owns all of Descent 2nd ed.  That said, had they created D2e compatible content w/ consistent artwork, I would have had another $800 at the ready.
Too bad - missed opportunity.
P.S. Sorry for the pile on - but the artwork is truly an embarrassment given the precedent set by the last 12 years of Terrinothian artwork.  D2e minis are good enough for the average gamer, though I see how painters would prefer the new minis.

Here are a few ideas for creating a 3rd edition of Journeys:
- Focus on overlord vs heroes gameplay with a campaign system.
- Rethink some game mechanics (for example movement) and tighten up the rules to have less exceptions (just think about the immobilized condition and movement points from non regular sources).
- Use a better LOS System.
- Scrap compatibility for 2nd edition (it's just too much stuff), instead incentivise 2nd edition owners to upgrade to 3rd edition by including the 12 missing 1e heroes in the base game and adding 2nd edition hero sheets for them.
- If you plan to add coop play, use a system that is card based similar to the D2E PODs, but expand these in a way that offers the possibility to add future expansion stuff like new enemies. Don't create another app.
- Use a more classic "Terrinoth" like artstyle for characters.
- Use tiles that are at least as detailed as in 2nd edition and include many more tiles in the base game (think 50-75 2 sided tiles) for greater variety in later expansion campaigns
- Rethink the necessity of including 3D tiles.
- Expand dice options for combat.
- Design all systems in a way that allows to add expansion content to base game assets (like conditions for enemies, items and so on).
- Rethink hero KOs to make these more meaningful (think permanent injuries like Bilehall and Chains tainted cards), but don't make KOs the sole overlord win condition like in IA.
- Try to avoid power creep with expansions.
- Keep the flexibility of combining heroes with different classes.
- Avoid the design of hero abilities, that have a major impact on the overlord game mechanics (like completely shutting down overlord cards).
- Give hero players more options at the start of a campaign (at least 3-4 skills per class) and focus more on improving these with upgrades instead of unlocking new skills as level up options.
- Invest time into balance testing.
- Listen to the feedback of your beta testers, even if you don't like what they have to say.

I'm not able to judge how fun it will be yet, but from the looks it seems to be a lot more intrusive than Road to Legend. If it is for narrative reasons, I'll be somewhat ok with it. But from the looks combat seems to be driven completely in the app, and that might indeed become a bit overbearing. I still have to wait and see.

Here are a few ideas for creating a 3rd edition of Journeys:
- Focus on overlord vs heroes gameplay with a campaign system.
- Rethink some game mechanics (for example movement) and tighten up the rules to have less exceptions (just think about the immobilized condition and movement points from non regular sources).
- Use a better LOS System.
- Scrap compatibility for 2nd edition (it's just too much stuff), instead incentivise 2nd edition owners to upgrade to 3rd edition by including the 12 missing 1e heroes in the base game and adding 2nd edition hero sheets for them.
- If you plan to add coop play, use a system that is card based similar to the D2E PODs, but expand these in a way that offers the possibility to add future expansion stuff like new enemies. Don't create another app.
- Use a more classic "Terrinoth" like artstyle for characters.
- Use tiles that are at least as detailed as in 2nd edition and include many more tiles in the base game (think 50-75 2 sided tiles) for greater variety in later expansion campaigns
- Rethink the necessity of including 3D tiles.
- Expand dice options for combat.
- Design all systems in a way that allows to add expansion content to base game assets (like conditions for enemies, items and so on).
- Rethink hero KOs to make these more meaningful (think permanent injuries like Bilehall and Chains tainted cards), but don't make KOs the sole overlord win condition like in IA.
- Try to avoid power creep with expansions.
- Keep the flexibility of combining heroes with different classes.
- Avoid the design of hero abilities, that have a major impact on the overlord game mechanics (like completely shutting down overlord cards).
- Give hero players more options at the start of a campaign (at least 3-4 skills per class) and focus more on improving these with upgrades instead of unlocking new skills as level up options.
- Invest time into balance testing.
- Listen to the feedback of your beta testers, even if you don't like what they have to say.

I know art is subjective, but this seems to be the ugliest art style I’ve ever seen from FFG. Not a fan.

Sorry to disillusion you, but FFG has been notoriously awful at communicating with their customers, much less listen to them.
Perhaps they would indeed rethink some of their choices if this game flops, but I fear Asmodee would rather cancel the whole line than give them a chance to return to the drawing board and redo it from scratch.
The sad thing is, there might be a lot of potential in this game, and the presentation really felt like this was a labor of love for the designers. But some of the choices are so far of from what Terrinoth has been for the past years I'm still baffled.

Your opinion is welcome. Maybe you are right, but less made me ran away from video games.
I may continue to play but as films and vidéo games I will play no more than 1 or 2 new ones a year ans focus and old but greater games

Rugal, you've been around for awhile - longer than a lot of us.  I'd hate to think that something like this would put you off a hobby you are truly passionate about.  I get that this is disappointing to you - and no blame there, the expectations were high and so were the hopes.  Anywho, I am honestly not trying to bait you when I say that this will all level out. 
  For my sons and I, after we finish our Folklore Campaign, we are jumping back in to 2e 1vsMany which is in no way diminished by the Legends in the Dark.  Who knows?  Perhaps the success of Legends, if it ends up that way - and I hope so for the designers - it will reinvigorate the entire Terrinoth IP in ways that will good for all of us.
Hang in there!  But I'll apologize if this note is unwelcome. 

Maybe you are right. But 175$ for a game for 40 miniatures, cartons base 3d, ugly art and needing a phone to be plates, seriously ... 
Even licencied game were cheaper. Terrinoth is their universe, so it could be far cheaper.
If the game sells good, then, I was wrong, board game go a way I won't follow and that's good for them, bad for us. But if I was right, the game won't live more than 2 years like Runebound v3, or Runewars miniature.
A well sold game doesn't mean it is good. Just that the marketing was great about it, that's all

Warhammer Quest (yes we know the Warhammer licence expired)/ Heroes of Terrinoth were both well recieved by the community and reputed to sell out.  Runebound Unbreakable bonds was reportedly a sell out item.  Neither got reprints or any word from FFG, that I know of, as to why they went Doa.  ****, FFG didn't even give us the curtosy of telling us they were killing the lines.
Now you show us a new version of Descent with no Overlord (YES!  I support this 110%) but with artwork that can't even hold a candle to Warhammer Quest, Runebound (Totally amazing art) or even Heroes of Terrinoth (Mediocre artwork) and is app driven (reserve the right to judge til we have seen more, but it has high potential for good if not flumoxed up).  With a MSRP of $175...
Sooo... if this does not fly off the shelves is FFG just going to drop it with no notice like previous Terrinoth products?  A price point of nearly $200...?
Normally, I would all ready have a preorder for this in at my FLGS and have my group ready to play it on day 1 of release but FFGs lack of communication on anything that is not Star Wars/Keyforge (yes I know these are cash cows that Descent/Terrinoth can only dream of comming close to) will keep my wallet in my pocket until more news is forthcomming.

Every 2d tile allows you to do exactly the same. Or perhaps you think they will implement rules for real line of sight on elevated tiles?
No, they will do an abstract ruling IF they ever do some distinction between different levels. Exactly the same as other board games that have abstract rules for different levels. In Imperial Assault there were ladders, stairs, balconies, etc. They were drawn, yep, but they were there and there were rules for them. I mean... of course I like miniatures and terrain and 3d environments, but if it means 175€ instead of 100€ and wasting ten minutes each time I discover a new room you can keep your ridiculous (and flat colored) tiles. Give me good designed 2d tiles, that will make a beautiful board game wit a great art. It is way more immersive if it has got a great lightning and wonderful shadows than if it is one inch over the rest of tiles. How many times will you use exactly THE SAME 3d stair and exactly THE SAME 3d tree? I prefer variety... Look at Mansions of madness tiles, or Imperial Assault ones, or Gloomhaven... or Conan battle maps, or how beautiful and immersive is Scythe board, or even Brass: Birmingham board... they are BEAUTIFUL, and still you can do a mechanic that allow you to move "up and down" exactly the same as the leveled tiles. For example the vehicles in the parade in Mansions of Madness, or the stairs in the manors... you still could go upstairs and downstairs to that mysterious loft or that mysterious basement... still felt like going down/up there, and there was no need to place the tile one inch over the others to represent it. In fact, I wonder what would have meant to have to place the tile over some cardboard pieces to place it over the others while in the middle of an immersive story...

I never play 1st or 2nd edition of descent. I simply use to love this publisher and i was waiting this new game and hoping to see something good, whatever the ip. 
Objectivle speaking this is a bad product. Im tired of explain every weak point on this, inthink the images and description speaks by himself.
 
Check there no "4 or 5" old grumpys, theres the majority of people complaining bout a videogame with toys for 175 bucks.
 
Sure, theres another games, we
move on of course, but this art and marketing direction is to be worried bout the future of Terrinoth and FFG.