Jump to content

Swordbreaker

Members
  • Content Count

    602
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Swordbreaker

  1. I like how you ignore the actual point I was making and zero in on something irrelevant. That's why my comparison is called a metaphor. I'm not disagreeing that EA and other AAA game developers practice shady business, or that the ESA's argument is bogus. What they do is like building a gumball machine that drops capsules that may contain a piece of candy or may contain confetti. And their argument is that they aren't s selling candy, just a chance at candy. The comparison of KeyForge and Discover to lootboxes, though, is faulty. Lootboxes, as well as booster packs from collectible games like MtG, Pokemon, and Star Wars Destiny, are usually packed with junk you don't need or want. When people buy lootboxes or booster packs, they are trying to get specific things. It could be a powerful weapon in a lootbox, or a certain powerful card in a card game, or whatever else, but they are spending money on a blind box to hopefully get a certain object. The thing is, neither KeyForge or Discover are saying that's something you need to do. You said: This is where the problem lies with your argument. Nothing in either announcement article says that faction hunting or character chasing is something the game is designed for or towards. They aren't advertising certain archons over others, nor are they saying a particular survivor in Discover will be help players excel at the game; just, simply, that these elements are randomized and each box has a unique set of contents, but they are fully playable on their own. With MtG, by contrast, if you want to play competitively, they expect you to buy boosters until you get the cards you want or need to deck-build. Now, chances are, there will be people who do want to faction hunt or collect characters. The best way to do this would be buy secondhand from people who'll list the contents for them. If anybody does otherwise, they are probably stupid.
  2. Put it this way: KeyForge and Discover both use the same business model as a gumball machine. When you put a coin in a gumball machine, you are not promised a particular color or flavor of gumball, but you do get a gumball. You get exactly what you paid for, and you get exactly what was advertised. Every time you buy a KeyForge deck or a Discover box, you should be getting a fully playable game. They are not promising certain factions, nor are they promising you will always win with it, but you should have a fully playable game. Lootboxes, by contrast, are like putting money into a gumball machine for a chance at a gumball. No assurance you get anything at all for your money, just an attempt.
  3. I mean, that's the entirely wrong mindset to have? The advert isn't saying "you will be hunted by wolves," and then when you buy it, there are no wolves. You will be in a survival scenario, with the specifics unique to your table. That's all they are promising, which is why they are going to only preview mechanics and not individual characters and scenarios as much as they can.
  4. As far as I can see, these games are not designed with the intent for players to pick one faction over another, at least not from what's being advertised. So if anybody goes into this to chase factions, they have missed the point and are doing it wrong. While it is technically true that EA does sell you a fully playable game, it is quite obvious to anybody who has eyes and ears that it's a false front. In the case of Battlefront 2, they advertised a game where you could play as all these cool characters in a bunch of situations. When you actually get the game, these characters need to be unlocked, which is fine, as games have been doing that for decades. But the requirements for unlocking is ridiculously high, and the payout from grinding is a pittance, so it's blatantly obvious they are pressuring players to cave in and buy their lootboxes, except the boxes don't assure players that they will get what they're buying, just a randomized chance. So, yes, EA does sell you a "complete" game, but they put as many roadblocks as they can to get you to buy their lootboxes. In every way that it actually matters to consumers, they are selling an incomplete product at full price, expecting people to dump extra money into the game afterwards just to get a complete play experience. So far, what FFG are advertising is not the above. If I buy a KeyForge deck, I should have a fully playable deck that I can take to any table against anybody else. I won't know what picture they've printed on the back of the cards, but it still has all the parts I need. If I buy a box of Discover, I should have everything needed for a few friends to play a full game. I won't know exactly which character's are printed on it, or what environment I'll be in, but it should still have all the parts I need.
  5. The fundamental element aspect that made EA a scummy company was them several things, not just offering random boxes. You would spend $60 on a "complete" game, but find that content people wanted (like playing Darth Vader) was locked behind an in-game currency that could take you a week to unlock (per character) or by dumping an uncertain amount of real-world cash to win an uncertified amount of points to unlock it instead, potentially costing you as much as the base game or more, just to access features that they built their advertising campaign on. Compound all this with other terrible business practices and bad PR. Time will tell (seeing as the games aren't out yet), but what FFG is advertising seems different. EA sold you something that was incomplete, forcing you to either spend inordinate amounts of time or pay the fees, with them naturally rewarding those that do pay out (creating a pay-to-win scenario). FFG seems to be offering a 'complete' package with a fully playable game, you just won't see what 'color' it is. Discover, to me, seems way less opaque than KeyForge. Survival is survival, whether it's on an island or in the mountains or in a desert. If they focus on designing a core system of resolving events, then it doesn't matter what the situation, just that the game underneath is full. For FFG to be more like EA and other lowlife companies, think of it this way: say the game requires you to have 3 unique dice to play the game. They only package one of the three randomly in the box set, and you have to buy blind boxes for $5 each that each contain 1 random die. You might get lucky and get all three on your first try, or you might not and be forced to keep buying until you have all the components you need to actually play. That is what EA does. So far, I haven't seen anything that tells me if I bought either of these games, I couldn't play a complete game with a single copy.
  6. It would boil down to how the game actually plays from a mechanical standpoint. Even if the situation and objectives change from box to box, as long as how situations and objectives are resolved remain consistent, you could probably trust reviews. You can compare it to RPGs in a way: different people may use the same system, but one group may play a group of noir vampire hunters, and another may like playing high fantasy, but the system remains the same so both groups can say that it works. So if one copy of Discover has you stranded in the mountains being hunted by sasquatch and another has you surviving on an island after a shipwreck, as long as the rules for foraging for supplies, setting camp, and whatever else remain consistent, you can assume the game works and reviews are trustworthy.
  7. I would not allow triggering qualities without qualities on every combat check. I would consider applying the effects (knocked prone, disoriented, immobilized, staggered, etc.) depending on the circumstances... which the game already allows anyway in one form or another.
  8. @Klort is correct. Talents were tiered based not on how cheap they were in Star Wars, but their effect and how they interact with the talent pyramid structure. As for Precision Strike, it was not included early on (before I began contributing), and I don't know off hand why it hasn't.
  9. I think the closest to an in-universe dating system we ever got was After Ruusan Reformation, which took place exactly 1000 years before Yavin. But that was for Legends.
  10. Maybe this will be a two part series. Rise of the Separatists covers early Clone Wars, roughly Episode II through the first half or so of TCW, while "Fall of the Republic" covers the second half of TCW through Episode III. They could expand on those new careers in that way.
  11. I mean, it could be a typo. Put down 2 when they meant 3.
  12. For the record, as I've played that game, there's no way that ship is 100m long. The developers (where the size came from) mixed up meters with feet.
  13. This all depends on if they make backing one prince over the other a player choice or not, which seems highly likely, in which case it would boil down to number of wins per supporting side. I can also see it play out several different ways. Satorii fleeing to the Crab and promising them support in return for their allegiance, or Daisetsu bucking trends and promising them all the resources they've been asking for. Funniest thing is that the Crab stand to gain a great deal, but could also not intervene on either side and still remain mostly as they were.
  14. I don't buy it. They've already changed plenty, such as Toturi as Emerald Champion, the Emperor's second son being born without the kidnapping, and everything to do with the Phoenix's plight and the Kaito, that they can do plenty without treading the same steps all over again. Working up to some form of civil war seems likely, but I don't see why it has to tread the same path all over again.
  15. Not to offend anybody personally, but why are there so many theories here that assume all roads lead back to the story AEG told with the Scorpion Coup followed by the Clan War? There's enough changes currently that they could do anything they at all, but there seems to be a consensus that it will all work back to where it was before.
  16. The Fury Interceptor is a freighter sized military transport, so the TIE interceptor wouldn't work at all. Look here. You'll have to search page by page, as the links are all broken.
  17. What skill does the garrote use, Melee or Brawl? And does chapter 3 talk extensively about incorporating Stealth?
  18. This is because it was Hunter from SWRPG, but RoT released a talent named Hunter that works differently. The title was changed, but it looks like an editing failure.
  19. In that case, wasn't what little we've seen of him showing that he seemed to actually be concerned with the duties of his clan, directly contrasting Kachiko's ambition? Based on that, being declared regent plays more into Kachiko's hands than Shoju's.
  20. Have we seen much of Shoju since his introduction? I've missed the last stories few since I haven't been able to pick up the last 3 packs.
  21. Swordbreaker

    FAQ

    Question: When a character is mounted as laid out in Realms of Terrinoth, does the character's and/or mount's silhouette change? Answer: The silhouette is the same as the mount’s value. A person on a horse is pretty much the size of a horse, and so on. Answered by Tim Huckelbery.
  22. I typically run the numbers to get an idea, then adjust them based on what works for the setting.
  23. When making an unarmed Brawl combat check to deal strain damage to a living opponent, increase damage by the character's ranks in Medicine. No ignoring soak about it.
×
×
  • Create New...