Class and Rarity Gates - Discussion Thread

18911131417

Comments

  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 8,452 Guardian

    Rasilover said:

    Rasilover said:

    Don't act surprised that Act 6 would have 6 star requirements.
    Act 6 is clearly designed strictly for end game players that are able to expand their 5 stars and 6 stars to give those players some sort of "challenge" to keep the players optimistic preventing content drought

    Are you for real right now dude? Are you actually for real??? I personally have done almost every content in the game aside from Labyrinth. The amount of progress I have done... warrants me the right to Act 6.2. Unfortunately, some paths require 4 6*’s... & I only have 3. No matter what way you look at it, it’s BS. For the amount of progress I’ve done throughout Story & the game, it only makes sense I have full access. Plain & Simple.
    It's Permanent Content that the rest of the minority has to look forward while working to develop their 6* Roster.
    Eventually 6*s will be as easy to get as 5*s
    But if I want to dive into it Day 1, I should be able too. My progress warrants it. Access in this game should be based on Progress & Achievements, not roster size. It’s basically a d*** measuring contest, of who has the biggest & thickest roster, & not about skills or achievements. I know of SO MANY players with a WAYY bigger roster than me, but I’ve still achieved more in this game. Roster size should mean nothing... it should be about your skills, decisions & achievements throughout the game.
    Your skills and achievements throughout the game ARE your Roster. This debate has gone on for longer than I care to admit. Your Rating, your Prestige, the Champs you have...all reflections of your achievements. Even people who bought their 6*s from the Cavalier Crystals had to get there in the first place. There are more measures of skill than just an overpowered 4* and some fancy Dex. Skill is measured in other ways as well, along with progress made with that skill. Although it's worth noting that the progress gates aren't really directly about skill. They're about having a certain amount of progress in order to pass. That progress is measured by your Roster, which you can only get at certain stages in the game.
    Nope, sorry. The simple fact that I’ve accomplished way more in this game than players who have twice the roster I do, tears down your whole “roster is progress” BS.
    How does it do that? That's like saying if you can do more by level 40 than most people do at level 60, that means leveling is not progress.

    There's different kinds of progress in the game, some the player can measure by their own standards, and some the game itself measures and uses as soft or hard prerequisites. There's no question that roster strength is being used as a form of progress metric in the game. I would argue it always has been. Whether you like it or not the statement that it is "BS" is simply ignoring reality.

    This game is first and foremost a champion collecting game. All of the fighting elements of it are ways to value champions. This game can and has existed without many of those elements, and most players don't even participate in all of them. But everyone collects champions, because you pretty much have to. The dev cycle includes regular champion additions. Most of the monetization in the game revolves around champion collection. And as the game continues to develop forward it continues to leverage depth and breadth of champion roster as a soft gate for further progress in the game. You can say it "shouldn't" be about that, but that's your opinion. There's no game design rule that says that's supposed to be true, or that that's the best way to make a game. And if that's what you want, this is not the game for you.
  • GamerGamer Posts: 4,452 ★★★★
    We can’t simple not make any judgment befor it out man giv it chois I’m do agerd van out 4 star isn’t good and that ther doing with 5 star isn’t great either but don’t complain for censtes it’s out yet as @xNig said we make a judgment for to quickly
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 8,452 Guardian

    In order to give proper feedback, you have to understand all the angles.

    You don't have to understand all the angles to give reasonable feedback. You don't have to know anything about games, or even this game really. Feedback when it is limited to expressions of personal preference or personal experience should be tolerated from anyone, regardless of their foundation.

    The problem is when that feedback becomes hyperbolic, unjustified, foundationless judgment. I think it is perfectly legitimate to simply state "I don't like the gates." Not everyone will, and that's fine. "These gates are stupid and terrible game design" is not feedback of preference, that's a judgment that can and should be challenged, and now it is entirely fair game to question whether the person making that statement is actually knowledgeable enough about the situation to make that evaluation.
  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 6,152 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    In order to give proper feedback, you have to understand all the angles.

    You don't have to understand all the angles to give reasonable feedback. You don't have to know anything about games, or even this game really. Feedback when it is limited to expressions of personal preference or personal experience should be tolerated from anyone, regardless of their foundation.

    The problem is when that feedback becomes hyperbolic, unjustified, foundationless judgment. I think it is perfectly legitimate to simply state "I don't like the gates." Not everyone will, and that's fine. "These gates are stupid and terrible game design" is not feedback of preference, that's a judgment that can and should be challenged, and now it is entirely fair game to question whether the person making that statement is actually knowledgeable enough about the situation to make that evaluation.
    100% agree. In my mind we are essentially saying the same thing. I'm perfectly fine if people dont like the gates. They have right too like you said. People just need to realize the game has to be playable for everyone and not every decision will please everyone.

  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 6,152 ★★★★★

    Cant wait for 6.4, where we only get one character who has to be a r3 2015 mystic 6* with sig lvl 65

    If you truly believe they would do that then its time for you to move on.
  • Incitatus666Incitatus666 Posts: 150

    Kerneas said:

    Looks interesting. The gate system is nice, but I gotta say that 5* and 6* shards aren't really that accessible. As a mid-game player (I just today completed 5.4.3), 6* shards are really hard to get. I know 6*s are meant to be rare, but my maximum is 1000/month, which isn't much. And I can't always get them all (I have no mood for Thanos, my intercepts are weak).

    To be fair, I don't think this is mid-game content. Also, there are 6 Paths without Gates, so people will be able to complete about 50% without them.
    Out of curiosity, what do you consider mid-game?
  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 6,152 ★★★★★
    Ace_03 said:

    Roster Size is mostly dependent on your wallet when it comes to the endgame. Skills & achievements are based on the players. What would you want your game to focus on?

    So explain Brian Grant and his F2P account.
    He plays this game as a source of income and it's his fulltime job. Brian Grant is F2P depending on how much you value time and energy.

    Brian Grant is not the measuring stick for F2P in this game and he will never be, he might not be a money whale, but he definitely is a time and effort whale. And I'm not talking 2-3 hours a day, he literally plays this game for living, come on dude, be sensible.


    F2P is F2P sorry to say. You cant exclude people cause they make a living on YouTube. He doesn't spend and has a sizable roster. He has more 6*'s than I do and spend a ton.

    F2P players cant expect to be on the same level of anyone that spends. Its a choice they make and they need to understand that progression is slower because of that. Unless you an on being a youtube star, you won't have the same things ans spenders.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 8,452 Guardian
    Ace_03 said:

    Roster Size is mostly dependent on your wallet when it comes to the endgame. Skills & achievements are based on the players. What would you want your game to focus on?

    So explain Brian Grant and his F2P account.
    He plays this game as a source of income and it's his fulltime job. Brian Grant is F2P depending on how much you value time and energy.

    Brian Grant is not the measuring stick for F2P in this game and he will never be, he might not be a money whale, but he definitely is a time and effort whale. And I'm not talking 2-3 hours a day, he literally plays this game for living, come on dude, be sensible.


    Brian Grant is not a reasonable example of what the typical person can accomplish in the game. However, he is an entirely proper counter-example to people making statements about what absolutely cannot be done without spending, as he doesn't spend. And while he does play more hours than you'd expect the typical player to play, it isn't necessarily true that he plays the game "full time." He has other projects (game related, but still) that he spends time on, and making Youtube videos is not just about recording game play and then uploading. He probably spends much less time playing the game than he could, specifically *because* he is a Youtuber. In fact, Brian Grant has fewer PvP fights than I do, so he absolutely cannot be just grinding all day.

    Wait, Brain Grant has fewer PvP fights than I do? Holy banana burgers.
  • May_The_WayMay_The_Way Posts: 561 ★★★

    Roster Size is mostly dependent on your wallet when it comes to the endgame. Skills & achievements are based on the players. What would you want your game to focus on?

    So explain Brian Grant and his F2P account.
    The dude plays the game practically 100% of the time. Normal people have jobs & daily lives, he doesn’t. I’m not bashing him or anything, I personally watch his late night streams often, but I’m saying it as it is.
  • RogerRabsRogerRabs Posts: 274 ★★★
    I just wish Kabam would invest more resources into buffing old characters. People wouldn't hate the gates nearly as much if they were able to use more of the characters they've pulled. When the majority of player's 5 star rosters have 0 use outside of arena and synergies, you know the game has a balance issue.

    This is coming from someone with plenty of R5's and 6 stars who will be able to jump straight into 6.2 the day it comes out.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 8,452 Guardian

    You know how we know these gates are nothing but a cash grab?

    Cause if they wanted it to be about skill and not RNG they would have banned 5*s and 6*s and let us use our 3*s and 4*s only and tailored 6.2 around them.

    Any game developer doing this in a progressional game - making the next step in the progression ladder go backwards - I would think had either completely lost his or her mind or was a mole for another game development company. Except this would never happen in any game studio with more than two developers, because the other two would fire this guy.

    As many things as Kabam gets wrong, and they get many, many, many things wrong, I would rather play their game than one somehow designed by the forums. I can think of no better exemplar than this.
  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 6,152 ★★★★★
    edited May 16
    RogerRabs said:

    I just wish Kabam would invest more resources into buffing old characters. People wouldn't hate the gates nearly as much if they were able to use more of the characters they've pulled. When the majority of player's 5 star rosters have 0 use outside of arena and synergies, you know the game has a balance issue.

    This is coming from someone with plenty of R5's and 6 stars who will be able to jump straight into 6.2 the day it comes out.

    They are investing in it. Its not just about coding new values, theres a lot that goes into it revamping a older champ.
  • May_The_WayMay_The_Way Posts: 561 ★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Rasilover said:

    Rasilover said:

    Don't act surprised that Act 6 would have 6 star requirements.
    Act 6 is clearly designed strictly for end game players that are able to expand their 5 stars and 6 stars to give those players some sort of "challenge" to keep the players optimistic preventing content drought

    Are you for real right now dude? Are you actually for real??? I personally have done almost every content in the game aside from Labyrinth. The amount of progress I have done... warrants me the right to Act 6.2. Unfortunately, some paths require 4 6*’s... & I only have 3. No matter what way you look at it, it’s BS. For the amount of progress I’ve done throughout Story & the game, it only makes sense I have full access. Plain & Simple.
    It's Permanent Content that the rest of the minority has to look forward while working to develop their 6* Roster.
    Eventually 6*s will be as easy to get as 5*s
    But if I want to dive into it Day 1, I should be able too. My progress warrants it. Access in this game should be based on Progress & Achievements, not roster size. It’s basically a d*** measuring contest, of who has the biggest & thickest roster, & not about skills or achievements. I know of SO MANY players with a WAYY bigger roster than me, but I’ve still achieved more in this game. Roster size should mean nothing... it should be about your skills, decisions & achievements throughout the game.
    Your skills and achievements throughout the game ARE your Roster. This debate has gone on for longer than I care to admit. Your Rating, your Prestige, the Champs you have...all reflections of your achievements. Even people who bought their 6*s from the Cavalier Crystals had to get there in the first place. There are more measures of skill than just an overpowered 4* and some fancy Dex. Skill is measured in other ways as well, along with progress made with that skill. Although it's worth noting that the progress gates aren't really directly about skill. They're about having a certain amount of progress in order to pass. That progress is measured by your Roster, which you can only get at certain stages in the game.
    Nope, sorry. The simple fact that I’ve accomplished way more in this game than players who have twice the roster I do, tears down your whole “roster is progress” BS.
    How does it do that? That's like saying if you can do more by level 40 than most people do at level 60, that means leveling is not progress.

    There's different kinds of progress in the game, some the player can measure by their own standards, and some the game itself measures and uses as soft or hard prerequisites. There's no question that roster strength is being used as a form of progress metric in the game. I would argue it always has been. Whether you like it or not the statement that it is "BS" is simply ignoring reality.

    This game is first and foremost a champion collecting game. All of the fighting elements of it are ways to value champions. This game can and has existed without many of those elements, and most players don't even participate in all of them. But everyone collects champions, because you pretty much have to. The dev cycle includes regular champion additions. Most of the monetization in the game revolves around champion collection. And as the game continues to develop forward it continues to leverage depth and breadth of champion roster as a soft gate for further progress in the game. You can say it "shouldn't" be about that, but that's your opinion. There's no game design rule that says that's supposed to be true, or that that's the best way to make a game. And if that's what you want, this is not the game for you.
    I probably said it wrong in my 1st statement, my apologies. Roster Size... Champion collection... however you put it, is a form of progression, but it’s a progression that is mostly based on Cavalier Crystals & GMC’s when it comes to the endgame of MCOC. As a F2P player, I have never had a problem with this, because the size of my roster does not limit what I can do. Even in Labyrinth, people have cleared all the way through with simple 4*’s. Now, it’s a firm requirement that I have a certain amount of 6*’s, & a certain amount of a specific class of 5*’s. And now... because of stupid requirements, my skills & achievements mean nothing.

    And one more thing...
    DNA3000 said:

    Rasilover said:

    Rasilover said:

    Don't act surprised that Act 6 would have 6 star requirements.
    Act 6 is clearly designed strictly for end game players that are able to expand their 5 stars and 6 stars to give those players some sort of "challenge" to keep the players optimistic preventing content drought

    Are you for real right now dude? Are you actually for real??? I personally have done almost every content in the game aside from Labyrinth. The amount of progress I have done... warrants me the right to Act 6.2. Unfortunately, some paths require 4 6*’s... & I only have 3. No matter what way you look at it, it’s BS. For the amount of progress I’ve done throughout Story & the game, it only makes sense I have full access. Plain & Simple.
    It's Permanent Content that the rest of the minority has to look forward while working to develop their 6* Roster.
    Eventually 6*s will be as easy to get as 5*s
    But if I want to dive into it Day 1, I should be able too. My progress warrants it. Access in this game should be based on Progress & Achievements, not roster size. It’s basically a d*** measuring contest, of who has the biggest & thickest roster, & not about skills or achievements. I know of SO MANY players with a WAYY bigger roster than me, but I’ve still achieved more in this game. Roster size should mean nothing... it should be about your skills, decisions & achievements throughout the game.
    Your skills and achievements throughout the game ARE your Roster. This debate has gone on for longer than I care to admit. Your Rating, your Prestige, the Champs you have...all reflections of your achievements. Even people who bought their 6*s from the Cavalier Crystals had to get there in the first place. There are more measures of skill than just an overpowered 4* and some fancy Dex. Skill is measured in other ways as well, along with progress made with that skill. Although it's worth noting that the progress gates aren't really directly about skill. They're about having a certain amount of progress in order to pass. That progress is measured by your Roster, which you can only get at certain stages in the game.
    Nope, sorry. The simple fact that I’ve accomplished way more in this game than players who have twice the roster I do, tears down your whole “roster is progress” BS.
    This game is first and foremost a champion collecting game. All of the fighting elements of it are ways to value champions.
    This statement is 100% false. This game is first & foremost a fighting game, NOT a collection game. Not sure where you got that strange idea, but it’s advertised as a fighting game, talked about as a fighting game... & widely known as a fighting game. Even Wikipedia classes it as a fighting game...

    Collecting Champions is an element within this “Fighting Game” that many people enjoy... but it’s definitely not what the game is all about.
  • RogerRabsRogerRabs Posts: 274 ★★★

    RogerRabs said:

    I just wish Kabam would invest more resources into buffing old characters. People wouldn't hate the gates nearly as much if they were able to use more of the characters they've pulled. When the majority of player's 5 star rosters have 0 use outside of arena and synergies, you know the game has a balance issue.

    This is coming from someone with plenty of R5's and 6 stars who will be able to jump straight into 6.2 the day it comes out.

    They are investing in it. Its not just about coding new values, theres a lot that goes into it revamping a older champ.
    I said invest MORE resources. Buffing 1 champ every 4 months is not good enough when so many champs need reworks.

    Clearly they have no issue creating 2-3 new characters every month. Maybe try focusing on older champs so people aren't constantly disappointed when they pull the likes of Hulkbuster, IP, Magneto x2, DPX, CA, TJF, Groot, IM, SIM, Vulture, Storm, oh boy is this list long, BPCW, Cyclops x2, KK, man I'm still going, NDD, Rhino, IF, Abom, Miss Marvel. Think I got them all.
  • EpistriatusEpistriatus Posts: 646 ★★★
    It doesn’t even matter how many class and/or rarity gates you implement, with this much lag the game is unplayable. So good luck with that.........
    I’m also relatively late to becoming cavalier, but the number of times I’ve got clipped by the final boss of 6.1 due to sheer lag is just insane.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,468 ★★★★★
    RogerRabs said:

    RogerRabs said:

    I just wish Kabam would invest more resources into buffing old characters. People wouldn't hate the gates nearly as much if they were able to use more of the characters they've pulled. When the majority of player's 5 star rosters have 0 use outside of arena and synergies, you know the game has a balance issue.

    This is coming from someone with plenty of R5's and 6 stars who will be able to jump straight into 6.2 the day it comes out.

    They are investing in it. Its not just about coding new values, theres a lot that goes into it revamping a older champ.
    I said invest MORE resources. Buffing 1 champ every 4 months is not good enough when so many champs need reworks.

    Clearly they have no issue creating 2-3 new characters every month. Maybe try focusing on older champs so people aren't constantly disappointed when they pull the likes of Hulkbuster, IP, Magneto x2, DPX, CA, TJF, Groot, IM, SIM, Vulture, Storm, oh boy is this list long, BPCW, Cyclops x2, KK, man I'm still going, NDD, Rhino, IF, Abom, Miss Marvel. Think I got them all.
    People will inebitably be disappointed. As long as there is a variety of Champs, people will develop preferences. As long as they have preferences, they will pull what they don't want. As long as there are new Champs, people will compare them to the old. There are some that could stand a rework, no dobut about that. However, this needs to be done based on data over time, not by comparison to the newer and "shinier" ones. Trying to make the old on par with the new is not only a never-ending process, it's not necessarily based on what the actual data shows. Preference is not automatically in line with how they score in the data.
  • LongtimegamerLongtimegamer Posts: 179 ★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    You know how we know these gates are nothing but a cash grab?

    Cause if they wanted it to be about skill and not RNG they would have banned 5*s and 6*s and let us use our 3*s and 4*s only and tailored 6.2 around them.

    Any game developer doing this in a progressional game - making the next step in the progression ladder go backwards - I would think had either completely lost his or her mind or was a mole for another game development company. Except this would never happen in any game studio with more than two developers, because the other two would fire this guy.

    As many things as Kabam gets wrong, and they get many, many, many things wrong, I would rather play their game than one somehow designed by the forums. I can think of no better exemplar than this.
    I never said it was a good design, but it clearly reveals Kabam's intentions here.

    No matter what Kabam says it's never about making the game be based on skill or less based on RNG, or as they put it: "Having the right Champion, and being lucky in Crystal pulls, is much more important than we would like it to be".

    But that's exactly what it is! These gates shaft f2p'ers and benefit the spenders and the RNG lottery winners and nothing more. All it is throwing 5*s in the trash and making us buy the next stuff.

    This game is more pay2win than ever. Whatever you spent on 565s will go down the drain with these gates. Have a sig 200 r5 Omega? Too bad, get him as a 6* cause no other reason than they want more money. Who knows what's in store for 6.3 and 6.4, but whatever it is it's worse than this.

    If any business tried these bait and switch tactics anywhere they'd be under investigation.
  • RogerRabsRogerRabs Posts: 274 ★★★

    RogerRabs said:

    RogerRabs said:

    I just wish Kabam would invest more resources into buffing old characters. People wouldn't hate the gates nearly as much if they were able to use more of the characters they've pulled. When the majority of player's 5 star rosters have 0 use outside of arena and synergies, you know the game has a balance issue.

    This is coming from someone with plenty of R5's and 6 stars who will be able to jump straight into 6.2 the day it comes out.

    They are investing in it. Its not just about coding new values, theres a lot that goes into it revamping a older champ.
    I said invest MORE resources. Buffing 1 champ every 4 months is not good enough when so many champs need reworks.

    Clearly they have no issue creating 2-3 new characters every month. Maybe try focusing on older champs so people aren't constantly disappointed when they pull the likes of Hulkbuster, IP, Magneto x2, DPX, CA, TJF, Groot, IM, SIM, Vulture, Storm, oh boy is this list long, BPCW, Cyclops x2, KK, man I'm still going, NDD, Rhino, IF, Abom, Miss Marvel. Think I got them all.
    People will inebitably be disappointed. As long as there is a variety of Champs, people will develop preferences. As long as they have preferences, they will pull what they don't want. As long as there are new Champs, people will compare them to the old. There are some that could stand a rework, no dobut about that. However, this needs to be done based on data over time, not by comparison to the newer and "shinier" ones. Trying to make the old on par with the new is not only a never-ending process, it's not necessarily based on what the actual data shows. Preference is not automatically in line with how they score in the data.
    If you can't admit that there are objectively superior champions in the game then I don't know what to tell you. It has nothing to do with preference. These champions were designed years ago and never updated. They're basically irrelevant to the current game outside of arena ad the occasional synergy.
  • TacoScottyTacoScotty Posts: 407 ★★
    edited May 16
    Comparing normal F2P players (e.g. this is their hobby not their job) to Brian Grant would be like comparing spenders to COWhale. BrianGrant is also in a top 10 AQ alliance and historically a master AW alliance so he is getting more rank up resources than most. He’s earned it all so not knocking him. End game players though expands to spenders / F2P that goes down through all the platinum ranks for AW and even some of the gold and further down AQ ranks.

    It being only 6.2 and they are adding paths that only allow you one 5* makes 6.3-6.4 feel like they will have more and more 6* reliance and if that is the case they are phasing 5* out too fast

  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 8,452 Guardian

    I probably said it wrong in my 1st statement, my apologies. Roster Size... Champion collection... however you put it, is a form of progression, but it’s a progression that is mostly based on Cavalier Crystals & GMC’s when it comes to the endgame of MCOC.

    I actually get most of my 5* champs from arena grinding, not either of those two sources.


    And one more thing...

    DNA3000 said:

    This game is first and foremost a champion collecting game. All of the fighting elements of it are ways to value champions.

    This statement is 100% false. This game is first & foremost a fighting game, NOT a collection game. Not sure where you got that strange idea, but it’s advertised as a fighting game, talked about as a fighting game... & widely known as a fighting game. Even Wikipedia classes it as a fighting game...

    Collecting Champions is an element within this “Fighting Game” that many people enjoy... but it’s definitely not what the game is all about.
    I'm commenting on the game as it is designed and implemented, not how it is marketed. It is obviously a progressional game as that term is used in the games industry, but it isn't marketed as such because almost no progressional game is marketed as such. That doesn't change how the game itself works. If you think this game is designed and implemented as a fighting game that just happens to have some champion collecting in it, almost every design or monetization decision Kabam makes will seem mystifying to you.

    How a game is designed and implemented, and how it is "skinned" and marketed are two completely different things. Take Arkham Asylum for example. Is that game in the same genre as Dance Dance Revolution, a rhythm dance game? Of course not. Except, under the hood, that's how it was originally conceived and designed. How the mechanics work and how they are presented to the player are different. Similarly, how the priorities of content creation and monetization work for a game and how the game is marketed to players doesn't have to be the same.

    But if you believe authoritative sources above the game development, then here's how Kabam itself presents the game on its own website: https://playcontestofchampions.com/

    The page highlights three things: building alliances of players to challenge other alliances, creating teams of champions, and collecting Marvel champions. Some of those things implicitly refer to combat, but the actual combat of the game is not highlighted on MCOC's landing page.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 8,452 Guardian

    DNA3000 said:

    You know how we know these gates are nothing but a cash grab?

    Cause if they wanted it to be about skill and not RNG they would have banned 5*s and 6*s and let us use our 3*s and 4*s only and tailored 6.2 around them.

    Any game developer doing this in a progressional game - making the next step in the progression ladder go backwards - I would think had either completely lost his or her mind or was a mole for another game development company. Except this would never happen in any game studio with more than two developers, because the other two would fire this guy.

    As many things as Kabam gets wrong, and they get many, many, many things wrong, I would rather play their game than one somehow designed by the forums. I can think of no better exemplar than this.
    I never said it was a good design, but it clearly reveals Kabam's intentions here.
    You have to be implying it was good design, because you say "if they wanted it to be about skill and not RNG they would have banned 5*s and 6*s and let us use our 3*s and 4*s only and tailored 6.2 around them." If you are also saying this is bad design, you're saying if Kabam wanted the game to be about skill they'd do something deliberately wrong. They won't do that because it is bad design, and because they won't do that they can't satisfy your requirement that they do that to prove they value skill. That's an unreasonable standard.
  • Dtl7714Dtl7714 Posts: 425 ★★★

    Roster Size is mostly dependent on your wallet when it comes to the endgame. Skills & achievements are based on the players. What would you want your game to focus on?

    So explain Brian Grant and his F2P account.
    Dtl7714 said:

    TaZ_4178 said:

    Sociopath said:

    Well great job for listening to the community about the gate of no 4*'s in 6.1.
    *Dev team* "let's gate 6.2!
    Honestly I respect your transparency about this before release but listening to the community is certainly not your strongest attribute here.
    As for the more availability of 5/6* shards in content.. Have you no data on the last 4 weeks????
    I'm genuinely curious as this event has been God awful in rewards and we still have two more weeks of poop to go.
    In all honesty the gate does not effect me to much as I'll still be able to complete it, just not explore. But the reasoning behind this is almost delusions of grandeur.

    In their defense, the community is extremely short-sided and wrong in almost every situation (at least the majority)
    Since my phone claims your comment was approved via the over lords... I'll simply say wtf are you talking about? I will give you the reward for Troll post of 2019 though! Great job, now stand up and take a bow!
    He isn't terribly wrong. The majority of the player base overreacts with every announcement unless it involves free stuff. Then tends to shut up once the content is released or changes made and because they realize it wasn't what they thought it was.
    They dont "shut up" cause they realize it wasnt as bad as they say it was.

    They just get tired of giving feedback to Kabam that it continues to ignore. The complaining stops cause it isnt accomplishing anything

    And what is your personal stake in all this. You always take criticism of Kabam so personal and act hostile to anyone who criticizes anything about the game.
    If they get tired of giving feedback...why are they all here again? You call myself and @xNig trolls because we tend to have an opposing opinion that doesn't always put a negative light on Kabam. Why arent you and the others that insist that every decision they make as a company bad, considered the trolls? Its pretty much the same people all the time that whine about everything they do. I understand that I CHOOSE to play this game. I am NOT the owner of this game. Therefore I can accept what decisions they make, while giving an opinion when warranted.

    You aren't giving feedback, you are complaining. In order to give proper feedback, you have to understand all the angles. The gate system is becoming the meta because we rely on a few champs to try and complete content. They want us to use more of our rosters and that's all there is too the move. This content isn't going anywhere and you'll have time to make adjustments to this content as well.

    You aren't the only player here. They have a target demographic for each set of content they release. 6.2 won't be for everyone and they haven't been shy about saying that. Theres other things to work on for a large majority of the player base.

    I dont agree with every decision they make. I do understand that I have very little control no matter what. I can choose to play a game I love or walk away. I play Marvel Future Fight and Marvel Strike Force casually as well. I could easily go and play those more but I choose to stay here. I don't have a fantastic roster of 6*'s but I'm not worried about those 6 paths out of 60 yet.

    We will all be fine in the end. We will all at some point or another grow our rosters to beat the content. Also, we still have next months EQ coming and everyone will shift their compl...i mean feedback to the 3.2 boss they can't beat after one try and its a money grab. See you in those threads!
    👋
    I dont likewhat their doing for 6.2 but dont mind it as much as some. I will get through it when I feel like it.

    And I am objective. I actually defend some decisions like I dont believe Thanos is that big a deal this month and I dont understand the crying about the empty path I'm 3.1.

    I just dont understand your dedication to screening every thread you can for the purpose of being hostile towards anyone who criticizes Kabam
  • May_The_WayMay_The_Way Posts: 561 ★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    I probably said it wrong in my 1st statement, my apologies. Roster Size... Champion collection... however you put it, is a form of progression, but it’s a progression that is mostly based on Cavalier Crystals & GMC’s when it comes to the endgame of MCOC.

    I actually get most of my 5* champs from arena grinding, not either of those two sources.


    And one more thing...

    DNA3000 said:

    This game is first and foremost a champion collecting game. All of the fighting elements of it are ways to value champions.

    This statement is 100% false. This game is first & foremost a fighting game, NOT a collection game. Not sure where you got that strange idea, but it’s advertised as a fighting game, talked about as a fighting game... & widely known as a fighting game. Even Wikipedia classes it as a fighting game...

    Collecting Champions is an element within this “Fighting Game” that many people enjoy... but it’s definitely not what the game is all about.
    I'm commenting on the game as it is designed and implemented, not how it is marketed. It is obviously a progressional game as that term is used in the games industry, but it isn't marketed as such because almost no progressional game is marketed as such. That doesn't change how the game itself works. If you think this game is designed and implemented as a fighting game that just happens to have some champion collecting in it, almost every design or monetization decision Kabam makes will seem mystifying to you.

    How a game is designed and implemented, and how it is "skinned" and marketed are two completely different things. Take Arkham Asylum for example. Is that game in the same genre as Dance Dance Revolution, a rhythm dance game? Of course not. Except, under the hood, that's how it was originally conceived and designed. How the mechanics work and how they are presented to the player are different. Similarly, how the priorities of content creation and monetization work for a game and how the game is marketed to players doesn't have to be the same.

    But if you believe authoritative sources above the game development, then here's how Kabam itself presents the game on its own website: https://playcontestofchampions.com/

    The page highlights three things: building alliances of players to challenge other alliances, creating teams of champions, and collecting Marvel champions. Some of those things implicitly refer to combat, but the actual combat of the game is not highlighted on MCOC's landing page.

    But aside from all of the Advertising & what the Devs claim the game to be, this game is far from Collection Oriented.
    Even when people do want collect champs, it’s almost always only to help progress in they’re fighting. When the “Blade era” was around, people didn’t want him to simply collect him, they wanted to fight with him & win. Blade was (& still is) a powerful weapon within the contest... as are many Champions, & that’s why people want them. Not just for a collection, but as a piece of utility to help them fight within the contest. That’s like saying a Gladiator doesn’t want to swords to fight, but swords to collect. Or a Cowboy wants pistols to collect, & not shoot.
    It’s absurd. Why do you think players don’t want Champions like Colossus, Kamala, IP, DPXF & many others? Do they not make good collectibles? 😂. No, it’s because this game is about fighting, not collecting... & those champs are terrible for fighting with.
Sign In or Register to comment.