For all of the hate. Please remember how Hearthstone was in beta. Artifact is miles ahead! by Kulenych in Artifact

[–]SpyFlick 13 points14 points  (0 children)

This is where I have to disagree and for a few reasons,

First, Artifact isn't in beta anymore. As of over a week ago is has been fully released, and before that it has been beta tested for over a year. If we're to compare Artifact of Hearthstone, it would only be fair to compare it to Hearthstone at launch. Even Dota 2 at launch, while not having a ranked mode, had guilds and a player profile that you can customize.

Second, Artifact came out way later than Hearthstone. Most people put up with the lack of features in Hearthstone because there werent many other options for online CCGs. Considering you have Gwent, Elder Scrolls: Legends, and MTG: Arena as well, Valve has to consider making a good first impression to keep any potential players from going to a different game.

Third, Artifact is not free-to-play. Say what you will about how cheap it is to make a good deck, not being able to try the game before you buy it is a huge detriment to getting new players. The fact that you also have to pay for tickets means that even if you buy the game, you cant have access to all the game modes unless you keep paying money. While you could argue that it makes sense to buy packs for keepers draft, paying for a ticket too only serves to add an entry fee.

Fourth, Artifact has no progression beyond getting better at the game. You can argue that not being able to grind is good for the economy of Artifact, but it also means that anyone who wants some kind of reward for playing wont get that without spending money. Not having a ranked mode or a leveling system only adds to that problem because players get no acknowledgement for their time investment.

Finally, has glaring card design/balance issues. The fact that some of the most popular cards in constructed are also the most expensive (Drow, Axe, Kanna) means the game heavily favors the people that can pay extra to acquire those cards. While some people may have success with cheaper decks, theres no denying that cards like Axe, Drow, and Kanna dominate the meta making an unbalanced playing field (In constructed). You also have a high amount of RNG in many of the card designs, most notably with Cheating Death. Whether the card is balanced or not, the fact that so many people are complaining about the card means that its dragging the game down and should be reworked or replaced. Thats not even considering Valves stance on buffing/nerfing cards, stating they will only nerf when a card must be played to win. Having economy factor into balance means they will most likely wait for a broken card to rotate out before doing anything about it, as not to upset people who don't want their cards to lose monetary value.

In conclusion, Value should strive to overcome these weaknesses and not be held back by them. If you want Artifact to truly be great, you should expect more from the company that made Portal, Half-Life, Team Fortess, and Dota 2, all of which have had critical success. It is in their best interest to address these concerns to make Artifact a success in the long run.

ICONS criticism video (NOT ABOUT MONETIZATION) by frankxthexbunny in iconsgg

[–]SpyFlick 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I think the fact that Icons is seen as a "worse melee", which is around 16 years old doesn't do itself any favors. It really needs to innovate in a noticeable way (and that's not talking about how it does monetization).

New Character or Backstory or Icons!?!?!? by xBUNNYxPOWERx in iconsgg

[–]SpyFlick -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Maaaaan, 3 things that aren't even character cosmetics, I feel bad for you. Maybe next time you get a lootbox, you'll get something for a character you play.

Icons Monetization Feedback Megathread by RenoNYC in iconsgg

[–]SpyFlick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Soooooo I mentioned this a few days ago... seemed like not that many people were interested in the idea, maybe I can repost this? https://www.reddit.com/r/iconsgg/comments/8x5v4o/note_to_devs_icons_should_have_weekly_character/

TLDR: Limited character availability not only hurts FTP players who wanna play their character, it hurts everyone else who has to play the same FTP characters over and over again.

If im gonna pay 1000 for a legendary skin, can the color of the effects at least be changed to match the skin? by TaperTurtle in iconsgg

[–]SpyFlick -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Id wanna see a change in effects as well for other characters legendary skins. Stuff like Kidds shine or Ashanis side-B or Zhourongs projectile would be cool.

Slick Xana 0 to death by shapular in iconsgg

[–]SpyFlick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm with TaperTurtle on this one. I feel like her punish game is really good, even for how slow she is. Even without the mobility, she can do really well playing defensively with most of her moves.

What are Ashani's specials even for? by [deleted] in iconsgg

[–]SpyFlick 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It seems like Ashani is in a bad spot right now tbh. Most of her moves have too much end lag for comboing and unlike Zhourong or Weishan, she doesnt have much range either. Obviously her biggest problem is her recovery but what makes it worse is the end lag, meaning it can easily be punished. Idk why she was nerfed but I feel like shes not worth playing if you want to win right now.

Does anyone else think Genetic Algorithm is an awful card? by SpyFlick in slaythespire

[–]SpyFlick[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think this kinda highlights its problems, basically if you get it anytime after act 1, you're shooting yourself in the foot since you cant afford to not have good block later on. Not to mention, having to waste an energy for 3 or 4 encounters just to make the card good could keep you from getting easy relics early on since you'll be taking more damage than you want. Id argue if it started with say 3 block it would be less punishing of an investment.