Nerd Reactor's Interview with Magic: Puzzle Quest Designer, JC Frenette
Comments
-
Regarding the interview, its not a problem if an hour or 5 minutes were spent designing a card...
I am more interested to know the process after the initial design... How much play testing is involved to get a feel of how the card plays with others? To see if its too strong or too weak? Also have there ever been cards that were changed from the initial design after play testing?
@Hibernum_JC maybe you should shed a little bit more light on the process.
3 -
Ohboy said:EDHdad said:Or possibly Shteev and the interviewee are the same person.
Shteev being JC makes a lot of sense suddenly.
I'm smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that he is not.
1 -
This is... So just... I can't even. I have had a hobby of designing cards for several years now, and this is just absurd. How in the world do you think the feeling of -1/-1 counters will translate well and have the similar feeling and intent as in paper? The whole bit about intent is great! In theory at least. I'm sire if someone knew what they were doing and actually cared it'd turn out great in practice. I'm sure literally every member in the community could do better.0
-
I'm imagining what would happen in paper if Mark Rosewater released an interview like that.
2 -
shteev said:Ohboy said:EDHdad said:Or possibly Shteev and the interviewee are the same person.
Shteev being JC makes a lot of sense suddenly.
I'm smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that he is not.
You forgot humble.
You're a million times more humble than he is. That arrogant ****.2 -
The most disturbing thing that has not been mentioned is that he literally took all of the credit himself. "I design cards...", "how I believe they translate...". etc. I mean honestly, if the process is that this highly casual player is the stand alone designer then Hibernum should be fired. If he is part of a team, then perhaps he shouldn't be such an "arrogant ****" and actually talk about how the team designs cards. Even if he is on an island he would serve himself well to talk as if he were part of a team effort. .1
-
@Hibernum_JC thank you for giving us some insight into the card-design process. Everyone knows it's not an easy job.
You interview does raise some important issues, though. Namely QA and testing and having someone that understands the game and how cards interact with each other involved in the process.
Part of the reason for so many negative responses is that it seems a bit tone-deaf to brag about how little thought you put into the design process when there are so many "unforeseen" issues with cards.
I had assumed that it was multiple people designing the cards and that lack of communication between team members was causing a lack of continuity. To learn that there is one person totally responsible for all of the cards makes me sad. To learn that there is very little feedback from actual players makes me despondent.
You have a rich resource of enthusiastic players here that would be more than happy to help you review things (and spot "broken" combos before they make it to market).
We want to help you make a successful game and we are nervous about the future.
From the lack of meaningful prizes to the lack of care involved with testing, this whole operation feels like major decisions are being made without regard to playability and that's very frustrating.8 -
babar3355 said:The most disturbing thing that has not been mentioned is that he literally took all of the credit himself. "I design cards...", "how I believe they translate...". etc. I mean honestly, if the process is that this highly casual player is the stand alone designer then Hibernum should be fired. If he is part of a team, then perhaps he shouldn't be such an "arrogant ****" and actually talk about how the team designs cards. Even if he is on an island he would serve himself well to talk as if he were part of a team effort. .
Whoa! No need for indirect attacks. A quick review of his linkedin shows he has a decent amount of experience in the industry, and he likely does exactly what he says in the interview (why lie?). Also, he has shown a decent amount of character whenever he pops in the forums, so why all the hate?2 -
A flawed process does not mean a flawed person. I'm as critical as any non-Shteev around here, but there's no need to spew venom.
3 -
I also want to point out that Shaharazad is an absolutely miserable card to actually play with / against. Sure it is cute the first time or two, but after that it becomes onerous. It is exactly the sort of "too clever, designer self pleasuring" thing that should be avoided at all costs if you want to make a game that people actually enjoy playing.
Basically this entire interview leaves me concerned that @Hibernum_JC is completely out of touch with both the playerbase of the game he is designing and paper magic, though it does explain most of the questionable decisions that have been made recently.
It really feels at this point that MTGPQ is mostly being propped up by the brilliant design work of WotC, but even then is being poorly translated over.1 -
khurram said:@Azerack Sky sovereign and Heart of Kiran aren't OP. It may appear that way because the PvE events using them have tons of Mana which makes it seem like casting them is a piece of cake. Gonti and Baral have been reworked.
I'm just saying that the current release plan seems a tad flawed if they aren't being playtested before or during the forum responses to the card preview sheet. Veteran players called these long before they went into Live game and yet nothing was done about them until well AFTER they went live.
1 -
I just want to add - what he does might have led to some problems, but most cards actually come out well / okay designed. Like the Lone Rider, in my opinion one of the most interesting and best designed cards (should maybe be rare, tbh).
Also thanks to @Sarahschmara to point out the issue in a very constructive way!
2 -
The pros:
- Very interesting to hear about the design proces, and whilst we might not like it, It does make sense to "budget" cards based on their rarity to ensue comparable power.
It is actually not that different from how paper magic is designed, if they are making a common 3/3, the base cost is 2G for instance. Add on flying and the cost should be 3G. That is their starting point, afterwards costs are adjusted, and likewise cards of a higher rarity has more leeway in how they are budgetted. You will almost never see a 3/3 flier for 2G at common, but a rare 3/3 flier for 2G would not be out of the ordinary. So in that respect it quite fits. Also it is a good starting point for comparing cards and for trying to determine apropriate mana costs.
Lets say the same flier draws a card when it enter the battlefield. That effect costs 1½ mana, so the designer of the card knows the correct cost is likely to add 1 coloured mana for a rare, or 2 colourless mana for a common/uncommon. The end result would be a 3/3 flier that draws a card when it enters the battlefield, for 2GU. (Would be a really good card actually! At uncommon a 3GU with same stats is also really really solid)
- The recent set seems well designed, and being a paper player is a huge bonus. So he is doing something right, and seems to be getting better at balancing cards. If it really is only one person doing it, he is doing a pretty good job all things considered.
Cons:
- 1 person
I seriously hope this isn't true! I was expected at least a team on the job, and you really need more than one person to ensure that each card gets more than 1 hour of time put into it, and that there is a chance of multiple points of view to help spot broken mechanics. There are so many players here who would GLADLY help you design new sets for free, if you really only want to pay for 1 person, then at least allow us to contribute, maybe have some players volunteer to give feedback on early drafts of the set, or set up a beta client to help test the new set!
- Spreadsheet
No, just no. I am hoping this sounds worse than it is, but you cannot simply put cards into a math equation and expect things to work out. Cards do not operate in a vacuum and you need to consider the hundreds of interactions that can occur!
- Budget for commons and uncommon
While I agree that the cost of stats should be different, based on rarity, I really dislike the notion that there is a limit to their power and toughness based on said rarity. Paper magic does feature huge 8/9 trample dudes at common! Powerful, but maybe overpriced, commons are important to your game because it allows newer players to have a stepping stone. Origins seemed to do this quite well, with some commons being at least playable, even if you knew there were rares that were objectively more powerful.
It's fine for a common 8/8 trample to cost 20 mana, but at least give players the option of having something besides 4/4's. Paper magic does this, and it only benefits the game. No player with better alternatives is going to use that 8/8, so you are not losing anything by it. A person is not going to say "I wont buy Baral, I have my common 8/8!", but it vastly improves the experience of the new player.
Again, Amonkhet seems to do a lot of things right in this regard, with 4/4s for 7 at common, and arguably the best removal in the set also being common, however the self-imposed limits also show.
Finally it should be mentioned that We are worried about this interview because We want the game to be as good as possible. So for the love of god, if You don't have a team working on new sets, use the players! Heck, I would gladly assist in converting the paper set to digital equivalents for free! And I am sure I am not the only one that would gladly help you out.
7 -
JC's previous interview regarding Aether Revolt can be found here and his interview regarding Battle for Zendikar is here.2
-
Steeme said:babar3355 said:The most disturbing thing that has not been mentioned is that he literally took all of the credit himself. "I design cards...", "how I believe they translate...". etc. I mean honestly, if the process is that this highly casual player is the stand alone designer then Hibernum should be fired. If he is part of a team, then perhaps he shouldn't be such an "arrogant ****" and actually talk about how the team designs cards. Even if he is on an island he would serve himself well to talk as if he were part of a team effort. .
Whoa! No need for indirect attacks. A quick review of his linkedin shows he has a decent amount of experience in the industry, and he likely does exactly what he says in the interview (why lie?). Also, he has shown a decent amount of character whenever he pops in the forums, so why all the hate?
0 -
shteev said:Steeme said:babar3355 said:The most disturbing thing that has not been mentioned is that he literally took all of the credit himself. "I design cards...", "how I believe they translate...". etc. I mean honestly, if the process is that this highly casual player is the stand alone designer then Hibernum should be fired. If he is part of a team, then perhaps he shouldn't be such an "arrogant ****" and actually talk about how the team designs cards. Even if he is on an island he would serve himself well to talk as if he were part of a team effort. .
Whoa! No need for indirect attacks. A quick review of his linkedin shows he has a decent amount of experience in the industry, and he likely does exactly what he says in the interview (why lie?). Also, he has shown a decent amount of character whenever he pops in the forums, so why all the hate?
1 -
Matthew said:shteev said:Steeme said:babar3355 said:The most disturbing thing that has not been mentioned is that he literally took all of the credit himself. "I design cards...", "how I believe they translate...". etc. I mean honestly, if the process is that this highly casual player is the stand alone designer then Hibernum should be fired. If he is part of a team, then perhaps he shouldn't be such an "arrogant ****" and actually talk about how the team designs cards. Even if he is on an island he would serve himself well to talk as if he were part of a team effort. .
Whoa! No need for indirect attacks. A quick review of his linkedin shows he has a decent amount of experience in the industry, and he likely does exactly what he says in the interview (why lie?). Also, he has shown a decent amount of character whenever he pops in the forums, so why all the hate?
0 -
Thuran said:The pros:
- Very interesting to hear about the design proces, and whilst we might not like it, It does make sense to "budget" cards based on their rarity to ensue comparable power.
It is actually not that different from how paper magic is designed, if they are making a common 3/3, the base cost is 2G for instance. Add on flying and the cost should be 3G. That is their starting point, afterwards costs are adjusted, and likewise cards of a higher rarity has more leeway in how they are budgetted. You will almost never see a 3/3 flier for 2G at common, but a rare 3/3 flier for 2G would not be out of the ordinary. So in that respect it quite fits. Also it is a good starting point for comparing cards and for trying to determine apropriate mana costs.
Lets say the same flier draws a card when it enter the battlefield. That effect costs 1½ mana, so the designer of the card knows the correct cost is likely to add 1 coloured mana for a rare, or 2 colourless mana for a common/uncommon. The end result would be a 3/3 flier that draws a card when it enters the battlefield, for 2GU. (Would be a really good card actually! At uncommon a 3GU with same stats is also really really solid)
In paper magic the main reason for this is for limited (which is completely absent from MTGPQ). Commons can be (and have to be) lower power in general because they make up ~70% of the cards in a limited pool, and probably about 50% of the cards in your deck. Commons that are total garbage for constructed are limited staples (or even powerhouses). There are very few commons / uncommons that are actually intended to be playable in constructed and those tend to be spot removal, counters, utility spells, and cards that have good synergy with the rares / mythics. On the other side of this, the reason that rares and mythics can be significantly above the general power curve (and masterpieces can be in packs despite being broken good) is because they are only a small part of limited. On average you will get 3 rares in draft, and 6 in sealed. And they may not even fit in your deck. Many games of limited are played without you ever seeing a rare.
In MTGPQ there is no limited. Garbage commons are just that, garbage. They are only usable when you are a new player, once you get some good cards, you will never touch more than half of the cards in the game again. When a new set comes out, you will not ever use more than half the cards in it. Well, you may use it for the mastery points, but then you won't use it again. Cards like Festering Mummy, Giant Spider, In Oketra's Name, Scribe of the Mindful, Sunscorched Desert, and Tah-Crop Skirmisher (to name a few) contribute nothing to the game for enfranchised players. Could they be better balanced to actually be useful in niche decks or for objectives, or at least have reasonable costs for what little they do? Absolutely! But they wont be, because the point "rarity = power" isn't about balance in MTGPQ, it's about money. The more garbage they include in the sets, the more money you have to spend to get anything good out of it.
The rarity budget is also a completely different way of balancing for rarity than MtG. In MtG, for 1R at common you will get a 2/1 creature. At uncommon you will get a 2/1 creature. At rare you will probably get a 2/1 creature, maybe a 2/2. At mythic you will get a 2/1 or a 2/2. You will get varying abilitied on those creatures, but the cost to stats ratio is very tightly fixed, and it's rare to see cards wander outside of that by more than 1 point without some sort of downside or condition (though it will happen occasionally, especially on multicolor cards). If you look at the most efficient creatures ever printed in older formats, there are some commons (Delver of Secrets, Gurmag Angler), and uncommons (Young Pyromancer, Monastery Swiftspear) among them.
0 -
shteev said:Matthew said:shteev said:Steeme said:babar3355 said:The most disturbing thing that has not been mentioned is that he literally took all of the credit himself. "I design cards...", "how I believe they translate...". etc. I mean honestly, if the process is that this highly casual player is the stand alone designer then Hibernum should be fired. If he is part of a team, then perhaps he shouldn't be such an "arrogant ****" and actually talk about how the team designs cards. Even if he is on an island he would serve himself well to talk as if he were part of a team effort. .
Whoa! No need for indirect attacks. A quick review of his linkedin shows he has a decent amount of experience in the industry, and he likely does exactly what he says in the interview (why lie?). Also, he has shown a decent amount of character whenever he pops in the forums, so why all the hate?
I learnt from the barely adequate.1 -
shteev said:Steeme said:babar3355 said:The most disturbing thing that has not been mentioned is that he literally took all of the credit himself. "I design cards...", "how I believe they translate...". etc. I mean honestly, if the process is that this highly casual player is the stand alone designer then Hibernum should be fired. If he is part of a team, then perhaps he shouldn't be such an "arrogant ****" and actually talk about how the team designs cards. Even if he is on an island he would serve himself well to talk as if he were part of a team effort. .
Whoa! No need for indirect attacks. A quick review of his linkedin shows he has a decent amount of experience in the industry, and he likely does exactly what he says in the interview (why lie?). Also, he has shown a decent amount of character whenever he pops in the forums, so why all the hate?It's apparent you take me for a nitwit. That's fine, I suppose you are entitled to your "beliefs".
But let it be known, it's quite clear which posts are inflammatory and which ones are genuine. I'll just leave it at that.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 44.8K Marvel Puzzle Quest
- 1.5K MPQ News and Announcements
- 20.3K MPQ General Discussion
- 3K MPQ Tips and Guides
- 2K MPQ Character Discussion
- 171 MPQ Supports Discussion
- 2.5K MPQ Events, Tournaments, and Missions
- 2.8K MPQ Alliances
- 6.3K MPQ Suggestions and Feedback
- 6.2K MPQ Bugs and Technical Issues
- 13.6K Magic: The Gathering - Puzzle Quest
- 508 MtGPQ News & Announcements
- 5.4K MtGPQ General Discussion
- 99 MtGPQ Tips & Guides
- 424 MtGPQ Deck Strategy & Planeswalker Discussion
- 299 MtGPQ Events
- 60 MtGPQ Coalitions
- 1.2K MtGPQ Suggestions & Feedback
- 5.7K MtGPQ Bugs & Technical Issues
- 548 Other 505 Go Inc. Games
- 21 Puzzle Quest: The Legend Returns
- 5 Adventure Gnome
- 6 Word Designer: Country Home
- 381 Other Games
- 142 General Discussion
- 239 Off Topic
- 7 505 Go Inc. Forum Rules
- 7 Forum Rules and Site Announcements