Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Once you've registered and completed email validation, you'll need to reply to the thread in The Welcome mat before you gain full access to the site.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
VS System 2PCG info released
Topic Started: May 27 2015, 12:20 AM (26,018 Views)
Mordis
Member Avatar
Regular
[ *  *  * ]
@BatHulk
I look forward to seeing what you and others come up with to possibly integrate the cards.

Honestly, it seems myopic on their part to have disregarded backwards compatibility so completely. New players wouldn't care about the numbers on the cards, and the (perceived) math issues of old would be alleviated by the removal of endurance. Now you'd only care about 'is my guy bigger than yours?' I understand the reasoning behind flattening the curve as a means to 'soften the blow' of missing a drop, but that undoubtedly could have been solved another way, primarily via set design. So it seems to me that keeping the old stat curve would only have helped sales by appealing to those players who wanted to add cards to their old VS. decks.

They are right to not want to support the old cards in the new game, but it seems like they threw out the baby with the bath water with that specific change.

You could argue that getting rid of the shared turn necessitated the flatter character curve, but that feels just like an easy solution, not necessarily the right one. While I'm on it, the shared turn was certainly tricky to grasp at first, but it quickly became second nature. I think just including an actual "Initiative Token" like a coin in the set to pass would have helped people grasp that concept, rather than just abstractly passing the initiative.

All moot points now obviously, and I do hope the new game is fun. But in the mean time, I look forward to the box of MHG and two boxes of MUV I just ordered.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
-TK-
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
BatHulk
Jun 2 2015, 12:20 AM
Either way, would it make you feel better if you realized that it's not personal... it's business.
That's what everyone keep telling me.

Problem is: I know.

This is not personal, to me. It's just a bad company getting bad review. It's part of the business.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OnyxWeapon
Member Avatar
Keeper of the Realm
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I'm not going to say anything. ill just quote jason Brenner's interview at gencon last year.

BatHulk
Jun 1 2015, 08:52 PM

Was there some type of promise that if you bought the "living card game" version at last year's GenCon you would get the same exact Vs you wanted in a future release?


The promise from Jason Brenner Himself that Vs System's engine would remain unchanged.

BatHulk
Jun 1 2015, 08:52 PM

I understand that may have been the expectation but I don't think buying last year's box set created some type of contract that UDE had to deliver on...
...I don't know if that makes them "worse", as it would be difficult to gauge demand for a game that had been discontinued 6 years prior.


The 2014 GenCon release is a test market to gauge interest on the project before deciding to go ahead.






Edited by OnyxWeapon, Jun 3 2015, 01:15 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KingKal
No Avatar
Member
[ *  * ]
OnyxWeapon
Jun 3 2015, 12:52 AM
I'm not going to say anything. ill just quote jason Brenner's interview at gencon last year.

BatHulk
Jun 1 2015, 08:52 PM

Was there some type of promise that if you bought the "living card game" version at last year's GenCon you would get the same exact Vs you wanted in a future release?


The promise from Jason Brenner Himself that Vs System's engine would remain unchanged.

BatHulk
Jun 1 2015, 08:52 PM

I understand that may have been the expectation but I don't think buying last year's box set created some type of contract that UDE had to deliver on...
...I don't know if that makes them "worse", as it would be difficult to gauge demand for a game that had been discontinued 6 years prior.


The 2014 GenCon release is a test market to gauge interest on the project before deciding to go ahead.






Game, Set, Match.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KardKrazy
Member Avatar
"'I've got a huge" Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
OnyxWeapon
Jun 3 2015, 12:52 AM
I'm not going to say anything. ill just quote jason Brenner's interview at gencon last year.

BatHulk
Jun 1 2015, 08:52 PM

Was there some type of promise that if you bought the "living card game" version at last year's GenCon you would get the same exact Vs you wanted in a future release?


The promise from Jason Brenner Himself that Vs System's engine would remain unchanged.

BatHulk
Jun 1 2015, 08:52 PM

I understand that may have been the expectation but I don't think buying last year's box set created some type of contract that UDE had to deliver on...
...I don't know if that makes them "worse", as it would be difficult to gauge demand for a game that had been discontinued 6 years prior.


The 2014 GenCon release is a test market to gauge interest on the project before deciding to go ahead.
Ouch...Jason put his foot in his mouth big time by making those statements then UDE turning around and doing what they did to the Vs engine.

In the end I've decided I'm going to Gen Con to play in the 10K (as it is only 12 hours up the road). However, I'm only going for the shot at the money. Not because I think this game is going to be amazing and as entertaining to me as Vs was. I've tried a few games over the past few years such as MtG and Hearthstone. While Hearthstone is the only one to keep my interest they both are boring as hell compared to Vs. Yes, yes, yes I realize I am the minority and that is why Vs was canceled to begin with (not enough people enjoyed/understood the engine). Lastly there is also the stigma of UDE being involved. I still despise the thought of supporting them but meh I'll give em $60 of my time and a Saturday for the shot at some $$.

Kj
Edited by KardKrazy, Jun 3 2015, 01:55 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BatHulk
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
@OnyxWeapon:

While Jason Brenner did say (not sure it was a "promise") it is going to be the same Vs Engine, I don't see where he said that if you buy the set at last GenCon, that it would guarantee that, which is what TK seemed to be alluding to.

Additionally, testing the market to gauge interest still doesn't imply they made money on that sale last year, nor does it mean that they aren't allowed to make changes to the game engine.

Devils' Advocate:

What if after that interview, after GenCon 2014, Jason Brenner got feedback that the game was still too difficult and inaccessible? That when he contracted with the designers, consulted whoever was involved with the Vs project, it was a consensus that the engine needed to be changed? That the test to "gauge interest" showed that the product would still have a limited player base in its current form?

Does Jason say "But I said in the interview that it would be the same!" and then override everyone else involved with the project?

Like I said... that's business. Sales people promise things all the time, but then when it comes down to implementation and development, they realize that what they wanted to deliver and the reality don't match up. Of course it may hurt prospects, but they will explain that they can't deliver feature X because of reason Y and either the prospect understands and decides to purchase anyways, or they walk.

If this was a Kickstarter and you guys funded it on the premise that the Vs engine would stay the same, there would be more to this. But it wasn't, no one has given money to UDE to develop this VS 2PCG (and despite what some may think, the money spent on last year's GenCon sets paid for those sets not the one that is coming out).

And there is a risk UDE is going to run... for all of you who wanted the same engine, you won't buy it and UDE will be stuck, so it's the same as if they never revived it. But for those of us who can deal with the changes and want to see Vs even if it means a compromise in the game engine, we'll spend the money willingly.

Again, I ask any of you, if you were in charge of UDE and this were the 2 scenarios:

A. Keep the engine the same, to serve the minority and limit your sales.

B. Update the engine to bring in potentially more gamers and a larger future player base and expand your sales.

Which one do you choose? As a Vs 1.0 gamer, of course you lean towards A, but if you want the game to succeed... you really have to go with B.

I don't know how else to explain that this is a positive for Vs. That these changes may help the game last beyond this first set. We won't really know until it is out, but we do know one thing... the old Vs 1.0 engine was not viable, or else it would have never been discontinued.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KardKrazy
Member Avatar
"'I've got a huge" Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
BatHulk
Jun 3 2015, 03:46 PM
Which one do you choose?
Neither...I wouldn't have called it Vs :P (much less 2PCG...were they really struggling that bad with a name). The route I would have gone was that I would have simply advertised it as a new game that has it's roots of design from the Vs engine but it is not Vs. I would have made that last part very clear. Because as much as we all here loved Vs, in the end it was a failure. Was it solely because of the engine? I personally don't think so. I think UDE's handling of the game from beginning to end caused problems for the longevity of the game. While that may seem to be a moot point at this time it isn't because, well, who's making the new game and handling it? UDE is.

I get it BatHulk. You're a optimistic individual and that is a good trait man. I'm normally pretty darn sprite and positive myself. But with UDE and how things went with Vs at the end and the flip floppy nature this game is starting out with I'm a little hesitant to be all happy go lucky with it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
-TK-
No Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
BatHulk
Jun 3 2015, 03:46 PM
I don't know how else to explain that this is a positive for Vs.
And I really don't know how to explain this anymore. This is not VS System, so what's good for VS here? Nothing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
minivan987
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
@BatHulk

I think the best way to get you to understand the other side here is to imagine a world where they did not call this new game VS at all. This new game has been dubbed "VS:2PCG" or whatever by upper deck currently but what would be yours and others responses if they just called it say... "Character Battles" the first one could be "Marvel Character Battles"

Would the game still be on your radar? Would you still be saying these same sorts of things indicating "VS is back and it's better than ever"? It seems from our perspective that you believe the name VS is synonymous with basically the IP involved and loosely the rules to the game don't matter so much as long as character cards get to like attack one another. So as -TK- has mentioned were you excited about Marvel Ultimate Battles in a similar way? Was VS just a new and improved "Overpower"?

Would these same people on the other side of the fence be as mad if they hadn't named this VS? If they had just sent a messenger a little earlier to say hey sorry guys we took a look and it just doesn't work for us this is what we've ended up with instead it has some similarities and is a spiritual successor to VS but it's too different to try and call VS again.

As you seem to understand at some point along the way they sat down with design and management and looked at what went wrong with the original game and decided if they went down this road again with effectively the exact same rules even after resetting the card pool and perhaps making only minor changes to the engine the result would be the same as before. The player base would not grow as it needs to, the game would be too hard/complicated/inaccessible, and it would die off again and not actually be a profitable venture for the company. So it was decided to go in another direction to try and make it work. They changed things about the engine, major sweeping changes to try and make the game play better simpler in some ways and be more accessible and avoid some of the pitfalls of the original system. In the end they ended up with something that was sort of a spiritual successor but a ton of things changed including the win condition and basically the only things that were kept was kind of the resource system, kind of the formation step, and kind of combat between characters, and kind of you still draw two cards a turn.

Now at this point what is there to do? The engine is flat out not the same and this is not that close to what they had their PR folks indicate to the public previously. They sit back down in the big meeting room again and have the discussion. "Do we go ahead and still call it VS or not? Some people are gonna be pretty pissed this isn't close to the same" (Mandel quite literally indicates and acknowledges he understands this in the game rules primer/FAQ thing) I suppose they all might have determined that they thought they'd came to a middle ground by adding on the 2PCG part to try and differentiate it from the original engine while also still indicating some connection back to original VS. This largely I imagine was decided for 2 reasons (1) They thought this still might be good enough to placate some folks left in the original community and (2) Why throw away the name and possible brand recognition that comes with it just because of the small leftover community who is still hanging around a decade later that may feel you're just trying to dupe them.

I'm not going to say that the design and marketing folks didn't end up in a no win situation with the original player base. But maybe as KardKrazy says, perhaps the best course would have been to just apologize and say "sorry guys we tried, this isn't VS so we're calling it this other thing but it's kind of close". In some capacity that is also what Mandel wrote there at the end as well but that "apology" is likely a little too veiled for some and perhaps it may have just arrived too late for others. Some people however will still just be too fixated on reason 2 for the naming decision above.
Edited by minivan987, Jun 3 2015, 06:51 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BatHulk
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
KardKrazy
Jun 3 2015, 04:24 PM
Neither...I wouldn't have called it Vs :P (much less 2PCG...were they really struggling that bad with a name). The route I would have gone was that I would have simply advertised it as a new game that has it's roots of design from the Vs engine but it is not Vs. I would have made that last part very clear. Because as much as we all here loved Vs, in the end it was a failure.
Yes, but they are communicating that it is changed.

Not sure how that is much different than calling it something like "Fight, with roots in Vs". Wasn't that what Marvel Superstars (Ultimate Battles?) was? Heh.

To me, I would rather it call it Vs 2.0 as it will retain a large portion of the Vs engine, rather than call it a new name altogether.
Quote:
 

Was it solely because of the engine? I personally don't think so.

I know this has been argued about infinitely but I really do believe inaccessibility of the engine was largely the cause. UDE offered a $1m Pro Circuit, $10k events and tons of OP support, yet their numbers at these events were less than Pokemon and YGO that offered almost zero monetary prizing.

I helped TO the largest YGO events in the country, and I couldn't believe how many people showed up just to get a playmat and a box, where my Vs events would barely have any players but you could win $250.

And the demographics were so much different, hardly any kids played Vs... very few casual players. You had to invest a lot of time and money in order to make Vs worth it... and the tournaments were a grind (why do you think they went to one-game format?).
Quote:
 

I think UDE's handling of the game from beginning to end caused problems for the longevity of the game.

Everyone says that but that really is more the end times reflecting on the overall experience. I've been to the $10ks, went to the San Fran PC, and it was amazing how much UDE spent on those events. It's like how people say that UDE never advertised the game but there was a Vs System ad in almost every comic book I read the first year Vs was out.

Even in the end, I was still getting hobby kits and release day kits for my store tournaments. That's 5+ years of OP support. I remember when other players were saying that their stores were not getting kits and I asked if their store owners ordered them and I got silence back. So many of these issues had to deal with their stores, not with UDE, but of course UDE got blamed for all of it.

Does anyone remember that during the dying days of Vs, UDE still gave us City Championship events? They even gave us one last big tournament in SoCal (maybe that's why I'm biased).
Quote:
 

While that may seem to be a moot point at this time it isn't because, well, who's making the new game and handling it? UDE is.

I understand this sentiment. But who would know better about the pitfalls and problems than UDE? Just like they are trying to improve on the game engine, don't you think they would also like to improve on the OP and other things?

Quite honestly, I think a $10k event is too much. There is no way UDE is going to recoup the costs on that. But to me that's a sign that they want people to try this new game. What other company is offering a $10k event at GenCon for a "new" card game?
Quote:
 

I get it BatHulk. You're a optimistic individual and that is a good trait man. I'm normally pretty darn sprite and positive myself. But with UDE and how things went with Vs at the end and the flip floppy nature this game is starting out with I'm a little hesitant to be all happy go lucky with it.

I understand that too. But it's a catch 22. If people don't buy and support the game, this will be it, one set and done. But if we get mass appeal, a large casual following and dedicated tourney "pros"... this could lead to more sets and even a DC license.

I guess one reason I'm still optimistic is Legendary is still getting support and expansions from UDE so I can see VS2PCG following the same route... mini expansions and standalone expansions. And like Legendary, getting non-Marvel IP. Isn't that something to look forward to?

Man... I seriously think stubarnes hijacked my account.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BatHulk
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
@minivan:

Great post.

But had they renamed it to something else but still said it had Vs roots, to KardKrazy's credit, I would still be excited about it.

But I would have also probably said, why not just name it Vs 2.0, instead of Marvel Fight/Battles/FaceSmash?

I just don't see why naming it Vs:2PCG is that bad.

Let's flip it... say UDE did come out and say they couldn't release Vs in its original form, but they decided to create a new game that has elements of Vs and they are calling it Marvel KickButt. Would some of you still be upset? Upset that they didn't release Vs as "promised" maybe... but would the name change really matter all that much?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BatHulk
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
-TK-
Jun 3 2015, 04:52 PM
BatHulk
Jun 3 2015, 03:46 PM
I don't know how else to explain that this is a positive for Vs.
And I really don't know how to explain this anymore. This is not VS System, so what's good for VS here? Nothing.
Technically, Vs is whatever UDE decides what it is.

This may not be good for Vs System 1.0, but to me (and maybe just me), this is good for a new Vs community... which may or may not include Vs System 1.0 loyalists.

I still think it may be good for Vs System 1.0, people might play the 2PCG game and want more and they may look for the original game (sort of like what I did when Vs first came out, Majestix showed me the original Wildstorm cards). Or, people like me, might figure out a way to play the new cards with the original engine (or vice versa).

So you won't be going to the $10k?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KardKrazy
Member Avatar
"'I've got a huge" Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
BatHulk
Jun 3 2015, 06:39 PM
Quite honestly, I think a $10k event is too much. There is no way UDE is going to recoup the costs on that. But to me that's a sign that they want people to try this new game. What other company is offering a $10k event at GenCon for a "new" card game?
You make all valid points BatHulk but in the end I just feel like UDE did a piss poor job at handling the game. One of the cases being that, which you brought up, they simply threw too much money at the game. They wanted to compete with MtG and Yu-Gi-Oh from day one. That was madness if I have ever seen it. Looking back I feel like they should have gone about being more gradual with the game and tournaments. But in the end it's all said and done. Nothing we can do about it now.

However, I do want to point out one thing (the part I quoted in particular). The actual $10K will pay for itself if they have 167 players. At that point, 167 boxes will have been sold plus $10 per entry. That breaks $10K. If they fill all 250 seats for the tournament, which I will be shocked if they don't, will equal out to $15,000 generated by the tournament. I think $10K events three to four times a year is along the lines of what they should have done the first time around. Enough to interest people in playing competitively but not enough to bankrupt the game. Like I've already stated, I'm actually only going to GenCon just for Saturday and just to play in the tourney because it is a 10K. If the money to be won wasn't as much as it is I wouldn't even bother buying a box until others that I am close to and 100% trust their judgement bought a box and gave me their opinion on the game.
Edited by KardKrazy, Jun 3 2015, 07:12 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BatHulk
Member Avatar
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
KardKrazy
Jun 3 2015, 07:10 PM
However, I do want to point out one thing (the part I quoted in particular). The actual $10K will pay for itself if they have 167 players. At that point, 167 boxes will have been sold plus $10 per entry. That breaks $10K. If they fill all 250 seats for the tournament, which I will be shocked if they don't, will equal out to $15,000 generated by the tournament.
Not sure your math is right.

You forgot to factor in product costs, venue costs, staffing costs and prizing costs.

They will have to sell all 250 seats and even at that, there will still probably be a loss.

When was the last time there were 250 players at a Vs tournament? How many have you guys been getting at the Worlds that were held by VsOrg?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KardKrazy
Member Avatar
"'I've got a huge" Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
BatHulk
Jun 3 2015, 07:31 PM
When was the last time there were 250 players at a Vs tournament?
But it's not a Vs Tournament. [grin]

Sorry man...I just had to :P.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Marvel Comics Character Images, Character Names and Card Text Copyright 2009 Marvel Characters Ltd. and/or Upper Deck Entertainment, LLC. DC Comics Character Images, Character Names and Card Text Copyright 2009 DC Characters Ltd. and/or Upper Deck Entertainment, LLC.