PDA

View Full Version : Three Campaigns? That's all?



Viridel48
09-20-2013, 12:21 AM
Unlike many users, I don't give a flying crap about multiplayer... But I know there are plenty of us campaign-only players out there. Having this component so completely underdeveloped is a massive slap in the face to those who have taken the time to learn the game, and were expecting at least a legitimate single-player experience.

Booooo :mad:

dale533
09-20-2013, 05:17 AM
IMO, the campaign is there for the sole purpose of teaching you about the card play. Since this is the first card game I have ever played, I appreciate it.

BTW, if you have not played the HOMM series, you should try them. They do have campaigns as well as a variety of single player maps. I played HOMM V for well more than a year without getting tired of it -- primarily because of all the fan made maps. HOMM VI did not last as long for me, but it did have half decent campaigns.

Viridel48
09-20-2013, 05:34 AM
BTW, if you have not played the HOMM series, you should try them. They do have campaigns as well as a variety of single player maps. I played HOMM V for well more than a year without getting tired of it -- primarily because of all the fan made maps. HOMM VI did not last as long for me, but it did have half decent campaigns.

I've been playing Heroes since the first one (which was a dud), but the series came into its own on the second and especially 3rd editions. I've been playing the M&M RPGs since #2 - which was what, 25 years ago. The common factor of thew entire M&M series - stellar single-player play. I don't particularly like the latest versions of the Heroes series' as the required time investment has gone from reasonable to absurd.

dale533
09-20-2013, 08:47 AM
The M&M series were also very good as you say. They did not have the map editor such as Heroes did, but were great games in their time -- as were many other RPG games.

Revalon
09-20-2013, 02:57 PM
If I would get 1€ everytime someone complains that a multi player game does not have a gigantic single player part, I would never need to work anymore.
But since it's not like that, would you please stop whining and start playing single player games if you want a single player game.

Viridel48
09-20-2013, 06:26 PM
If I would get 1 everytime someone complains that a multi player game does not have a gigantic single player part, I would never need to work anymore.

And if I had a $1 every time some elitist multi-player snot made a snide self-serving comment, I would own the world. People like you are the REASON I don't play multi-player.

Gladders1980
09-21-2013, 09:34 AM
Its a multiplayer game, I grow tired of single player games having a multi-player component as an after thought and usually a shoddy experience because of it. But you know what I do if I find that? I don't play the game.

Revalon
09-21-2013, 09:35 AM
And if I had a $1 every time some elitist multi-player snot made a snide self-serving comment, I would own the world. People like you are the REASON I don't play multi-player.

You're absolutely wrong about me.
I'm a big fan of single player games, I'm far from being elitist and absolutely want to have a friendly and respectful environment in the multi player games I play which aren't very many I play actively, wishing my opponents luck and fun in about every game, congratulating him on winning even when I'm absolutely frustrated about the match.
I simply expect people to understand that the internet is mainly for communication, which contains multy player games rather than single player. This game is based on competition, on facing others in duels, not in doing your own thing without ever having to care about others except for maybe seeing what they are doing.
If that's not what you want, that's ok, but don't blame the game for being what it's meant to be.

Viridel48
09-21-2013, 05:27 PM
The point is, why have a campaign mode at all then? Why put in the programming effort to have that component included, but then half-*** it up with such a lack of follow-up effort. The campaign dialog is a joke, so that couldn't have taken more than 10-15 minutes to write. The art is already in place. The only thing that needs to be done is build the deck for each opponent. Yes, this will take a marginal amount of time, but let's be realistic here - there have been more expansion packs than campaign modules, yet the time "expense" for expansions absolutely dwarfs the time expense to build a deck. This is an intentional decision by Ubi to disregard that area of the game - in spite of the framework already existing. Considering the HM&M franchise is primarily built around the single player experience, and M&M is (obviously) built entirely around single-player play, one would think more respect would be given to these gamers and the legacy of the franchise(s).

Revalon
09-21-2013, 06:53 PM
I don't know if that what is there has been since the beginning of the game, but i guess it was.
The main purpose of the campaign is to lead new players, showing them the general mechanics of the game and providing them with some stuff without just giving it to them for free.
And while I really liked the campaign and would love to have more of it, I think the biggest amount of work should be put into making the multi player experience enjoyable, finding and fixing bugs, working on the balance and so on. For me, and I'm mostly playing single player games as I said, that has absolute priority, while the single player mode is a bonus, but nothing that should be taken as an argument against a multi player game if it's not as you want it.
When the game is working well in the main region, which is multi player, then they can put some real effort in the single player campaign, but they should not do both, where both would suffer.

Viridel48
09-21-2013, 10:23 PM
...When the game is working well in the main region, which is multi player, then they can put some real effort in the single player campaign, but they should not do both, where both would suffer.

Best reply so far. My issue with this is that the resources required to advance the campaign side of things would be minimal-to-none (using community driven missions, there's no Ubi resource requirement). It's like saying if you're writing an essay, you can't afford the time to hit F7 to spell-check. The work is already there and done - it just needs to be utilized.

Revalon
09-21-2013, 11:15 PM
Well, missions constructed by the community would be a nice thing, but there has to be some test playing to make sure it's neither too simple for the high level players nor too hard for the new ones.
With the already existing missions it was easy, since you could expect people to be on the same level when they tried the campaign, but now I guess it's not that easy to get missions beatable for beginners but not just some effortless free gold/seals/xp for those playing since the beginning.

But we will never know why exactly it doesn't come unless the devs say something about it.

MadJesh
09-28-2013, 11:32 AM
You're absolutely wrong about me.
I'm a big fan of single player games, I'm far from being elitist and absolutely want to have a friendly and respectful environment in the multi player games I play which aren't very many I play actively, wishing my opponents luck and fun in about every game, congratulating him on winning even when I'm absolutely frustrated about the match.
I simply expect people to understand that the internet is mainly for communication, which contains multy player games rather than single player. This game is based on competition, on facing others in duels, not in doing your own thing without ever having to care about others except for maybe seeing what they are doing.
If that's not what you want, that's ok, but don't blame the game for being what it's meant to be.

Can I barge in even though I'm inexperienced? :D
I agree with this guy. I was also complaining BEFORE why it only have 3 campaigns. But it was better playing off with single fights against other players because you get to see various plays and strategies. You get to train your "fast hand" capability for the Swiss Tourney too.

If there would be new campaigns every.. let's say at least every 2 patches.. then the other new guys will just farm the gold/seals on single campaigns. I know the other long-time players can still try the new campaigns but.. don't you think that it's quite unfair that the newcomers will have the best start with more freebies compare to the long-registered players?

Yeah I'm having difficulty gaining the cards that I need, but I'm a free-player, so I need to abide by the game's rules. Just stating my opinion/view about the game, so please I don't want any arguments. XD

Xandrios
09-29-2013, 09:40 AM
You'd have to come up with a way for them to monetize the singleplayer experience, I think people are unlikely to buy more seals for card after having been defeated by Shaar-bot. Although it would be amusing if the bots sported all of the latest expansion cards to make the player jealous. Maybe if they released a new campaign that you'd have to unlock with seals?

titusthefox
11-12-2013, 07:03 AM
From my point of view as a paying player I would just like to say that yes, I want more campaign. I get that it's multiplayer and I hope those who play multiplayer often have fun playing it, but if there is no more campaign then I will be taking my money elsewhere. Not to be some kind of snob or elitist or whatever, it's just how it is for me. I prefer playing a campaign.

In the grand scheme of thing I'm sure it doesn't matter to the developers to loose one customer, I'm just explaining my reasoning for leaving is all incase it does matter to them.

S9TF1
11-12-2013, 09:27 PM
From a developer's point of view, I think new campaigns could be used as a viable mean to gather players' interest to the other factions. Let's say you are a new Haven/Inferno/Necropolis player, and you want to try out a new deck, but you are unsure whether you'll like it or not. A campaign with a premade Stronghold/Sanctuary/Accademy deck would allow you to discover these factions' playstiles without buying them first.

As an added benefit, if the campaign's missions were each focused on a different challenge for the players to overcome, then they would also learn some userful strategies to better play their new deck.

titusthefox
11-13-2013, 07:42 AM
I think a lot of player would also like to be able to play non-ranked games and still earn XP, gold and seals and having more campaign missions and maybe making them replayable with dimished rewards might help with that. Some minor rewards for playing against friends too would be nice, but overall I think the campaign is a good way to go.

My impression of it is that it wasn't ment to end yet, so maybe if's something the devs will add inn later?

Xerxes_Aragon
12-06-2013, 09:34 PM
I'll add another vote for more campaigns. I've been playing Magic The Gathering - Tactics on Steam for a while, and just recently came to M&M Champions. On MTG - Tactics well over 99% of my time was spent playing the purchased campaigns and replaying the daily campaigns. I've only played a very, very few head-to-head games because, admittedly, I'm a pretty lousy deck builder. Losing repeatedly to an AI opponent is less traumatic than repeatedly losing to a real life opponent. I'm sure the same will turn out to be true for M&M Champions, and my ranking will remain near the bottom of the pile. By having more campaigns, and having them replayable for at least some minor payoff like MTG - Tactics, I'm more likely to give this game more of a chance, especially since Tactics is being phased out at the end of March.
C'mon Ubi! Get a clue from the Wizards and give us solitary players more!

svilleneuve
12-06-2013, 10:06 PM
The answer is pretty straightforward: We decided to have a campaign, thought we could keep it relevent, but couldn't bring the AI up to our standard during production.

It's been put on ice until we can spend some time on it. It's still useful as a learning tool for new players. We'll support single-player down the line, but we need to get the AI up to snuff first!

titusthefox
12-08-2013, 02:34 PM
The answer is pretty straightforward: We decided to have a campaign, thought we could keep it relevent, but couldn't bring the AI up to our standard during production.

It's been put on ice until we can spend some time on it. It's still useful as a learning tool for new players. We'll support single-player down the line, but we need to get the AI up to snuff first!


Look forward to any progress here. There are a bunch of good programmers in the community that could help you with this issue probably. Would love to see a randomized AI opponent that gives lesser rewards.

As a middle ground, have you considered making the campaign replayable with lesser rewards? Sometimes you want to just avoid the competetiveness of rank duels and have a chill match.

Xerxes_Aragon
12-12-2013, 05:41 PM
We decided to have a campaign, thought we could keep it relevant, but couldn't bring the AI up to our standard during production.

It's been put on ice until we can spend some time on it. It's still useful as a learning tool for new players. We'll support single-player down the line, but we need to get the AI up to snuff first!

It's only because of the half-baked AI in MTG - Tactics that I was eventually able to beat all of the campaigns there with my mediocre deck building skills (along with buying some better cards in the auction there). :D If you boost the AI in DOC I'd probably never be able to get through any new campaigns. I had enough trouble getting through the later parts of the existing campaigns as it is. ;)

Rhunclaw
12-12-2013, 06:10 PM
And if I had a $1 every time some elitist multi-player snot made a snide self-serving comment, I would own the world. People like you are the REASON I don't play multi-player.

If i would get $1 every time i pop in pointless unfunny comments into discussions because i have a lot of fun doing so, i would atleast be able to pay my rent.

Seniuk1979
12-22-2013, 08:54 PM
Even if campaign is not continued now, there are events that take place behind the scenes, as i understood. But I don't know, what are the sources for lore info? Only characters bio that are being published on this forum?.. Someone told me about Herald gambit, about Five Towers role... But where these events where told?.. Could someone tell me about lore and plot of Duel of Champions, and how it is tied to events we saw in three campaigns?..

iharderages
01-19-2014, 05:30 PM
I have an idea for a new campaign. You should make riddle missions like at MMDOC King site at the sidebar ,,game moments''.These one turn to win missions are easy to create. In this case the producer don't must program a good AI and it is fast to make. This would be an interesting addition to the game which make a lot of fun.

ColdHeart322
03-24-2014, 06:22 PM
Legends of Norrath had a brilliant set of scenarios. Each expansion released about 10 new scenarios, completing each one gave you a card. (up to 15 copies, if you complete the scenario with different classes and difficulties). When I saw DoC had campaign mode, I was hoping for something similar. Let's hope they can work out a good AI as I wouldn't definitely play them.

Shinrin
08-19-2014, 12:35 PM
I agree it would be nice with a larger campaign option, but even more so a skirmish/random match up vs a computer would be nice adding in a gold reward.
Personally I hit a wall in this game after having played over 100 hours.
The daily login rewards should not be days in a row imo, but rather each time you login it should keep growing.
THe last couple of months i've hardly played due to the cards i want for a future deck would req that i'd play hundreds of hours with the focus on those cards alone.

Myrmadonna
09-04-2014, 06:39 AM
If I would get 1 everytime someone complains that a multi player game does not have a gigantic single player part, I would never need to work anymore.
But since it's not like that, would you please stop whining and start playing single player games if you want a single player game.

If the only reason you work is due to a need for some currency of a tenuous, arbitrary value, what possible justification could you have for sinking time into this trifle of a game? If your "work" is proffering belligerently-caustic advice emphasizing lack of both wit and worth, consider yourself an artisan of your craft. Blaming the victim.. Extremely efficient means of burying the subject even if it is among the most base of logical fallacies, the curt quip served well to mask the errant following rejoinder and the hypocrisy of "whining" about "whining." No confirmations or denials; clever boy indeed. It's obvious now; you're a judge with political aspirations.. well that or an UBI fanboy.but they're all but one-in-the-same. ~ciao

Myrmadonna
09-04-2014, 08:42 AM
Unlike many users, I don't give a flying crap about multiplayer... But I know there are plenty of us campaign-only players out there. Having this component so completely underdeveloped is a massive slap in the face to those who have taken the time to learn the game, and were expecting at least a legitimate single-player experience.

Booooo :mad:

Sadly, it seems the game is conceptually straight-forward but the complexity that emerges from card abilities in and across multiple zones (in addition to the constant emergence of new card sets) has proven too complex for the developers to create a compelling 'AI' for a single-player engine. Just look at the current 'campaigns' (for lack of a better term), They balk when a card triggers a dialog that didn't exist when they were made, ignore restrictions of cards (fi, "may attack with only one creature per lane"), have mediocre card-play ability despite their stacked deck(s) and, in many cases, pregame card deployments and/or resources of 6+ and decks with the cards from multiple factions. Even so, the campaign 'bosses' quickly become trivial opponents. Even if there were some way to provide them with upgraded decks, they would likely end up playing them poorly and/or freeze up in an infinite loop due to missing 'cases' for triggers.

The obvious question is "why don't they just update the AIs for the old heroes or create new AIs for the new heroes with full working knowledge of the dynamics of all card abilities/triggers new and old?" Answer: the programmers can't keep up with the card designers. It's probably tough-enough to keep the game-client and anti-cheat systems working, let alone maintain 2-dozen AI flavours. I share your disappointment both with UBI for promoting it a 'single-player game' and for the joke they're passing off as a 'card campaign' (which I fully/foolishly assumed was simply the successor to M&M:VI). Once you look at the list of achievements, then look at the card sets and notice that having the exact same cards from BS1+ does not count toward BS2+ achievements the truth becomes painfully obvious; they're trying to bill the game as an e-sport (like starcraft, dota, etc..) and the players are footin' that bill. It doesn't make much sense to travel to Paris for a tournament of champions playing a turn-based game. Still, I'd be happy to be wrong about that and see them do well over the years (and, more importantly, their stock start paying dividends).

The only reason I even learned about the game was by receiving "Steam Puzzles" during the summer promotion. Just like the "free" games AMD 'gave' me for buying graphics cards; what you get is game-lite. For the real deal, just add money. In any case, they will be a M&M:VII; most likely due out in late November or early December with patch releases starting late Jan. That's my take on the game anyway and if/when called to account, it'll just be a finger-pointing game between UBI and Steam on their way to the bank.