Support NeoGAF

[ashecitism]

First off, I didn't know this game has been out since March 9. Second, this is the only review so far and without knowing when others will post theirs, decided not to use a general "review thread" title for now.

PC Gamer - 78/100

The good news is that Dire Wolf Digital, which also develops the Eternal CCG and includes Magic: The Gathering hall of famer Luis Scott Vargas on the design team, has been much more active when it comes to balance than Blizzard. Truly problematic cards like Murkwater Savage and Divine Fervour have been nerfed relatively fast and without too much fuss. The game is also pretty generous when it comes to rewards. You can earn Soul Gems (the card crafting currency) just from playing practice games against the AI, and both solo and versus arena offers healthy card pack payouts. But be warned that the solo Arena difficulty spikes like the Throat of the World after you hit rank five.

The counterpoint to Bethesda's apparent card pack largesse is that Legends decks are bigger the Hearthstone's—50+ cards versus 30—and you can include three copies of some of the legendary cards, which are inevitably among the best in the game. Yes, you can grind it out as free-to-player, but if you want those Supreme Atromancers in your ‘Merric Battlemage' deck, you'll need to be patient or pay. Presumably the idea that CCGs are expensive if you want to play competitively won't come as a shock, but for complete disclosure my collection is ~90% complete and I've spent a couple of hundred bucks so far.

Here's the far bigger problem. Legends doesn't have that ineffable quality that Blizzard's game does, which it's tempting to call magic, but actually amounts to ridiculous amounts of polish. I don't mind the card art in Legends, which is mostly detailed if somewhat muted high fantasy fare, but plenty of people seem to find the style boring. Less debatable is the game board, of which only one is offered, and it's an absolutely unloveable rhapsody in beige. The lack of pizazz also extends to the most basic interactions.

In Hearthstone, pretty much every action, whether it's a ridiculous board clear like Twisting Nether, or something you'll do a million times like clicking your hero power, looks great and feels satisfying. That's not the case in Legends. It's not that the its animations are bad per se, they just don't release the same sweet hit of dopamine. The biggest case in point being when you actually win. In Hearthstone your opponent dies in something close to a supernova. In Legends it's more like a damp firework going fut.

All of which explains why I no longer think Legends is going to take a serious bite out of Hearthstone. At least not yet. Legends' more serious approach means it doesn't lend itself to those Swashburglar-into-Sacrificial Pact to kill Lord Jarraxus moments that have turned the likes of Disguised Toast and Trolden into YouTube stars. This is never going to be a game of great memes. But what Legends does have are rock solid systems, and a clearly talented team of card designers who are responsive to feedback. On that basis, I'm optimistic that the two forthcoming expansions can at least shore up its position as a viable competitor with better deck diversity. And if you do decide to jump in, here's a semi-pro tip: They always have the Lightning Bolt.

A deep, and potentially rewarding alternative to Hearthstone that suffers from underwhelming art design and desperately needs an injection of players to grow the scene.

more at the link

 

[ashecitism]

IGN - 8.3/10

The Elder Scrolls: Legends may not be the most visually appealing CCG, but what it lacks in looks it makes up for in modes, mechanics and card design. This is well worth checking out for fans of The Elder Scrolls or digital card games in general. And like all great CCGs, the more you put into it, the more you'll get out of it.