• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Marvel Puzzle Quest developer to fans: "You're supposed to lose."

Dalek

Member
MPQ_-_Galactus_Faceoff-850x560.png


A bit of background: Marvel Puzzle Quest is a "match 3" puzzle game with RPG elements. You collect characters, each with different powers and then use the puzzle mechanics to build up "AP" to unleash these powers against the enemy. Additionally, a social aspect of the game is being in an "Alliance" of 20 players where there are benefits to earning rewards, etc.

This weekend is the second anniversary of the game and the developers have released an event where your Alliance teams up to fight Galactus. Galactus of course, has massive health-and the goal is for your community to whittle him down by a certain time, and then rewards are earned.

The problem here is that Galactus's moves are so insanely broken-you don't have enough time to build up any AP to unleash any powers, meaning you are basically wiped out by Galactus in 2 or 3 moves. This has really caused a conversation on the developers forum, where players have voiced their frustration-you only get a certain amount of tries at Galactus before an 8 hour cooldown period begins-meaning many Alliances are floundering and won't meet goals. Additionally, anytime your team of 3 characters dies from Galactus, they must wait to heal before they can be used again (or use consumable health packs)-meaning there is little incentive at all to fight, but plenty of deterrent.

The developer responded, with what might be one of the most tone deaf arguments I've ever heard:


https://d3go.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=33616&sid=f07b878a65a4099c74110119e5d8668f

Hey all,

Wanted to share a few things about how Galactus works and what we're expecting versus what we're seeing.

To start, it seems like a lot of people are on a basic disconnect here, looking at the boss battle similar to how Ultron ran in terms of how things work. Meaning that Ultron should be going down pretty regularly. He's powerful, but his real power lies in the fact that killing his body doesn't stop him. You need to crush every one of his drones and main bodies to win. So winning rounds is a pretty regular occurrence. Game-wise, what this means is that players won fairly easily against Ultron and took their lumps against the drones. The stopping timer there was health packs based on when the drones finally wore you down. What this also meant is that the higher end Alliances would chew through the entire Event in about 12 hours and let it kinda sit for 3 days.

Galactus is different. The "minion" fights against the villains are relatively simple. They're there as minor hazards but relatively easily winnable. Galactus on the other hand is a massive threat. He's not going to be stopped by gnats. Iron Fist punching him in the toe isn't very painful. So he gets bored and swats them away. In game terms, this means that players are going to be beaten. Winning a round against Galactus is an achievement. You're supposed to lose. Every time you do, you're still chipping away at his life. It's an exercise in damage in aggregate. Over the 3.5 days, hitting him over and over to finally bring down the big bad is somewhat slow, but certainly effective.

Overall, most of the higher end Alliances are in Round 6 or knocking on the door to Round 7. Which is actually slightly faster than we were expecting people to get just based on the math. So everyone's doing pretty darned well in terms of progression. There are some teams rockin' the Winfinite, other teams that are pushing through with some interesting strategies (who woulda thought OBW would be a rock star against Galactus?). Not many Alliances are getting anywhere near full clears. Which is actually intended. You're supposed to lose your Health Packs on Galactus, rather than against the minions like on Ultron. It's also why we changed up the play method for this round too so that it's not just a flip flop between Ultron and minions till you win. There's a set number of times you can hit Galactus before you need to take a break to let minions refresh. That break means that you have plenty of times for Galactus drained Packs to refresh while you can go in and get some Black Vortex in. Or play Simulator (up soon). Or get your Devil Dino on when that starts up. It's a different design than the rush of Ultron where that was pretty much all players did while it was open.

Long story short, you all are doing really well against Galactus. Yes, the gameplay is different. I'm sure most of you aren't used to going into a battle with the idea that you may well lose. But given that you're still pulling out wins with pretty strong regularity, I don't see any reason this wouldn't continue into Rounds 7 and 8, and on to Cyclops awesomeness.

At the outset, going into the boss battle, you're looking at winning like normal. After all, it works elsewhere in the game, and it worked against Ultron. So suddenly getting rocked by Galactus is a shock. Keep at it. If things are really going to go poorly, we'll look at doing refresh timer changes and the like that we can do server-side as a quicker band aid style fix for run 1. After that, we'll figure out what we want to do for difficulty on run 2 (and any other runs that we do in the future, of course).

pTDN3.gif
 

Corpekata

Banned
I don't think they're saying anything particularly outrageous. Haven't there been other community event type bosses like that in a variety of games?
 

Vesmir

Banned
I don't see an issue. He explained it pretty well both in terms of game mechanics and in-game lore. He also stated that they may look into tweaking some things.
 

ItIsOkBro

Member
If it's one of those boss battles where an entire community has to whittle down its health then yes, you probably will each lose individually.
 
Seems like a perfectly reasonable thing.

It's a pretty standard community vs completely unbeatable (by an individual) boss.
 

Dystify

Member
I haven't played the game, but what he says makes a lot of sense to me, just from the in-universe lore behind the character. It seems you'll still be able to beat the challenge, if you just do it long enough.
 
D

Deleted member 47027

Unconfirmed Member
First, Galactus is beatable. You contribute to his overall health decline and you can win, and it's not tough. You have to pick your team carefully.

Second, there is no second. Just requires planning. That's all. I've beaten him about 10 times so far. Sometimes you have good luck, sometimes you have bad luck. This quote is a non-issue.
 

Dalek

Member
I haven't played the game, but what he says makes a lot of sense to me, just from the in-universe lore behind the character. It seems you'll still be able to beat the challenge, if you just do it long enough.

You can't though. You have a limited amount of tries per "8 hours" and if you're dying on round 3, you're not doing any damage to him.
 
This sounds like a neat little mixup of the formula. I don't see an issue.

It could be viewed as a way to generate IAPs because the cool downs this quick fight will inflict may cause some to spend a few bucks to keep playing. challenges is one thing, designing something to cause the player to lose and on a cool down is another.
 

QaaQer

Member
Your title quote is a bit inflamatory. They are just running an event and will tweak things as results come in. This is how these types of games work, it is all based on telemetry. So yeah, just releax and enjoy your freetoplay comic book match three.
 

BlackRock

Member
So, they made something that is intended to be hard, and it actually is hard. Got it.

But making something hard is simplistically easy. The goal should be to make something that's challenging but fun. That's what's much harder design. This doesn't sound like fun to me.
 

Karak

Member
Playing it and found it fine and fun. Its a typical crunchfest. No complaint here. Strangely in our group I haven't heard any either. We all seemed to understand how hard this would be and its been fun.
 

Nishastra

Banned
But making something hard is simplistically easy. The goal should be to make something that's challenging but fun. That's what's much harder design. This doesn't sound like fun to me.
Just sounds like a typical "group boss" in a game without grouping. You do some tiny little bit of damage, everyone else does some tiny little bit of damage, and the thing eventually dies.

Every event in PSO2es is like this. You "win" by taking a few % off of the boss, you're not ever supposed to actually kill it by yourself in one go.
 

Vesmir

Banned
You can't though. You have a limited amount of tries per "8 hours" and if you're dying on round 3, you're not doing any damage to him.

Reverse-bolding one of your selections:
Winning a round against Galactus is an achievement. You're supposed to lose. Every time you do, you're still chipping away at his life.
 

Dalek

Member
But making something hard is simplistically easy. The goal should be to make something that's challenging but fun. That's what's much harder design. This doesn't sound like fun to me.

Agreed. The Ultron event was fun. Bombs would spawn at the top of the board every round and if they reached the bottom a massive explosion would hit. You had time to think of a way to remove the bombs. It was fun.
 
I think its a bit of a dirty thing for them to do to expect people to fight a boss that is unbeatable, in a game where waiting for revival can go into hours and hours.

Almost seems like they're goading you to pay, eh?
 

dallow_bg

nods at old men
But making something hard is simplistically easy. The goal should be to make something that's challenging but fun. That's what's much harder design. This doesn't sound like fun to me.

Some people like grinding, and some don't.
These types of games are grindy in the first place.

He is beatable as Vince mentioned a few posts above, who's done it 10 times already.
 

danthefan

Member
But making something hard is simplistically easy. The goal should be to make something that's challenging but fun. That's what's much harder design. This doesn't sound like fun to me.

It doesn't sound that fun at all but there's nothing that outrageous going on. From the thread title I thought there was going to be some shady P2W mechanic implemented or whatever, but it's nothing of the sort. It's just a not that well thought out battle.
 
I beat him twice in the earlier rounds, but now I can't get any good damage in before the three turns where he immediately kills your entire team.

I have no problem with this. He's freaking Galactus, I shouldn't expect to beat him so easily. Plus it's more about helping your alliance whittle away at his overall health in the round.
 

Scrooged

Totally wronger about Nintendo's business decisions.
This is not too different than most f2p matching games. They gate progress in a number of ways, one of which is making certain levels pretty damn tough requiring you to get lucky. In short, you're supposed to lose a number of times.

It's all about stretching out play time.

Also, I'm not necessarily defending this practice. It's a shit way to design games, and mobile is rife with them. It's just not unexpected.
 

Maximus.

Member
Sounds ok to me.
Is there a problem?

Sounds like people want an easy win for their smartphone game. The developer reasoning makes sense to me and is kind of unique. Those games are meant to be money grabs, and I would assume people with some sense would be patient to win battles.
 

autoduelist

Member
I don't see anything wrong with this. Everything he's saying makes sense.


I despise microtransactions in games so have no idea how that all ties in to it, but it's perfectly understandable that you're 'supposed to lose' against Galactus. He's mf'ing Galactus

The bolding in the OP just seems silly, as if the context isn't right there to read and go 'ok, yeah, he makes sense'.
 

redcrayon

Member
At this point, some players have ridiculously powerful teams after nearly two years of play. What's wrong with one single event being rock-hard and offering something a bit different? I'm sure they'll be back to running one that's much easier very soon, it's fitting that Galactus should be one of the hardest events to win on an individual basis. I don't see an issue with challenging veteran players as well as providing easier targets for new ones as an ongoing game, it's not like there aren't other things to do rather than fighting Galactus.

I played for about three months after launch and really enjoyed the different events, it's good that they are still translating all kinds of Marvel lore to the puzzle quest game two years later. As FTP games go, maintaining a stable of several dozen heroes meant I regularly fielded six or seven different teams and could play for a good couple of hours without running out of health.
 
Puzzle Quest was one of my favorite games on the DS. I'm sad to see it completely gutted by freemium b.s. I would pay 30+ dollars for the gameplay of marvel heroes alone, but the needing to upgrade heroes, needing to pay for more slots to even collect more heroes, needing to upgrade hero powers, needing to use consumable health packs to keep playing= no thanks.

The only groups that will beat Galactus are those that will buy and use consumable health packs.
 

Kieli

Member
It's a F2P game... They gots to earn their bread somehow.

Also, it's Galactus. Ain't no 2-bit scrub gonna take him down easy.
 

redcrayon

Member
Puzzle Quest was one of my favorite games on the DS. I'm sad to see it completely gutted by freemium b.s. I would pay 30+ dollars for the gameplay of marvel heroes alone, but the needing to upgrade heroes, needing to pay for more slots to even collect more heroes, needing to upgrade hero powers, needing to use consumable health packs to keep playing= no thanks.

The only groups that will beat Galactus are those that will buy and use consumable health packs.
High-level teams with a plan are the only teams that will beat him, it doesn't matter how many health packs you buy if your team can't withstand his attacks.
 

kswiston

Member
I was really into this game for a 6 month period about a year and a half ago, but I gave up when the developers got increasingly greedy, and everything became increasingly grindy. No idea if things have improved since then, but I am not supporting people who cut the rates of good drops in their random card machine, while simultaneously making it harder to win anything during events, just to milk the fanbase for more microtransactions. In contrast, GungHo has kept me playing Puzzle and Dragons going for over 3 years now because they have taken the opposite route.
 

Dalek

Member
I was really into this game for a 6 month period about a year and a half ago, but I gave up when the developers got increasingly greedy, and everything became increasingly grindy. No idea if things have improved since then, but I am not supporting people who cut the rates of good drops in their random card machine, while simultaneously making it harder to win anything during events, just to milk the fanbase for more microtransactions. In contrast, GungHo has kept me playing Puzzle and Dragons going for over 3 years now because they have taken the opposite route.

If anything it's gotten worse. They are releasing 4 star characters left and right, the last 3 star character was a long time ago-and now there's 5 star characters that you can only get in "Legendary" tokens. You can't spend HP on them.
 
Top Bottom