Sunday, August 18, 2013

How should archetypes be handled?

One thing that I keep hearing in the community over the past couple of years is how hard it is for non-themed decks to compete with theme decks. It's hard to get away with playing decks that exploit the synergy between otherwise unrelated cards when you constantly have to compete with decks that have cards for almost every single situation - a draw card, a search card, a defense card, an offense card - you name it, they've got it.

Personally, I like archetype decks, I just think Konami needs to be more aggressive in designing better cards and hitting the cards that don't work out in real life. And for the love of god, stop making things broken on purpose. You guys have been designing this game for over a decade, is it too much to ask for you to act like it? Just think about all of the people that must have had to approve of Spellbook of Judgment before it could ultimately be approved and mass-produced. How could so many people approve of such a gigantic mistake?

The answer is simple - they wanted mistakes to be made, because from their money-making perspective it's not necessarily a mistake. You could obviously tell with Prophecy that they were blatantly forcing that deck up the ranks. The funny part is that this time around, their plot almost completely backfired in the TCG before Spellbook of Judgment came out. And even when Prophecy blew up, it didn't take long for people to gravitate away from using any of the monsters besides Spellbook Magician.

My guess is that they're aiming to do the same thing with Noble Knights - the deck is pretty damn playable as it is now that Drystan exists (and even beforehand...), but Konami doesn't really seem to know when to stop when they take a liking to a deck. There will be FIVE new Noble Knight cards in the upcoming TCG release of Shadow Specters, and I would literally shit my pants if those cards somehow didn't manage to shove Noble Knights to the forefront of the competitive scene.

It's true that new cards need to be exciting to pique the interest of your customers and sell product, but do you really have to destroy the game in the process? Roller coasters are exciting. Technically, so are house fires. Which one would you rather experience? I say this to illustrate the point that excitement does not always equal fun, and some things that are considered exciting are also downright dangerous. Overall, it's not cool when you HAVE to play a themed deck just to be able to compete.

No comments:

Post a Comment