An Interview With A Former Elements Player

[OdinVanguard]

I just read the article and have looked through some of the comments. Thought I'd add my two cents here:

-He brings up some good points on balance, such as weapons and untargetable creatures. But some of it is definitely off.
--One example: with the exception of creatures that also bypass shields (none start off with both so this usually takes planning and time to pull off) several shields can kill or disable even untargetable creatures in combat.
--It is also possible to prevent their attack, redirect the damage, and even hide your own creatures from their abilities, so most elements have some form of counter.

-His comment about lack of duo or trio decks is off: pendulums were in when he started. I know because I started before him in '09 and they were available back then.
-- On the flip side though, I do concede that anything trio and higher is quite tricky to pull off.

-I think his most relevant point is that not every element can "answer" some major threats. I do have to agree with this to some extent. Even considering indirect methods this can sometimes be an issue.  Eg mono time cant do jack about weapons and shields.
--This is changing as others have noted, however, so hopefully that will be better.

In my opinion, the article has its faults, but as the saying goes Rome wasn't built in a day. It is very good start though.
I think what you need to do is to gather more information than just a single interview. There are a lot of different facets to this game, so you probably won't be able to catch them all in one or two interviews.
Do more interviews. Try to get as wide a range of interviewees as you can to avoid bias. Then take some polls based on what is discussed. Then you will have some good support to work from.
After that you can make a solid thesis and provide a useful source of information. Not just to help you build your game and improve this one, but also to help others who are trying to break into the industry as well.
I look forward to seeing what you come up with and trying out your game to see how it matches up to elements.

[Exeneva]

While I suppose the legality of the issue exists, by "foresite" I meant you could have a)let the interview continued when he obviously had more to say and b) come prepared with more questions, not that you should have taken any information without his prior permission. I call foul on your statement that interviews are steered by the interviewee and not the interviewer. Proper question writing and devoting enough time to the interview are important. If, for example, your first question to me is "What is bad about elements" and I give a 10 minute response with you interjecting for small elaboration questions, and say "thats all the time we have" then I haven't fully expressed my views. Obviously Jeff had other points, did you end the interview and chat more? And if he gave more information, you could have easily asked "May I use this information in the interview as well?"

The information he gave me was pretty much a reiteration of what I mentioned in the interview as positive points. We then talked a bit about Magic and card games in general. As you might can guess, he didn't find many positives with Elements.

Again, critiquing your skills as a researcher and an interviewer. I suppose your statement of not being against interviewing me is an invitation to be interviewed, since I didn't really get a clear answer. Give me a medium and some times you are available (not so good with time zones, Im on whatever Indiana is on) either here or via pm and I'll give you a full interview. And I expect you to be prepared with sufficient questions. If i dont have an answer, I'll say so. If positive or negative aspects are to much of a focus, I expect there to be some extra questions added to bring out more information. Your research needs to be important to you; it's a means to make your game grow.

If I didn't send you a PM (I've mentioned in this thread I've asked others for interviews) or otherwise ask you specifically for an interview, then that implies I am currently uninterested in interviewing you. You can take my unclear response as what you will, but you must take the facts into consideration as opposed to assumption. I won't state why I did not ask you specifically for a follow-up interview as that could possibly incite a flamewar, but by stating I am not averse to interviewing you doesn't mean I specifically want to interview you. I am after a certain kind of information here, and if I feel there are better qualified people to give that information, I will seek them out first.

I just read the article and have looked through some of the comments. Thought I'd add my two cents here:

-He brings up some good points on balance, such as weapons and untargetable creatures. But some of it is definitely off.
--One example: with the exception of creatures that also bypass shields (none start off with both so this usually takes planning and time to pull off) several shields can kill or disable even untargetable creatures in combat.
--It is also possible to prevent their attack, redirect the damage, and even hide your own creatures from their abilities, so most elements have some form of counter.

-His comment about lack of duo or trio decks is off: pendulums were in when he started. I know because I started before him in '09 and they were available back then.
-- On the flip side though, I do concede that anything trio and higher is quite tricky to pull off.

-I think his most relevant point is that not every element can "answer" some major threats. I do have to agree with this to some extent. Even considering indirect methods this can sometimes be an issue.  Eg mono time cant do jack about weapons and shields.
--This is changing as others have noted, however, so hopefully that will be better.

In my opinion, the article has its faults, but as the saying goes Rome wasn't built in a day. It is very good start though.
I think what you need to do is to gather more information than just a single interview. There are a lot of different facets to this game, so you probably won't be able to catch them all in one or two interviews.
Do more interviews. Try to get as wide a range of interviewees as you can to avoid bias. Then take some polls based on what is discussed. Then you will have some good support to work from.
After that you can make a solid thesis and provide a useful source of information. Not just to help you build your game and improve this one, but also to help others who are trying to break into the industry as well.
I look forward to seeing what you come up with and trying out your game to see how it matches up to elements.

Thanks for your feedback. As mentioned earlier, I am interested in doing follow-up interviews. It is good to see some people agree with points in the article, as well as disagree with some points, as opposed to what appears to be an attempt at complete shooting down by most of the community here.

[Naesala]

I offer you advice and an interview, and you decline for reasons you won't mention but specifically state that I should "take it as I will" and that it would "likely cause flamewars". Next time you should be clear when a person asks you if you want to interview them. Also, the fact that you declined me yet claim to be searching for interviewees seems to promote the point that you're not looking for people of all opinions but only a select few opinions, namely those who either agree with you and Jeff on at least a small level or those who have quit the game (read: people who can make your game look better). By taking in the facts in I conclude that I'm not the person you're looking to interview because I say things you don't like. Of course clearly stating your intentions would clear that up but fine, hide behind obscurity.

Also if you don't want start a flame war 1) dont call me under qualified 2)Don't respond to every post that tries to correct flaws with statements such as you dont care because its not the information you're after or it doesn't matter because you're exclusively looking for negatives. 3) Don't post a 90% negative interview about a game in it's own forum and then argue it's validity with the members.

Final point: I never said I was in complete disagreement with Jeff either, I just think he was a poor source (see: 75% of posts not by you in this thread).

You've turned down my advice. You've turned down my offer to interview. You have insulted me, intentionally or not, with many passive aggressive posts like the one above. As such I'll continue to watch this thread and may comment on other people's posts here, but I will not offer you any more help in any form, and I will not be playing your game. I may even discourage friends from playing the game now that I have seen developer's actions towards the competition, developers poor response to criticism, and poor research tactics.

[Exeneva]

I offer you advice and an interview, and you decline for reasons you won't mention but specifically state that I should "take it as I will" and that it would "likely cause flamewars". Next time you should be clear when a person asks you if you want to interview them. Also, the fact that you declined me yet claim to be searching for interviewees seems to promote the point that you're not looking for people of all opinions but only a select few opinions, namely those who either agree with you and Jeff on at least a small level or those who have quit the game (read: people who can make your game look better). By taking in the facts in I conclude that I'm not the person you're looking to interview because I say things you don't like. Of course clearly stating your intentions would clear that up but fine, hide behind obscurity.

Also if you don't want start a flame war 1) dont call me under qualified 2)Don't respond to every post that tries to correct flaws with statements such as you dont care because its not the information you're after or it doesn't matter because you're exclusively looking for negatives. 3) Don't post a 90% negative interview about a game in it's own forum and then argue it's validity with the members.

Final point: I never said I was in complete disagreement with Jeff either, I just think he was a poor source (see: 75% of posts not by you in this thread).

You've turned down my advice. You've turned down my offer to interview. You have insulted me, intentionally or not, with many passive aggressive posts like the one above. As such I'll continue to watch this thread and may comment on other people's posts here, but I will not offer you any more help in any form, and I will not be playing your game. I may even discourage friends from playing the game now that I have seen developer's actions towards the competition, developers poor response to criticism, and poor research tactics.

Like many of the members of the community here, you have oversimplified many of the things I have said and drawn assumptions from them. Better qualified does not mean underqualified, which most people learn once they start seeking higher-up jobs or even applying to universities. So I'm sorry if that's what you took it as.

If you want me to specifically state why I declined you, it is because I have reason to believe that an interview with you would be an attempt to counterbalance the claims Jeff has made in his interview, or at least present more positive elements. I'm not looking for that sort of interview, I'm looking for an interview that will be interviewee-driven and will allow them to rant or discuss their thoughts about the game as a whole, whether positive or negative. I'm not saying an interview with you would directly attempt to counter the points Jeff has made, but I have reason to believe that and I have found other equally highly credible people to interview, and those are the ones I am talking to at the moment.

I realize you've not involved in the game development industry and don't realize the kind of hate developers receive, but making threats against developers means nearly nothing nowadays unless you run some highly credible review site or otherwise have a major impact on the media. It's sad that that's the case, but every developer comes under a lot of fire, both from customers and publishers, and thankfully statistics show that some threats really have marginal impact while others deserve more attention.

[Naesala]

Thanks for further insulting me by assuming I'm not in college and assuming that I would refute another interview rather than answer your questions. Heck you even assumed I'm not a game developer (a correct assumption, but only because I'm bad with computers).

[Aves]

I would have had a higher opinion of your interview if the information had been up to date. As it is, I recognize that yes, the game was a lot simpler at one point. I realize that you wanted a former player. It just doesn't make sense to me why you should run an interview from an out of date source. Yes, you can draw lessons from an earlier stage of EtG. However, the interview shines a misleading light onto EtG, especially as it is without comparisons to look at right now. I don't believe that you came here to antagonize, but the relatively poor representation of the game does create a certain feeling of distaste.

For followup interviews, I don't think you should look for any certain 'type' of player. If you want an unbiased sample of our perspectives, then don't use a bias in determining who you interview. Just my two on this.

[dragonsdemesne]

I realize you've not involved in the game development industry and don't realize the kind of hate developers receive, but making threats against developers means nearly nothing nowadays unless you run some highly credible review site or otherwise have a major impact on the media. It's sad that that's the case, but every developer comes under a lot of fire, both from customers and publishers, and thankfully statistics show that some threats really have marginal impact while others deserve more attention.

Luckily for you, nobody has threatened you, nobody has delivered hate to you here, (though heaps have been piled on the n00b Jeff) and nobody here really cares what you or Jeff say anymore.  Also, luckily for you, it seems that your servers won't be overloaded by former Elements players.

I'm assuming you want to make the best game you can.  For what it's worth, you should consult people who have more CCG and other game experience.  Jeff is obviously lacking in this department.  Find a serious gamer and interview them, whether they are positive or negative towards Elements.  I know not everyone has played CCGs for the last 17 years like I have, so I don't expect all interviewees to have that kind of background, but you need to find people who know what they're talking about.  I wouldn't interview my barber about aeronautical engineering, and I wouldn't ask a plumber how to build a nuclear reactor.  Similarly, you shouldn't be interviewing people who are not knowledgable on the subject at hand.

You'd also be better off finishing your game and then asking people here to try it out, so that you can get some feedback that is actually useful.  Nothing Jeff said will help you design your game, and pissing off Elements players won't help, either.  Other than to suggest that you follow proper unbiased research techniques, study argumentative logic, and come back when you have a finished product, there is nothing you can accomplish here other than troll the community.  We've all given the only critiques we can given what little you've presented (one interview with a n00b and a complete refusal to acknowledge logical respones)

My last bit of advice is not to use this for a university project.  Back when I was in university getting my degree, any professor would have told me the same things I'm telling you if I'd submitted that interview.  Sorry if I'm being harsh, but that's simply how things are.

[OldTrees]

Thanks for further insulting me by assuming I'm not in college and assuming that I would refute another interview rather than answer your questions. Heck you even assumed I'm not a game developer (a correct assumption, but only because I'm bad with computers).

1) The majority of people here are not in college. It was a safe assumption given the lack of evidence.
2) You have been sounding like a broken record about the (lack of) credibility of jeff. I personally would have picked people whose passion was more focused on ranting about EtG than ranting about credibility. (despite your points about credibility being valid)
3) Again it was a safe assumption given lack of evidence.

Please calm down.


@Aves
Picking an informed type over an uninformed type is wise.
Seniority brings longer period to gather data.
Passion towards ranting about the game (suggestions and feedback) is a sign of being focused on the topic at hand.

[Naesala]

Sorry, I've been under a number of large stresses. I'm trying to calm myself. Feeling insulted doesnt help.
2) Perhaps, but I feel as though he doesnt understand that. As for focus on credibility rather than elements, the point of his interview was to develop his game more than it was to make a direct statement about elements, so I was trying to address the more important point for him. But whatever
1) 3) I suppose. Still, he made a point about assumptions (or my brain invented it since I can't find it now) and so it grinds my gears that he turned around and also made assumptions.

I think a night's sleep might help me de-stress.

[Aves]

Picking an informed type over an uninformed type is wise.
Seniority brings longer period to gather data.
Passion towards ranting about the game (suggestions and feedback) is a sign of being focused on the topic at hand.

I respectfully disagree. How is one player's perspective 'better' than that of any other player's perspective when assessing an issue with an indeterminable answer? It is true that a more senior member may hold more knowledge of the game or have more accurate information, but it doesn't make the views of the 'newbie' less valid. A newer player may bring insights on issues that older players have ignored simply because they are used to seeing something. While a 'newb' may have less knowledge of the game's mechanics, his/her views could demonstrate how entering the game at this point in time differs from the beginning of a veteran. I do concede that interviewing less experienced players is more likely to produce misleading information about the game, but as Jeff clearly shows, players who have spent a decent amount of time can also be misinformed.

[OldTrees]

Picking an informed type over an uninformed type is wise.
Seniority brings longer period to gather data.
Passion towards ranting about the game (suggestions and feedback) is a sign of being focused on the topic at hand.

I respectfully disagree. How is one player's perspective 'better' than that of any other player's perspective when assessing an issue with an indeterminable answer? It is true that a more senior member may hold more knowledge of the game or have more accurate information, but it doesn't make the views of the 'newbie' less valid. A newer player may bring insights on issues that older players have ignored simply because they are used to seeing something. While a 'newb' may have less knowledge of the game's mechanics, his/her views could demonstrate how entering the game at this point in time differs from the beginning of a veteran. I do concede that interviewing less experienced players is more likely to produce misleading information about the game, but as Jeff clearly shows, players who have spent a decent amount of time can also be misinformed.

1) The issue does not have an indeterminate answer. It has an answer based on the aggregate opinions of the consumer base.
2) Both expert and new player perspectives are important. A veteran might be able to remember being a new player but most new players cannot foresee the their future perspectives. So seniority can be used as a very rough and crude method to have correlation with empathy with other perspectives via memory.
3) I did not list seniority as the only valid variable. I structured it in the form of Quality, Quantity & Focus. Jeff does not fall high in any of those categories.

[Exeneva]

Thanks to everyone for all the responses. For the most part, I got exactly what I expected 

I'll be interviewing another Elements player (current) this weekend in a follow-up interview. I'll post a link to it in a new thread if he gives me the right to publish it.