openEtG

[dawn to dusk]

if it is to become a subsection, whats to say it will be in general discussion or on the front board or whatever. id say having it a sub-board in off-topic discussions. thats to say if it becomes one at all.

it should be moved to off-topic anyway

[inthisroom]

So... I wanted to clarify a few things again as this is getting out of hand a bit and people feel attacked personally.

I do not post here to troll, it isn't fun for me to create dissentions between forum members and I do not think I'm known for mindless flaming.

I insist on opposing this because I'm genuinely worried about this project, about its impact not only on the game, but also on the "community" and especially on Zanzarino who - as most who have been around here for more than 5 minutes might know - was always very clear about him being the only one having decisional power on every aspect of the game he created for us to enjoy.

I do believe the majority of forum members is uncomfortable with this, the reactions I get from all those I talk to - except for the ones posting here and pushing this project forward no matter what - confirms this to me.

What is presented as a "community project" is, in my opinion, the attempt of a minority to turn EtG into what new players always asked for ("Create booster packs, close bazaar", "Make rares available to buy", "Dim Shield OP, needs nerf", etc, etc, etc...) and the initial meaning of oEtG, that was supposed to be a place to test new cards, helping the CIA section and - maybe - become a back up plan if Zanzarino should ever decide to let his game go, has long been surpassed and it has got out of hand.

I am not opposed to the idea of oEtG, I just believe that it should not be done without the developer's explicit consent because that is - again, in my opinion - disrespectful and - yes, I'll go that far - treacherous.

So if you think I'm trolling here, please stop for a minute and question your own motivations, I thought it over for a very long time before posting here initially and didn't do it light hearted, I genuinely believe this is wrong.

[ZephyrPhantom]

*cautiously applies can opener to can labeled 'worms'*

Would those involved in heated debate here see logic in moving the thread to PC/Video Games Off-topic discussion subforum?  There are plenty of games that have their own piece of this forum so claiming it needs to simply wiped out at this moment is a bit extreme (my opinion).  Also, placing it in a top-level (by location, as I see it on main forum page at least) topic/subforum is probably too up-front (my opinion again) for something claiming it is not part of "real" EtG.

Valid reasoning, but I believe this is not the ideal solution, for reasons stated below.
==========
In regards to the issue itself : I feel that oETG in it's current state is disrespectful to Zanz's original creation, mainly due to the fact that consent was given for him by someone else simply because Zanz himself would not respond despite repeated attempts to contact him. To further this, arbitrary changes have been made to the game mostly based on the whims of a small group rather than the community majority. While I understand the idea of an "ETG back up" was necessary and reasonable the game is beginning to overstep those bounds by becoming it's own game, using ETG as a sort of "in name only" base.

This has left oETG it in an awkward spot : there is no real way to completely separate oETG from ETG due to the core mechanics and many of the cards being the same, but at the same time continuing development only disrespects Zanz further and will continue to anger a significant(yet mostly silent) portion of the playerbase. I am not suggesting the game is eliminated on the spot because of this, but I would like to point out the conflict the dev team has gotten themselves into.

[BluePriest]

Zblader you bring up some good points so I would Like to respond to some of them.

I can understand people being upset with this game being on these forums. I would like to point out that its not something that's done by a rogue group of people and is instead allowed by the mods who are very aware of its presence.

As for game changes being done on a whim and not with community consent, its being done with the help of everyone that wants to help. I've read through pretty much every page of the discussion because I was mia and was weary of the project being on the boards. Once I saw that it was allowed and not some rogue post I decided to help out. Its unfair though to make the accusation that changes are being made without community support when the portion  of the community claiming that wants nothing to do with the game.

I'd like to also point out once again that zanz is aware of this topic and has not said anything about it. Its no ones job to interpret what that means but I'm using it to point out that no one is trying to go behind zanzs back. Its on his actual forums.

I'm assuming that you are point in out MTG simulators because you think that this game is infringing on zanzs rights to the game. I personally don't see that any more than league of legends in fringe a on dota or any other similar game. They may have the same art on some cards because the creators of the art have given permission since they still hold rights over the art.

[ddevans96]

I've honestly been expecting this to devolve into flames for a while. Going to talk with people on both sides and then post a long response to the last five pages or so.

EDIT: Some events have occured that make this an impossibility for me. I encourage someone else to attempt taking this up. Apologies for the hype, this was a legitimate plan of mine, it's just not something I'm capable of doing.

[ZephyrPhantom]

I'll wait on dd's reply before I bring up any more points of my own, but in the meantime :

I can understand people being upset with this game being on these forums. I would like to point out that its not something that's done by a rogue group of people and is instead allowed by the mods who are very aware of its presence.

While this is true, I believe it was allowed back when oEtG was intended to be more of a 'backup' of EtG and not it's own game, in addition to the fact that someone had to resolve the issue of "should this be developed or not" or risk the thread becoming more hotly debated much earlier. oEtG has changed significantly since it's original introduction and as I have said before may be exceeding it's original "reasonable and necessary" purpose.

As for game changes being done on a whim and not with community consent, its being done with the help of everyone that wants to help. I've read through pretty much every page of the discussion because I was mia and was weary of the project being on the boards. Once I saw that it was allowed and not some rogue post I decided to help out. Its unfair though to make the accusation that changes are being made without community support when the portion  of the community claiming that wants nothing to do with the game.

A high amount of posts however come from a select group of players on this thread (see "Active Members" at the top for what I mean), and there are quite a few people who have tried to take a respectful stance on their dislike of the game by simply not commenting on it. It is clearly a coordinated effort by a small group, but the whole community is not involved it in either.

Please do not put words in my mouth and say I am accusing anyone of anything either. I have merely stated my opinion on the project and even explicitly stated I am not condemning the game to be immediately removed from the forums but wish to point out the awkward situation that has been created.

I'd like to also point out once again that zanz is aware of this topic and has not said anything about it. Its no ones job to interpret what that means but I'm using it to point out that no one is trying to go behind zanzs back. Its on his actual forums.

Again, please don't assume Zanz's position just because we tried to contact him and he did not respond. This is not a case where silence implies a "yes" or a "no".

I'm assuming that you are point in out MTG simulators because you think that this game is infringing on zanzs rights to the game. I personally don't see that any more than league of legends in fringe a on dota or any other similar game. They may have the same art on some cards because the creators of the art have given permission since they still hold rights over the art.

Also, I originally pointed out MTG Simulators not because of the art (most MTG simulators, in fact, do not provide art by default and require people to get the card art from a separate server, usually official MTG websites or ones that WoTC is clearly okay with.), but because these simulators will either try to A) seek out an agreement with Wizards of the Coast or B) At least encourage people to play the actual MtG without taking away from the original game itself. DoTA/LoL is a difference case to me seeing as it began as a distinct variant of a game that was able to exist without it's original 'core', Warcraft III - it is thus a completely separate idea made by the fans and continuously developed by fans.

[BluePriest]

On my phone so I'm not going to quote. I'm referring to where you talk about zanzs stance. When I say that he is aware of this I mean that he literally saw the forum post. Not people trying to get in contact with him. He actually logged on and has seen this topic and viewed it.

My point with that isn't if he agrees or disagrees with this. Its that its not tying to hide it from him. I out righted stated that its no ones job to state his position on this because of his silence

[ZephyrPhantom]

Understood, but at the same time people have gone and assumed Zanz's position (and in certain posts prior to the present topic, the whole community's position) on the this thread - while I respect the coordinated effort to make this game regardless of it's current state, I draw the line at speaking for a party not present at the discussion.

Just because Zanz has logged on and seen it doesn't prove much, either - to quote ITR's original prompt that started this discussion :

Has Zanzarino ever approved of this?

Or did some people just take his game and now do whatever they want with it, then are surprised that he doesn't work on the official game any more?

As far as I know, he always seemed very adamant about having decisional power on every aspect of his game.

[OdinVanguard]

I've honestly been expecting this to devolve into flames for a while. Going to talk with people on both sides and then post a long response to the last five pages or so.

Lol... yes I haven't seen a flame war start like this since someone asked what is the best free text editor for Fortran coding on StackOverflow...

Joking aside it would be good to keep things civil and rational here.

I look forward to seeing your summary. So far we have heard only from a small handful of voices on either side.
I would encourage you to take your time and get a good sized cross section of members so that the results can be relevant and meaningful.
---

In the mean time, it would be nice to have a brief, concise listing of grievances. After that would naturally follow an (equally brief) rebuttal so people have something to work from as they form their opinions.

I will see if I can encapsulate the Grievances. If I miss something let me know and I'll add it on.
1) Lack of explicit consent / support from Zanzarino.
2) Lack of sufficient community support / involvement.
3) Significant changes have been made to the game relative to current EtG which cause this game to run contrary to the "spirit" of current EtG.

Number 3 seems to need a little expansion, but I think that I should leave that to another since I am admittedly biased toward those in support of this project.
Would someone from the opposition be willing to elaborate? Try to be brief, concise, and (preferably with spoilers as needed) include support for why each of the changes runs contrary to the spirit of the game and / or degrades enjoyment.
For example:
-Statements by Zanzarino on specific topics / suggested features or mechanics
-Links to forum topics discussing given topics / mechanics
-Links to poll / survey results showing relevant majority agreement on given topics / mechanics
--To be relevant, the poll should include at least 20+ votes total (so as to be statistically relevant)

[dawn to dusk]

I used to consider this a 'trainer' for EtG trainer. EtG trainer is used to test decks while OEtG was used to test card ideas and such. It has steered away with that with larger updates like booster packs. IMO, this would have been MUCH better with a series of polls asking if XXXX should be implemented over XXXX.

I can see where each side is coming from and I understand worries from various individuals, and I accept them, but I am not worried myself. This may be because I was not around during the early days where updates were very frequent. I was here when shards were put in element. That's it. Then with 1.4 suddenly stopping, then this, it may induce some paranoia.

Some actions have angered me quite a bit though. I read ITR's wall of text about how he doesn't want to give personal attacks, I respect the post, then I read oEtGtfo at the bottom of the post and I immediately disregard the whole thing. That move was completely unreasonable, and is contradicting your post about not flaming. I too have spoken to a few people, some who do not approve of oEtG, but even they think that was a bad move.

When I found out the victors of trials, I was new. I respected all of the masters and looked up to them a lot. Even now, I look up to them. But it is hard to do so when they do such childish things as that (which means something as I am younger than 80% of the community at least). Not intending this as a personal attack, and I am sorry if you see it that way, but that move has angered me a lot and I would be much happier to see it removed, and I would respect you, and your brother, a lot more if you removed them.

[OdinVanguard]

Some points of order:
-Until we hear from Zanz regarding this project we won't know what he thinks about it. One way or the other.
-Unless we have some form of a poll, questionare, etc. we won't know how the community as a whole feels about this project.
(maybe that is a better place to move things instead of arguing back and forth about it...)
-We DO have a suggestion board. This should serve well as a gauge for whether or not openEtG is or is not following the will of the community.

I used to consider this a 'trainer' for EtG trainer. EtG trainer is used to test decks while OEtG was used to test card ideas and such. It has steered away with that with larger updates like booster packs. IMO, this would have been MUCH better with a series of polls asking if XXXX should be implemented over XXXX.

I think you have a good point there. Oetg's utility as a card idea tester, and its potential for testing various features and mechanics out live is what I think makes it worthwhile.
On the other hand there have been an awful lot of changes made. If these changes do correspond to common features / changes etc. being requested by the community, then I think there is some warrant to testing them out.

I definitely agree that we should make sure that openEtG is serving as a good testing ground for popular features, cards, etc.

So:
1) Is openEtG exploring features being requested by the majority of the community
2) Is it addressing ways to deal with potential bugs / pitfalls associated with those changes when / if they are ever implemented
3) Is it providing a development resource to make implementing new features easier when / if Zanz wants to do so

IMO, this would have been MUCH better with a series of polls asking if XXXX should be implemented over XXXX.

So, maybe this will help a bit in deciding whether or not openEtG is serving as community supported / involved project or if it is indeed just "the whims of a few":

Spoiler for very brief review of common suggestions / change requests:

The top 10 responses from this poll: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/game-suggestions-and-feedback/(poll)-the-5-most-important-things-elements-needs-right-now!/
quests - 89
more cards -71
balance shards - 40
achievements + more frequent updates - 36
more ways to gain rares - 34
More Endgame pve cotent + bug fixes + RPG elements -26

Most common feature request: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/game-suggestions-and-feedback/(poll)-the-5-most-important-things-elements-needs-right-now!/
1) More quests / campaigns / storyline
2)Method for using upped cards in unused tournament / ability to downgrade cards
3)Second tier of upgrades
4) Refund for cancelled abilities
5) Split toadfish/puffer fisth and chaos seed/ chaos power to new cards
6) Mobile / Portable version of the game
7) Graveyard / discard
8) Save multiple decks
9) Trading
10) Cancel end turn instead of force discard
11) Have all effects take place before opponent is defeated
12) Mulligan system
13) Improve AI5
14) Text Log
15) Cards re-ordered in bazzar
16) Hotkeys
17) Peak arena rank

Going forward, I think it would be good to focus development efforts based upon the above mentioned threads / boards since they seem to provide the best window into the actual desires of the EtG community.

The second most asked for feature is simply more cards... I think we have plenty implemented. They come largely from the CI&A armory... lets test them out!

I noticed that the number 1 request is for questing content... This is an excellent point for community involvement. With that in mind, I think it would be good to have some focus put into making quest development, testing, etc. accessible to the community at large.

[bripod]

I used to consider this a 'trainer' for EtG trainer. EtG trainer is used to test decks while OEtG was used to test card ideas and such.

-snip-

I would respect you, and your brother, a lot more if you removed them.

D2D et.al,

At first I too was under the impression that oEtG would mimic EtG as cards could be introduced for balancing and perhaps be ready for inclusion in the game if/when Zanz wanted them to be. As it stands right now, NO card idea can be balanced as many of the CURRENT in game cards have been MODIFIED in oEtG by the few who are working on the project because THEY believe that they should be changed in some way.
Let me remind all involved, that these cards have already been scrutinized for years and have been balanced to the game. Yes, some cards are a bit better than others but for the most part they are balanced.

I could live with a clone of EtG, add in your little in game chat and play around with your little quest mode thingy. Allow 3 or 4 cards to be added for a month or so to balance them. Start a topic for the balanced cards and then remove them from oEtG and then repeat the process with a few more cards... trying to spread out the cards over every element. Keep repeating until you run out of cards.

What I am NOT in favor of is messing around with the CORE of the game and game play because you don't like the way it works... I especially don't like the implementation of ideas that the creator has specifically stated that in no way what-so-ever would they ever be implemented into the game. Also changes made without consideration from the community.

If it were up to me, I'd say remove all new cards from oEtG and restore all current in game cards to their orig statuses. Concentrate on restoring/creating all game/play mechanics and allow user data to be imported for players card vaults in the orig game. Then choose a few cards to balance and get on with life... unfortunately no one cares to listen to me much anyways...

and you are right D2D, I had a few beers last night and came up with the whole sig line thingy. Sorry it offended. I'll remove it.