Elements 1.4

[Keolino]

Well, i don't really now what i should think about elements 2.0, so i will just write down the consequences which I thought about and let everybody decide for herself/himself...

1. Splitting it to 1.x and 2.0 would result in some things: The enemy-system I want is in 2.0, and the cards I have are in 1.x. I finally got my first fully upped deck, and i don't intent to train a new account to the top if the elements would split. I would play for some more time and then stop because I now have two accounts, and neither one is completely satisfying (The same happened with me with diablo 2 and diablo 3, and the same with Elder Scrolls: Oblivion and Elder Scrolls: Skyrim) That may be only what I would do, cause not everybody is the same as me. i would estimate that about 10-20 % would quit from that.

2. Would 1.x still get updates? If not, it wouldn't get the new cards anymore, and you would have to split the arena and the pvp after all. If it would get updates, Zanz would have to put all card-updates and pvp/arena updates always in both games. (i don't know how difficult this would be, (or if it would be as easy as Strg+C and Strg+V) cause I am not a programmer after all.

3. If there would be 1.x and 2.0, because of the new false god system (and the impossibility to farm false gods the whole day) and the new NPC system, people will start to argue about which of the two systems is better. I think they would split about 75% to 2.0 and 25% to 1.3x (because it gets necessary to create a new account as well...) If the elements 1.x wouldn't get the new card updates, we will slowly lose about the leftover 20-30 % óf gamers.

4. New players by 2.0. It would make a new game at kongregate and other sites, so it may attract some new and old players. I can't really estimate how many these are so it gets difficult at this point. Maybe about +20% to +40%

5. Players which play more than before if the elements is splitted. I think if it is splitted, some players will play more, and some players would play more if it gets a clean 1.4. So that may be even.

From the things I listed, it's difficult to make a decision which is better. So I want to hear other arguments and your opinion on my own arguments, to make things more clear. And something else: I hate fighting. And something else: All of your arguments till now were pretty poor because you focused on fighting each other. Focusing on your own arguments and thinking about the arguments and oppinions of others is a more mature way to do things...

[Pella]

Keolino, all five of your projected consequences are based on the concept that two separate games would exist.  As far as I know, exactly zero people suggested having two separate games.  We're not talking about a sequel, only a progression.

The thought behind the numbering of Elements 2.0 was ONLY that the game was receiving an update that was so dramatic that giving it a dot-update seemed insufficient.  No one other than you has suggested that there should be two separate games, one in the 1.x series, and another called 2.0.  Therefore, there would be no need to worry about the 1.x cards not being present in 2.0.

HOWEVER, as has been pointed out numerous times by numerous people, the entire concept of going to that numbering system is beyond stupid for numerous reasons.  Therefore, all arguments against it are a waste of time, because it's not going to happen.

I am beyond sorry I ever mentioned it.  I cannot begin to express my regret even for THINKING of the idea of using the number 2 in the new update, much less actually for presenting it to the Community.

Can we all please now stop discussing Pella Everwrong's mega-super-ultra-OMFG stupid idea of calling the new update Elements 2.0?

[Keolino]

Keolino, all five of your projected consequences are based on the concept that two separate games would exist.  As far as I know, exactly zero people suggested having two separate games.

No one other than you has suggested that there should be two separate games, one in the 1.x series, and another called 2.0.

There weren't zero people, since Naesala suggested it.

So I wasn't the one suggesting to make seperate games, but Naesala did it, just to be clear. I just listed the consequences which a seperation might face. nothing more.

But Pella. We are on a forum to talk about things. To argue about ideas, even if they are stupid or naive of whatever. It's not forbidden to talk about ideas, which first seemed good, but where stupid on a second thought. It's neither forbidden to talk about stupid ideas, which may later prove some value. And only by talking (not by fighting) we will be able to find out what may be stupid, or what was only stupid at a first thought.

[Pella]

Actually, Naesala understood what I meant.  It was BeefSupreme who completely misinterpreted what Naesala wrote, at which point he wrote:

Elements 2 =/= Elements update
-snip-
I am sorry but I just cannot stress enough how stupid I think Elements 2 is.

Therefore, as I stated above, no one suggested having two separate games.  One person completely misinterpreted the original idea and decided that the original idea was about having two separate games.  He was wrong, just as I was wrong for presenting the original idea in the first place.

Obviously, you are correct.  We are here to talk about stuff.  I, like you, would prefer that we talk about stuff that is relevant to the Elements Community.  That is why I begged the Community to stop discussing my horribly stupid idea.

[ColorlessGreen]

plus if we make it elements 2.0 we can re-release it on kong and get more badges and new players

Just about everyone is discussing the quoted suggestion to re-release the game on kong, which I made regular-sized-text instead of tiny to avoid any of the further confusion.


I had interpreted this idea to mean that everything would point at the same servers, and just get re-released on kong in order to get more of the visibility from being "new".

Does anyone know if kong has any mechanism to handle major updates other than issuing a "new" game? What would be ideal is to get the additional visibility out of kong without having to say it's a new game, since the history is important and there are badges that already exist for the old one. I don't see how it could be re-released without either removing the old version or splitting (which I don't think anyone actually wants to do), as I doubt kong is willing to have two separate identical games. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some way to get visibility out of kong from a major update, though. I'm pretty sure I've seen other MMOs get "new update" treatment at major patch releases even without resubmitting the game as a new game.

[dragtom]

on another note:
(and this is important for zanz to see)

you can get on the front page of kong with a major update.

I don't know exactly who to contact for that,
but I guess qazzaq123 (wolfunit) knows.

edit:
and apparantly i completely missed colorlessgreen's post.

[Chapuz]

Kong only puts again an old gane with an update if the game "pays" a lot to kong via kong points (or however they are called) when people purchase in-game stuff. As the game has no purchaseable stuff with kong points, EtG won't be again in the front page other than in the best CCGs part.

[Higurashi]

Removed rude comments, personal attacks and font abuse (poor font). Now look at the thread. It looks so civil doesn't it? Let's keep it that way.

I don't think Elements 2.0 is a neccesarily bad idea. Many brands pull it off, so it's obviously up to the execution. It could add to publicity, and the faithfuls wouldn't care about a number anyway. That said, I imagine a larger change to the interface or mechanics rather than just the content if I am to imagine a big ol' 2.0. That or an overhaul of the content. As it is, we're only getting more and nothing is going away or being modified (in essence), which is awesome :>

[Essence]

I knew Zanz would create something to draw me out of the woodwork eventually.

Oh yes.

[artimies7]

I suppose practically, we'd suffer if 2.0 was a separate game, just from that the old game and the new game would divide the community somewhat. I think 2.0 would be better off as an update to the original with a new interface and perhaps an 'old style' GUI setting.

Oh, and welcome back Essence.

[storyteller]

Im working on some things in bestiary. I would really like a way to have certain cards just played at the start of the match, like a pet. further, say a starting hand and quanta amount, so the AI plays certain combos at the beginning and such. Beyond this, decks that either dont deckout, or have blank 'dummy cards'.

[Keolino]

Im working on some things in bestiary. I would really like a way to have certain cards just played at the start of the match, like a pet. further, say a starting hand and quanta amount, so the AI plays certain combos at the beginning and such. Beyond this, decks that either dont deckout, or have blank 'dummy cards'.

1. Pets for AI, sounds interesting, I think that might be fun and is maybe something to consider.
2. starting hand and quanta amount at start...? Just no. I don't want them to play the exact same cards each fight. Just like normal players, they should be able to suffer from a bad draw.
3. decks that don't deck-out...? Give them 60 cards... That makes it unlikely that they deck out. But just like every deck (and every AI) should have a bad draw at one point, they should also deck out at one point. (And well, there is Eternity after all...)
4. Blank dummy cards...? I don't even know in which AI deck I would put something like that...