Hardly a trap. I'm sorry if me choosing to spend my own money(actually a gift card) on a game I enjoyed. I don't mind donating a few bucks to a game that was free and managed to keep me busy this long. I commend them for that and it's still enjoyable as the time goes on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacko2130
I have to say this has been one of the most interesting and entertaining derailed threads I think I have read since the days of HB808.
I am too long in the tooth to be baited by Coathanger, he tried but I wouldn't bite. As for everyone else who was drawn into his little game you should really just learn to ignore him and his over inflated ego. He would no doubt go find a new bridge to reside under.
Unfortunately for the OP, this thread has spiralled out of control in the exact direction that Coathanger set out to guide it towards. I congratulate him on his skills.
This thread is comparable to the state of the "GENERAL" Forum today.. Good ideas get push down to the bottom of the pile never to see the light of day again. It is a shame.
Unlucky OP better luck next time, if you can be bothered to make the effort.
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychedelic
Quote:
http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...rcell-freemium
The key argument is over whether many of the most successful F2P mobile games are little more than money-sucking "monetisation machines", where the design is almost entirely geared towards forcing players to spend money. Gambling-style addiction, without even the prospect of a payout.For the most part, Supercell's games have swerved this criticism, yet still managed to make lots of money. How? "The huge irony here is that if the monetisation is not your number one priority, that actually leads to better monetisation," says Paananen.
"When you prioritise engagement and retention – making a great game that people play often and want to play for a long time – they are happy to pay. We want to design games that people can theoretically play for years."
Paananen is quick to stress that Supercell is just the latest in a long line of games firms with this objective, and mentions World of Warcraft and League of Legends as two franchises whose longevity his company is keen to emulate.
He also has some sharp words for some of the trends in social and mobile/F2P games that have hinted at other motivations, as well as companies focusing too much on analytics as a guide for their design choices.
"There was a time, especially in the social games industry, where people thought you could create great games based on a spreadsheet: that creativity and design wouldn't really matter, because it was all about some maths," says Paananen.
"Games are still a form of art, not a form of science. You can't design fun on a spreadsheet. And if you want to make an industry for the long-term, if you can't create fun games, there's no future."
I'm sure analytics still play a significant role in Supercell's business, in terms of watching closely how people play Hay Day and Clash of Clans, and taking design decisions at least partly based on that.
In other words, Paananen's criticism isn't of analytics per se, but of the trend he saw for analytics without the art.
Supercell has talked publicly and regularly about its company culture: small teams organised in "cells", with the freedom to work on new game ideas, test them and – if the team decides they're not worth pursuing – gathering the company together to toast the lessons learned with champagne.
Wouldn't bite our couldn't bite? I suggest the later due lack of foundation and knowing the argument was easily contradicted. More on this at the end of this post.Quote:
Originally Posted by billwinkiesbear
You know me so well...:rolleyes: I wanted a discussion and found one from another sock puppet alias, PsychedelicQuote:
Unfortunately for the OP, this thread has spiralled out of control in the exact direction that Coathanger set out to guide it towards. I congratulate him on his skills.
Really? This thread was kept on the front page due to the discussion it inspired. Unfortunately one of it's most vocal supporters admitted to subverting multiple bans by using sock puppets.Quote:
This thread is comparable to the state of the "GENERAL" Forum today.. Good ideas get push down to the bottom of the pile never to see the light of day again. It is a shame.
Read the last line of the OP this was partially welcomed behavior.Quote:
Unlucky OP better luck next time, if you can be bothered to make the effort.
Onto Dodging my question asking you to back up your claim "The SC team back at the start then had the autonomy to make a decision and go for it, now they have to hit targets and have a tried a tested model to achieve that."
What backs up the claim that they develop the game based on targets?
Steve and the CEO themselves have posted/written in contradiction to that statement.
Here are their words contradicting your words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSteve[Supercell]
Can they be refuted without relying on fallacious arguments?Quote:
http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...rcell-freemium
The key argument is over whether many of the most successful F2P mobile games are little more than money-sucking "monetisation machines", where the design is almost entirely geared towards forcing players to spend money. Gambling-style addiction, without even the prospect of a payout.For the most part, Supercell's games have swerved this criticism, yet still managed to make lots of money. How? "The huge irony here is that if the monetisation is not your number one priority, that actually leads to better monetisation," says Paananen.
"When you prioritise engagement and retention – making a great game that people play often and want to play for a long time – they are happy to pay. We want to design games that people can theoretically play for years."
Paananen is quick to stress that Supercell is just the latest in a long line of games firms with this objective, and mentions World of Warcraft and League of Legends as two franchises whose longevity his company is keen to emulate.
He also has some sharp words for some of the trends in social and mobile/F2P games that have hinted at other motivations, as well as companies focusing too much on analytics as a guide for their design choices.
"There was a time, especially in the social games industry, where people thought you could create great games based on a spreadsheet: that creativity and design wouldn't really matter, because it was all about some maths," says Paananen.
"Games are still a form of art, not a form of science. You can't design fun on a spreadsheet. And if you want to make an industry for the long-term, if you can't create fun games, there's no future."
I'm sure analytics still play a significant role in Supercell's business, in terms of watching closely how people play Hay Day and Clash of Clans, and taking design decisions at least partly based on that.
In other words, Paananen's criticism isn't of analytics per se, but of the trend he saw for analytics without the art.
Supercell has talked publicly and regularly about its company culture: small teams organised in "cells", with the freedom to work on new game ideas, test them and – if the team decides they're not worth pursuing – gathering the company together to toast the lessons learned with champagne.
*slow clap* Well done! you can google 'Clash of Clans' and copy-paste an article..
Just because a thread is well written doesn't mean his idea's are fool proof. Most of what he talked about is a moot point. Sure he wrote it well and didn't complain like most children on here, but it doesn't negate the fact that most of what he said had no real bearing on the game. Clan wars are fine though more customization wouldn't hurt it's also very unecessary at the time, heroes are fine, and loot is fine. I wouldn't mind seeing quests in game but they aren't ruled out so honestly I wouldn't be surprised if we saw them in the game next year after the holidays are done.Quote:
Originally Posted by billwinkiesbear
Lol it's because I literally had nothing better to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by billwinkiesbear
I also am genuinely shocked this thread hasn't been closed. The OP is actually my favorite post on the forums to date.
Ever consider some 19 year old college freshman with a brand new VISA maxing it out on gems? I suspect most of the people buying the gems to that level can not afford them, and furthermore, havnt even earned the money yet. People who have 15 thousand dollars to drop on blue walls that get jumped over the same as pink ones have much better things to do than play this game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete82
Or they just have more spending money than you. Or they have different priorities. Or both. Either way not your money not your call. I'm sure we'd all get a good laugh at some of the things you spend your hard earned money on too if you cared to share.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaibosh
LOOT - There is no loot problem. I'm able to farm 75-80 million gold a week, each and every week. You just need to know how to look, when to look, and where to look. You can get all this info from observations while nexting. Most look problems can be solved by farming at non-peak hours, where you see mostly townhalls at your level or one level above, and switching from a collector raid army to a core penetrating army on the fly.
Non-peak hours...why would anyone be surprised they don't see loot when they are farming at the same time as a 100 million other players. Depending on your time zone you will have busy times and dead times. Observe and note good and bad hours and you will see patterns...use this info to know when to boost or not to boost, or when to shut it down and text a hot girl.
Townhalls...next a 100 times and note how many TH7's, 8's, 9's, and 10's you see. If you're seeing a lot of TH's 2 levels below you, you need to move to a higher trophy count. You can stop pushing when you're seeing 3/4 TH's at your level or one above. This will prevent you from seeing the dreaded 50% loot penalty TH levels.
Armies...when you're not seeing barch collector raids then switch to loonion and start going for storages. It's rare that you see no loot in both collectors and storages when you follow my advice from above.
ZAPPING - It's pretty simple to stop it. And once again all you need is info derived from nexting observation. All you have to do is know how much DE you have, then compare that to every base you see while nexting. You can roughly calculate a bases total DE stored by looking at their drill levels and DE storage. If you have considerably higher DE in your storage than everyone else you will be a zapping target. If your DE storage is around average or below average you most likely will not get zapped. When I'm under 25k I can cruise in G1, when I'm between 25k-50k I can cruise in C3, and when I'm over 50k I stay in C2. I have been zapped once in 3 months using this method. Find your own ranges and you will have success too.
CLAN WARS - How you could possibly think a clan is an actual "clan" when players could simply opt out. I don't know many wars where soldiers could say "well, sorry sarge, I'm just not feelin' it this week". If for some reason you need to opt out...then leave the clan for an hour and have the search begin while you're out.
QUESTS - If I was SC there would be no reason to make this happen. After they brought in the ultimate game update in Clan Wars and there are still whiners and complainers why on earth would they bring in another huge depth to the game.