We should ALL be writing to those who are able to review the game, since we have a vested interest in keeping the multiplayer base as large as possible. The only places I know of that the game is really doing well are in Russia and (interestingly), Greece. I've already contacted Chillingo to ask them why they have not been promoting the game. Seems silly to wait when the game really needs its multiplayer base if there's a chance for it to succeed wildly, no? I hope to be able to play this online for years to come. Win or lose, I have had such a blast playing online.
nice work, theres an extra "each" on deathrage and "turn" missing from megaworm. just glanced over some of them
Game-breaking Black Market bug The Black Market doesn't appear to work at all. Has anybody gotten it to work? When you build it, you can then access it. When you access it, you're given the option to buy cards. But when you try to purchase cards, you're told that you don't have the required power for more cards (even if you do). Then, the screen changes to the build UI pane, and hitting cancel puts you in an infinite pop-up loop. The only way to escape it is to force quit the app. I tried several different Orions and build locations and with and without deck space. Also tried it in several different campaign games, in multiple save slots...doesn't matter. It never works.
Nice work. There's a few errors, though: several missing apostrophes, Death Rage has an agreement error, Evil Sorcerer shouldn't be plural. Some other little things. There's also a bunch of extraneous words that don't clarify or add to meaning. For simplicity's sake, I'd cull them. Regardless, thanks for taking the time to do this!
Its not each turn, its only on your turn. I changed the wording to "on your turn" because it's more correct. "on each of your turns" is way to wordy and wont fit on a lot of cards. I kept the short form "on your turn" throughout most cards so I think it's clear that that ability triggers every time it becomes "your turn"
Yeah make a list for me of stuff and PM it if you want. I know it looks like I'm being wordy sometimes, but trust me I spend a lot of time trying to balance clarity and conciseness. If there is space on the card I like to make sure its very clear. Sometimes the smallest word choice can change the meaning. I spent time wording the cards based on the actual game mechanics for clarity's sake, which took some play testing. Some cards like astral cloud were very hard to clearly fit on the card as it has a lot of nuances. Another important thing to consider is that there is no standard rulebook or dictionary for this game. In Magic the Gathering you can use a lot of shorthand on cards such as "haste" instead of "this creature may attack and use abilities the same turn it was cast." Therefore I have to spell things out sometimes that would be better in a shorthand form. Also, what do you thing of replacing "creature" with "unit" on all creature cards? It would still be a clear naming standard and would save a lot of card space overall.
I'll write up a full list tomorrow. I do understand what you mean about balancing thoroughness with brevity. But the extraneous words I refer to are truly that. In general, you did a great job. A little tightening and fixing and it'll be perfect -- and (no offense, Pavel!) lightyears clearer than 1.0. I like the implied efficiency of replacing 'creature' with 'unit'. I'm a bit concerned that 'unit' is a fairly broad term and might be confusing in some contexts. Plus, it's less flavorful than 'creature'. But if it reads correctly in all cases, it seems like it'd be a good substitute. (incidentally, I've done an ungodly amount of technical writing geared for children. And I've played MTG for 15 years. So I'm totally on the same page as you re: concise, practical communication of instructional language)
Re the blackmarket issues above. I have built and purchased cards from the blackmarket. I have had a few cases where it wasn't registering my taps on the buy button but if I just tapped wildly it eventually worked. I have had other weird crashes in campaign mode on the build screen but I have also played a few full campaigns without issues so its a little hit and miss.
I really wish there were more people online Solo mode is fun but only for so long. MP is what will give this thing long lasting playtime.
I had problems last night, couldn't find anyone, then invited one of the peeps I gifted the app to. We played two matches. Awesome. He beat me in the first and the second match one went on for 45 minutes, he was Rejuvenating and I kept on using my Leviathan to gain life. Finally, finally wore him down and ended with Lightning Bolt, Unholy Word and another Lightning Bolt. I am usually not on until at least 11 edt (GMT 0300). A little advertising by Chillingo would go a long way. So would coverage on places like TA. I already contacted Eli Hodapp. You guys should too. http://forums.toucharcade.com/member.php?u=6517
next to big amount of bugfixes i would like to see at least a little "players online" counter.. i posted about this some pages back and its easy to implement and at least gives the player an rough estimate how much players are currently playing or want to play.. so you don't need to sit and wait for nothing to happen , but see ahh just 4 guys online.. i do something else.. or ahh 100 online, lets try to get a game.. as for reviews of orions2.. sometimes i think no review is better than if you get a reviewer who actualy cares about bugs and polish and just destroys the game with its review.. difficulty.. maybe it would be better to wait a patch or two till the most bugs are ironed out before you start nagging reviewers to review the game.. as for "success".. there is not much going on.. the highest chart position are in russia and spain both are tiny markets with very low sales volume.. in the us its currently #137 in strategy and #62 in board.. this can be easily compare to shadow era which is on #14 in cards and #68 in role play. thats all grossing charts (the important one- cha-ching) .. so in general even with its "age" SE earns more money than O2... just a short excursion into charts and competition.. from the gamecenter/crystal charts i would assume that the big part of the customers out there do not play multiplayer at all.. i assume they stick to the campaign i would advise again pestering eli.. mass spam request for a review won't help.. maybe they already have it somewhere on their list for review.. surely they did not not notice the games release, as they posted about it..
There's a huge difference between "nagging," "pestering" and simply reminding the Editor there's a game with a sizable following that we all are hoping receives more attention. Given the need to expand the user base for us to enjoy the multiplayer aspects, it is logical to contact those who can provide exposure. Sitting back and doing nothing risks having the Editors wonder why there is no response from the fan base at all, so why ever review it? That makes no sense to me. It's been two weeks since the game was released, which is not a long time, so I;m not apprehensive that TA has yet to post a review. However, I see no harm in requesting one. SE fans asked and finally got their coverage. So should we.
well if you asked him once i think thats enough.. what good is there for 20 more people to ask? even asking politely is still spam.. also i would assume proper review for a game like orions would take alot of time to write in the first place.. the game is pretty big if you take the campaign into account etc. so thats surely not a small task..
Meh. The whole "ZOMG! Front-page review!" thing is completely overblown. A game is reviewed, it gets a few comments, and it's usually cycled right off the front page within 24 hours. Big deal. I'm sure a TA review is nice for the developers and usually leads to a temporary spike in sales. I've got no issue with that; my fondest wish is for the iOS marketplace to remain fresh and vital, and keeping developers happy is the surest way for that to happen. And I've witnessed how a review can be a point of pride to fans of the game with the extreme cases leading to a sense of validation ("See! I told you my game is awesome! It got reviewed!"). Which is also cool ... to a certain point. Beyond those things, though, where's the beef? Why do some people here consider a TA review to be such a game-changer? In terms of O2 specifically, does anyone really think that a front-page review is going to bring in a flood of new players? That the multiplayer lobby will suddenly be jam-packed? If so ... well, let me know if you're interested in some of this great swampland in Florida I'm selling. A review would almost certainly lead to some new players; no argument there. But the gameplay is still the thing. In O2's case, that means it's only going to attract newcomers who are comfortable with the idea of a strategy card game with a nearly vertical learning curve (and a game that has some issues, if we're being truthful about it). That's a pretty small subset of people, no matter if TA were to review it every day for a week.
I think one of the biggest hurdles facing O2 is having Chillingo as a publisher. They did virtually nothing to promote the game prior to release and their customer service is appalling. At the moment, I think fixing the many issues with O2 is more important than adding new content or attracting new players. I'd rather have a polished game with minimal bugs and a conservative player base, than have O2 in its current release but have a zillion players to choose from. Don't get me wrong; I think O2 is brilliant and I'm playing it a lot. But I don't think anyone here would disagree when I say that it needs a lot of work.
