These videos are weekly highlights for me. Please keep them coming. Also, if somehow possible, I'd love seeing some small bits of gameplay footage or ingame examples to support the content/topic of the video and a few minutes more (if the topic allows for it) would also be amazing. Love these nonetheless and here's hoping we get to play this game somewhat soonish, cause I am really craving for something new in that type of genre :)
Thanks! We'll show game footage as soon as we have a presentable vertical slice (should be within the next 2 months). Right now if we were to screen capture our build, it would just look like a bunch of gray rectangles.
With the buy phase and attack phase.. Maybe there are guards at the Bazaar during the day who prevent attacks, but at night when the Bazaar has cleared out combat happens. Idk if the day/night cycle is still a thing
Yes! Perhaps put phases throughout the whole game. Night and day work, but instead, I’d add another timeframe or reason for halting of attacks. Religious/cultural day? Then you don’t have to have equal number of turns for day or night.
I liked it more in the previous videos where you were constantly intertwining the theory you were talking about with the game itself, and had a story about the design/learning process. This one felt very rambly in the beginning and I was thinking, "oh no, I've heard all this before, hopefully it doesn't turn into a scene from the Clone Wars," etc. Etc. Thankfully I was pleasantly surprised! I really like the idea.
Is there any concept of earning "interest" on your money? Runeterra's spell mana allows slower deck to not be punished for not having early plays. Something like that in the bazar could be interesting. A player only buys two things in the buy phase because they want to start saving aggressively for a big purchase later for example
Hey guys, I barely ever comment on anything but I just wanted to let you guys know I really like these updates and it gives great insight on the evolution of the game. It's really interesting and as (just) a gamer, it gives me a deeper perspective on how complicated making actual games really is. I have no doubt that if you continue on the path you guys are taking, this game will be a slapper. Also, I wonder if it was possible to make a video about the lore part of the game. I would be interested to hear from the writers/narrative designers because I believe the IP has great potential.
This is getting closer and closer to chess every time I see an update. This definitely opens up so much cool design space. "Libero Shorts: +2 defense to your stuff if this is in the back row, otherwise -1 defense" "Hookshot: once per turn Hookshot may move an opponent's item from the back row to the front instead of attacking" (seems real good but it could break easy or something) What about positional jump attacks like a knight in chess? "Knight's Horse: this piece can only attack back row items" "Collateral potion: your next attack hits any items behind your target"
The design space does look way more open. And ways to interact like that hookshot sound good to me. Probably each class gets its own way to work around defenses in a pinch?
I disagree with the chess notion; the fact that they're trying to stop snowballing means they are trying to get away from it. At the top level of chess (GM vs GM or even Masters-level vs Masters-level), dropping a pawn is basically game over and the point they made about just not being the last person to make a mistake has a little bit of truth here. Chess is the epitome of a snowballing game. If your opponent blunders and as long as you don't make a big blunder in return, you will never lose that game. It should be emphasized that I say large blunder because there are some inefficiencies that are okay or minor that won't impact the game, such as missing checkmate in 9 to play safe, trade off all the pieces and promote a pawn for a safe win where you know you will not blunder. The key point there is that you are minimizing your own opportunity to make a blunder and the game is not inherently random. At levels of play that is NOT the top level, where both players are more prone to make big errors I can see where you are coming from.
This is super awesome. The idea of the front row/back row also is a great idea for design space because now you can also design cards that are row specific as well.
I love the concept of having a front row and back row! Being able to buy ‘shields” to protect your items is such an interesting design. It reminds me of Magic the Gathering, it is as if you play an enchantment that gives your creatures hexproof. In order to kill target the creature, you will have to destroy the enchantment first.
I think it's great that you guys decided to redesign the game from the ground up. Instead of pigin holing yourself within the initial vision, and creating a game that would inevitably die within a few months due to its core design flaws being exposed. It really shows that you want to make a game that lasts, and isn't just a fad. Suggestion - Maybe you could add effects to cards that do something when they are "direct replaced" so it does feel as bad to remove cards. Also are you able to more your cards around the board freely? So you could decide what cards you want to replace, or do you want your initial placement to be a part of the skill of the game?
I love these new changes! I'm more and more excited about the game every week. One thing I noticed after last week's video is that deleting the deck and the discard pile freed up a lot of screen space. The two-row system looks like an excellent way of utilizing this space! And, I'm excited about the potential for large board states; there definitely needs to be a limit, but the one-row thing from last video seemed a little constraining. I have a couple ideas for how to make even more use of that new screen real estate: 1) Move "face" off to the side, where the deck used to be. I realize that that might be a little unintuitive, but we could then afford for "face" to be a lot bigger, and have a lot more information displayed on it. When "face" is in the back-center of the screen, it has to take up a whole strip of the screen, when really it's just a square. 2) Where the discard pile used to be, maybe there could be something resembling a hand or a graveyard? I am all for reducing the randomness in the game, but I wonder if there's any way to re-introduce secret information into the game; without a hand, everything is "on the table." So maybe the player could have a couple spells they can get into their "secret stash" each turn? Or maybe when cards have to slide off the table, they can go to your graveyard, which would ALSO have limited space? 3) Let's keep monsters in the game, off to the side of the boards! I think having some items/options which are open to BOTH players really increases the interactivity of the game. If this stuff doesn't work, I totally trust your judgement. Really loving the game direction! So excited!
Hey! Imo having hard limits such as “three cards” is less fun than adding risk reward. Instead of having a buy phase, you could try and make it so that until you start attacking and messing with the opponent board, you gain more and more money. The meta could incentivize people to wait three turns and you’d end up with what you wanted, but it adds more design space and adds risk rewards and more strategies of “rush” or “long term”.
Really like the solutions you guys came up with for this problem. In particular the buy phase seems really interesting since it forces players to think at least a couple turns ahead every game.
Weapons could have reload times (a certain amount of turns until it can be used again) or ammunition (purchased from the store) to help curb their power. Magical weapons could have drawbacks to them, such as draining your health to deal damage or augment the weapon, but this might add too many mechanics/effects and be overwhelming.
Hi, this may be completely useless to you but it was the first thing that popped into my head hearing about the two rows. I’m not sure you know about an old jrpg called Suikoden 2, in which, unlike most jrpgs you could have 6 characters in 2 rows, and so did the enemies. All of your characters (like 70ish playable) had an attack type(S,M or L) usually in line with their theme. So heavy armor, guys with shields, mechs and other clumsy big guys are Short attackers, they can only attack when in the front row, and can only hit the enemies in their front row. More agile types but still with melee weapons and generally lighter armor like ninjas, pirates etc are Medium attackers, they can attack from anywhere but can only hit the enemies front row aswell. Then of course the characters with ranged weapons like archers, knife/tarot card throwers and gunners etc can also attack from anywhere but are weak so you want them in the back usually, they can however also hit any enemy and thus snipe enemies in the back row. This could be something if you feel you need to make minions more diverse(and probably to complex) Also some characters had special moves (attack runes and magic runes) that could work like battlecries or something that would allow for attacking a whole row or a line (front and the one behind)
Love explanation of the % to win and whatnot. I do understand function of this video is not to relay every design philosophy, but thought I’d give you guys a shot to address a question moving forward. The spike to 100% win percentage is obviously more beneficial the longer the game goes on and kinda the point of big combo strategies. This video made it seem like all types of that spike were being avoided. Is that the case or will big finishing combos be possible?
A combo deck could be something like potion maker. Buying many small ingredients but when combined could be a powerful potion or something. Also make it like a one time use kind of thing. Definitely would be cool but maybe not for all the classes or characters to have main combo elements.
I like this concept, however make sure the game wont be too bloated with different mechanics, makes picking it up much more difficult. One of the reasons why MTG does not get alot of new players. Good progress tho, I'm excited!
Glad you're adopting the row system instead of a "taunt" variant. I was thinking about how youd solve this problem from the previous video when all the cards in "hand" are now on the board and exposed
The two row system could have more Room up front and less room in the back so it kind of balances the fact that back row cards are more protected. Also certain percentage of cards that you normally would want in the back could have bonuses for being up front. High risk high reward kind of thing.
Who goes first has always been a snowball issue in most games, so with this buy phase being implemented, maybe make it so that the person with the smaller items (weighs less for reasoning) goes first (is faster) i think your choices mattering right from the start would be refreshing
Instead of a discrete buy phase, have you considered something more like the back and forth mechanics in Runeterra? Maybe you only get X number of moves per round, and buying and attacking are both moves.
Reynad should post a video about this new channel on his main channel. I thought Bazzar updates just stopped because of the Rona. Just randomly found this channel by chance.
I like the framing that bad snowballing is when a lead becomes insurmountable but the game doesn't end. Very easy to grasp. D-FENCE. It's nice to have a distinction between defensive and offensive options. And it can add complexities in where the same item has valid uses in each row. Or perhaps items that can jump from one row to the other (a frog that knocks equipment around in your [or your opponent's] hand lmao). My concern is vertical space. We don't see a new board mockup here, but we're now up to what, 6 rows? I guess it's not too bad since there's not really a 'hand' anymore.
Thanks for the feedback! It was definitely a challenge getting everything to fit, but we made it work in the end without removing toys or reducing the size of the cards much
2 rows is interesting! Reminds me of gwent. Would've loved to see some examples of cards that interact with this 2 row system. Also wondering if night/day cycle is still in the game? how shop works - are the items generated based on turn number still? Do we see our shop and the opponent's shop, or is the shop generated at the start of every turn?
I was wondering, what is the plans for/current method to bring randomness to the game? It's starting to seem like a deterministic resource management game. With the only resources being health, durability, attack and board space. Prismata was a fine deterministic card game, but it died because it became repetitive. Is The Bazaar going to rely on new classes to keep it interesting? I'd love to see how the shop works since that is the only way I can see that randomness can be introduced.
@@reynad27 And you pick 1 out of the available cards, or multiple? Can you see your opponent's options? It would be awesome to see a video dedicated to the shop to better understand the game in its current state. Btw, love the transparency of your game development process! Great videos!
hey, someone who also played Prismata. I must agree that its fairly repetitive. Its also really really difficult to get into and its not really visually appealing frankly.
I was wondering if you could talk about the idea of cards not having a cost? It seems really weird to me a game about a bazaar has nothing to do with buying or selling.
I'm interested to see where this all goes but I seem to dislike the size mechanic in the game, just because it doesn't feel familiar. I don't know if that will be a common issue with many players but that's my first initial reaction, mana, health etc. All feel familiar and even if they all function differently in different games, it just feels natural. Where to me the whole size of the cards taking up more space etc. Feels unfamiliar
i disagree with the jogg example. jogg is the reward of a control playstyle. He is meant to be a big swing to an otherwise close match thats THE reason to play control
These videos are weekly highlights for me. Please keep them coming. Also, if somehow possible, I'd love seeing some small bits of gameplay footage or ingame examples to support the content/topic of the video and a few minutes more (if the topic allows for it) would also be amazing.
Love these nonetheless and here's hoping we get to play this game somewhat soonish, cause I am really craving for something new in that type of genre :)
Thanks! We'll show game footage as soon as we have a presentable vertical slice (should be within the next 2 months). Right now if we were to screen capture our build, it would just look like a bunch of gray rectangles.
This whole video is pretty much reynad (and ben) explaining what sucks about knife juggler.
Or capitalism
@Lunatic41521 He right tho
2:35 knife juggler triggered reynad so hard he decided to make a card game
With the buy phase and attack phase.. Maybe there are guards at the Bazaar during the day who prevent attacks, but at night when the Bazaar has cleared out combat happens. Idk if the day/night cycle is still a thing
Yes! Perhaps put phases throughout the whole game. Night and day work, but instead, I’d add another timeframe or reason for halting of attacks. Religious/cultural day? Then you don’t have to have equal number of turns for day or night.
Cool idea
that is a very neat idea, i love it thematically
That is perhaps the best idea I've seen in the comments yet
Im actually in shock that I found someone in the world that grabs the pen the same way I do. Thanks Ben
I liked it more in the previous videos where you were constantly intertwining the theory you were talking about with the game itself, and had a story about the design/learning process. This one felt very rambly in the beginning and I was thinking, "oh no, I've heard all this before, hopefully it doesn't turn into a scene from the Clone Wars," etc. Etc.
Thankfully I was pleasantly surprised! I really like the idea.
Is there any concept of earning "interest" on your money? Runeterra's spell mana allows slower deck to not be punished for not having early plays. Something like that in the bazar could be interesting. A player only buys two things in the buy phase because they want to start saving aggressively for a big purchase later for example
Hey guys, I barely ever comment on anything but I just wanted to let you guys know I really like these updates and it gives great insight on the evolution of the game. It's really interesting and as (just) a gamer, it gives me a deeper perspective on how complicated making actual games really is. I have no doubt that if you continue on the path you guys are taking, this game will be a slapper. Also, I wonder if it was possible to make a video about the lore part of the game. I would be interested to hear from the writers/narrative designers because I believe the IP has great potential.
Nerf the haircut, its snowballing.
This is getting closer and closer to chess every time I see an update. This definitely opens up so much cool design space. "Libero Shorts: +2 defense to your stuff if this is in the back row, otherwise -1 defense" "Hookshot: once per turn Hookshot may move an opponent's item from the back row to the front instead of attacking" (seems real good but it could break easy or something)
What about positional jump attacks like a knight in chess?
"Knight's Horse: this piece can only attack back row items"
"Collateral potion: your next attack hits any items behind your target"
The design space does look way more open. And ways to interact like that hookshot sound good to me. Probably each class gets its own way to work around defenses in a pinch?
I disagree with the chess notion; the fact that they're trying to stop snowballing means they are trying to get away from it. At the top level of chess (GM vs GM or even Masters-level vs Masters-level), dropping a pawn is basically game over and the point they made about just not being the last person to make a mistake has a little bit of truth here. Chess is the epitome of a snowballing game. If your opponent blunders and as long as you don't make a big blunder in return, you will never lose that game. It should be emphasized that I say large blunder because there are some inefficiencies that are okay or minor that won't impact the game, such as missing checkmate in 9 to play safe, trade off all the pieces and promote a pawn for a safe win where you know you will not blunder. The key point there is that you are minimizing your own opportunity to make a blunder and the game is not inherently random. At levels of play that is NOT the top level, where both players are more prone to make big errors I can see where you are coming from.
@@aaaakun that's a fat paragraph to completely miss the point of what I'm saying
This is super awesome. The idea of the front row/back row also is a great idea for design space because now you can also design cards that are row specific as well.
I love the concept of having a front row and back row! Being able to buy ‘shields” to protect your items is such an interesting design. It reminds me of Magic the Gathering, it is as if you play an enchantment that gives your creatures hexproof. In order to kill target the creature, you will have to destroy the enchantment first.
2:11 who holds a pen like that?
I have been waiting for this comment for weeks
ben
ben
omg yes!
I think it's great that you guys decided to redesign the game from the ground up. Instead of pigin holing yourself within the initial vision, and creating a game that would inevitably die within a few months due to its core design flaws being exposed. It really shows that you want to make a game that lasts, and isn't just a fad.
Suggestion - Maybe you could add effects to cards that do something when they are "direct replaced" so it does feel as bad to remove cards. Also are you able to more your cards around the board freely? So you could decide what cards you want to replace, or do you want your initial placement to be a part of the skill of the game?
I love these new changes! I'm more and more excited about the game every week.
One thing I noticed after last week's video is that deleting the deck and the discard pile freed up a lot of screen space. The two-row system looks like an excellent way of utilizing this space! And, I'm excited about the potential for large board states; there definitely needs to be a limit, but the one-row thing from last video seemed a little constraining.
I have a couple ideas for how to make even more use of that new screen real estate:
1) Move "face" off to the side, where the deck used to be. I realize that that might be a little unintuitive, but we could then afford for "face" to be a lot bigger, and have a lot more information displayed on it. When "face" is in the back-center of the screen, it has to take up a whole strip of the screen, when really it's just a square.
2) Where the discard pile used to be, maybe there could be something resembling a hand or a graveyard? I am all for reducing the randomness in the game, but I wonder if there's any way to re-introduce secret information into the game; without a hand, everything is "on the table." So maybe the player could have a couple spells they can get into their "secret stash" each turn? Or maybe when cards have to slide off the table, they can go to your graveyard, which would ALSO have limited space?
3) Let's keep monsters in the game, off to the side of the boards! I think having some items/options which are open to BOTH players really increases the interactivity of the game.
If this stuff doesn't work, I totally trust your judgement. Really loving the game direction! So excited!
Hey! Imo having hard limits such as “three cards” is less fun than adding risk reward. Instead of having a buy phase, you could try and make it so that until you start attacking and messing with the opponent board, you gain more and more money. The meta could incentivize people to wait three turns and you’d end up with what you wanted, but it adds more design space and adds risk rewards and more strategies of “rush” or “long term”.
Really like the solutions you guys came up with for this problem. In particular the buy phase seems really interesting since it forces players to think at least a couple turns ahead every game.
Weapons could have reload times (a certain amount of turns until it can be used again) or ammunition (purchased from the store) to help curb their power. Magical weapons could have drawbacks to them, such as draining your health to deal damage or augment the weapon, but this might add too many mechanics/effects and be overwhelming.
Hi, this may be completely useless to you but it was the first thing that popped into my head hearing about the two rows.
I’m not sure you know about an old jrpg called Suikoden 2, in which, unlike most jrpgs you could have 6 characters in 2 rows, and so did the enemies. All of your characters (like 70ish playable) had an attack type(S,M or L) usually in line with their theme.
So heavy armor, guys with shields, mechs and other clumsy big guys are Short attackers, they can only attack when in the front row, and can only hit the enemies in their front row.
More agile types but still with melee weapons and generally lighter armor like ninjas, pirates etc are Medium attackers, they can attack from anywhere but can only hit the enemies front row aswell.
Then of course the characters with ranged weapons like archers, knife/tarot card throwers and gunners etc can also attack from anywhere but are weak so you want them in the back usually, they can however also hit any enemy and thus snipe enemies in the back row.
This could be something if you feel you need to make minions more diverse(and probably to complex) Also some characters had special moves (attack runes and magic runes) that could work like battlecries or something that would allow for attacking a whole row or a line (front and the one behind)
Love explanation of the % to win and whatnot. I do understand function of this video is not to relay every design philosophy, but thought I’d give you guys a shot to address a question moving forward. The spike to 100% win percentage is obviously more beneficial the longer the game goes on and kinda the point of big combo strategies. This video made it seem like all types of that spike were being avoided. Is that the case or will big finishing combos be possible?
We're definitely encouraging big combos, and some classes will even be based around that play style.
A combo deck could be something like potion maker. Buying many small ingredients but when combined could be a powerful potion or something. Also make it like a one time use kind of thing. Definitely would be cool but maybe not for all the classes or characters to have main combo elements.
I swear reynad only has like 5 shirts in his wardrobe
i really like the double row idea! makes the game seem even more fun tbh
I like this concept, however make sure the game wont be too bloated with different mechanics, makes picking it up much more difficult. One of the reasons why MTG does not get alot of new players.
Good progress tho, I'm excited!
Glad you're adopting the row system instead of a "taunt" variant. I was thinking about how youd solve this problem from the previous video when all the cards in "hand" are now on the board and exposed
The two row system could have more Room up front and less room in the back so it kind of balances the fact that back row cards are more protected. Also certain percentage of cards that you normally would want in the back could have bonuses for being up front. High risk high reward kind of thing.
Who goes first has always been a snowball issue in most games, so with this buy phase being implemented, maybe make it so that the person with the smaller items (weighs less for reasoning) goes first (is faster) i think your choices mattering right from the start would be refreshing
This is a really cool idea. Will test this
Instead of a discrete buy phase, have you considered something more like the back and forth mechanics in Runeterra? Maybe you only get X number of moves per round, and buying and attacking are both moves.
Reynad should post a video about this new channel on his main channel. I thought Bazzar updates just stopped because of the Rona. Just randomly found this channel by chance.
Oh, looks like I'm a complete retard and he already did that this morning.
loving these man, really good talk there
I like the framing that bad snowballing is when a lead becomes insurmountable but the game doesn't end. Very easy to grasp.
D-FENCE. It's nice to have a distinction between defensive and offensive options. And it can add complexities in where the same item has valid uses in each row. Or perhaps items that can jump from one row to the other (a frog that knocks equipment around in your [or your opponent's] hand lmao).
My concern is vertical space. We don't see a new board mockup here, but we're now up to what, 6 rows? I guess it's not too bad since there's not really a 'hand' anymore.
Thanks for the feedback! It was definitely a challenge getting everything to fit, but we made it work in the end without removing toys or reducing the size of the cards much
2 rows is interesting! Reminds me of gwent. Would've loved to see some examples of cards that interact with this 2 row system.
Also wondering if night/day cycle is still in the game? how shop works - are the items generated based on turn number still? Do we see our shop and the opponent's shop, or is the shop generated at the start of every turn?
All great questions, some of which we're still working through ourselves!
I was wondering, what is the plans for/current method to bring randomness to the game? It's starting to seem like a deterministic resource management game. With the only resources being health, durability, attack and board space. Prismata was a fine deterministic card game, but it died because it became repetitive. Is The Bazaar going to rely on new classes to keep it interesting? I'd love to see how the shop works since that is the only way I can see that randomness can be introduced.
The items in the shop are random every turn. That's the main source of variance
@@reynad27 And you pick 1 out of the available cards, or multiple? Can you see your opponent's options? It would be awesome to see a video dedicated to the shop to better understand the game in its current state.
Btw, love the transparency of your game development process! Great videos!
hey, someone who also played Prismata. I must agree that its fairly repetitive. Its also really really difficult to get into and its not really visually appealing frankly.
@@JayOtberg We'll definitely make one in the future! We're still finalizing some of those things ourselves
I was wondering if you could talk about the idea of cards not having a cost? It seems really weird to me a game about a bazaar has nothing to do with buying or selling.
I'm interested to see where this all goes but I seem to dislike the size mechanic in the game, just because it doesn't feel familiar. I don't know if that will be a common issue with many players but that's my first initial reaction, mana, health etc. All feel familiar and even if they all function differently in different games, it just feels natural. Where to me the whole size of the cards taking up more space etc. Feels unfamiliar
SO HYPE FOR THE BAZAAR
i want to see more character concept art
I did find this interesting, thank you
Lol noodle really hate hearthstone. When he talk about the rng lol
i disagree with the jogg example. jogg is the reward of a control playstyle. He is meant to be a big swing to an otherwise close match thats THE reason to play control
Watching this and thinking about League...
Release 2024?
Reminds me of Dota 2 graph 5:05
More updates!
Get new markers !!!!
Premio Nobel now
Epic
3:11 - surely slating Hearthstone isn't a good look (or even safe?) for a company trying to create a card game? seems silly
The way the dude holds that marker really bothers me for some reason. Also, those markers suck, can barely see the lines.
get a haircut bro
Urbandictionary disagrees with your definition of snowballing