Tetris Battle Feedback

[XaeL]

$1-$20 is fine. People are used to buying convenience and access now. No one sees tuning purchases as purchasing just the option menu, social games have trained people to think of it as access to a platform.

Agree, I'll make a poll for purchase price...
(i personally would pay between $5 and $15 for a well implemented tetris game)

[loltris]

I personally have spent a small fortune (as well as a good amount of time) on Tetris.

First, I bought TDS.
Heck, the only reason I initially bought a DS Lite was for Tetris.
And then, I suffered through tons of videos and surveys to get rubies for max tuning on TF.
I even bought the (old) iPad version as well, just to try it out.
And even there I got shafted, with EA dropping the old version, and asking for new payment on the new version, instead of offering it as a free update.

And then now... max tuning for TB is unreasonably expensive.
I would pay, but it's nothing special either.
Maybe if it had instant AR and/or sonic drop.
But I'm not gonna pay for ANOTHER tetris unless it stands out like that.

And even worse is how EXPENSIVE the price they are asking for max tuning is. It's not even reasonable, it's almost as expensive as all I've spent so far combined.
And I don't even get instant AR or sonic drop for that? No thanks.

And even with those, I don't even think it is worth more than $20.
$25 max.

[Rosti_LFC]

I personally have spent a small fortune (as well as a good amount of time) on Tetris.

lol, you've bought a handful of consumer games and that's "a small fortune"? Talk to anyone who has bought anything for TGM (they range from $100 to $2000 per game, not including the required extra arcade hardware). There are people on TetrisConcept who have spent literally thousands of dollars on Tetris, and counting. IDK how much Kitaru, for example, has spent, but I'm fairly sure it's a lot and far closer to "a small fortune" than you'd ever spend buying the likes of Tetris DS.

Anyway, I didn't want to just be a dick, there's a point to be made here: we will pay what we think the game is worth.

Any discussion on here about what we'd pay is a bit stupid. We're a minor demographic. Really TTC should be looking at what your average user will pay, not the upper echelons who visit places like HardDrop and post stuff. What we are prepared to pay isn't a good judge - make a good game and we'll pay a lot more than your average user (some people are happy to pay $600 for TGM2+). Make what we feel is a rubbish game and we'll stick to Nullpomino and other free alternatives that we prefer, and we wouldn't give you a cent, whilst average users will happily still pay for it. Plus what we pay is pretty irrelevant - if we're a significant proportion of the income for the game then things are pretty dire financially, because 100 people shouldn't be financing a game aiming at probably 10-100 million users, and we're also the hardest 100 people to please.

Implement everything that myndzi said on the previous page and I'd happily pay a fair bit for it. Leave things as they are and I'd resent the idea of ever parting with money for it. Make a good game and we'll buy it. Other than that, don't make people choose between paying for things or grinding it for free. Either you pay for that part of the product, or you don't get it. I fucking hate the notion of 500 hours grinding or pay $10 to get a feature. It means you either value your time at 2 cents an hour, which is pitiful (it also makes playing feel like a chore, rather than a pasttime), or you're paying for something that yourself and other people can get for free, and any price seems expensive compared to getting it for free (personally this is why I've never put any money into Tetris Friends or Tetris Battle). There are plenty of major, successful free-to-play games (LoL, Team Fortress 2), that have a microtransaction system not based around pay-or-grind, and they're far better games for it.

[massi4h]

Since my facebook is linked to my TF page and I've got a whole bunch of rubies, shouldn't there be a way for me to max out the tunings on TB? I don't really want to play right now because I've got nothing unlocked.

[rEiGN]

Fixing the biggest issues in the game would basically make the marketing department very upset. TB doesn't facilitate competetive play and to me it just seems like a cash cow trying to do its best to tempt and nag people to spend money on the game. It's quite obnoxious, really.

Out of energy? No problem, just throw on $$$ at us. Want an (unfair) advantage over your opponents? No problem, just throw $$$ at us and we'll hook you up with these items and shit.

That said, I still like the gameplay and enjoy playing against my friends.

[Katatoniopeth]

Fixing the biggest issues in the game would basically make the marketing department very upset. TB doesn't facilitate competetive play and to me it just seems like a cash cow trying to do its best to tempt and nag people to spend money on the game. It's quite obnoxious, really.

Out of energy? No problem, just throw on $$$ at us. Want an (unfair) advantage over your opponents? No problem, just throw $$$ at us and we'll hook you up with these items and shit.

That said, I still like the gameplay and enjoy playing against my friends.

Very true, and also with the whole (Win a prize after x amount of games!) and the prize usually being double bombs of final rush or something, makes it hard for a casual gamer to say no to these "features", it would be nice if it were optional to play against a replay without the use of said "features".

[pizzapizza]

Very true, and also with the whole (Win a prize after x amount of games!) and the prize usually being double bombs of final rush or something, makes it hard for a casual gamer to say no to these "features", it would be nice if it were optional to play against a replay without the use of said "features".

agree with this comment

[myndzi]

There's a problem with that; namely, people play differently with those features than without. You can't just take a replay and remove the features, it won't work. So, you wind up dividing the population and everybody has fewer replays and therefore variety. It may not be a real big deal (I don't know what kind of numbers are involved) but I imagine that with 100 ranks dividing the players already, dividing it in half (or more probably, 70/30ish?) will take a big whack out of the diversity of the ghost replay system  for one or the other side of things.

I didn't say it on the other page because I just now thought of it, but the ghost replay system is actually a really good system... for a single-player game. It's like having an AI but more varied and human. And you're not playing the same kind of vs game you would play against a human. If you expect it to simulate real live multiplayer you will be sorely disappointed, and that's why I think a lot of people here are discontent with it. I still believe that it's a worthwhile system, though.

Hell, imagine if Nullpomino had replays on the netplay servers to keep people busy? How much easier do you think it would be to get people on at the same time to play real multiplayer if they had something at least "close" to occupy their time while they wait?

[Katatoniopeth]

There's a problem with that; namely, people play differently with those features than without. You can't just take a replay and remove the features, it won't work. So, you wind up dividing the population and everybody has fewer replays and therefore variety. It may not be a real big deal (I don't know what kind of numbers are involved) but I imagine that with 100 ranks dividing the players already, dividing it in half (or more probably, 70/30ish?) will take a big whack out of the diversity of the ghost replay system  for one or the other side of things.

I didn't say it on the other page because I just now thought of it, but the ghost replay system is actually a really good system... for a single-player game. It's like having an AI but more varied and human. And you're not playing the same kind of vs game you would play against a human. If you expect it to simulate real live multiplayer you will be sorely disappointed, and that's why I think a lot of people here are discontent with it. I still believe that it's a worthwhile system, though.

Hell, imagine if Nullpomino had replays on the netplay servers to keep people busy? How much easier do you think it would be to get people on at the same time to play real multiplayer if they had something at least "close" to occupy their time while they wait?

I just meant creating two different modes, one for pure play, and one for features, though I suppose that would defeat the purpose of the features being implemented in the first place :/. I really like the idea of having a ghost replay system on Nullpomino, if that was created, I would be on Nullpomino a lot more often, and I bet so would many others, and that would generate a lot more activity on Nullpomino, and maybe in the future it wouldn't even be needed

[MarioThePhenom]

i think i remember someone trashing the bomb idea? imma just say my input on it anyways and how it should be kept. it teaches the average player a basic understanding of downstacking, rather than having the 2p garbage system like tf, which just promotes speed and attacking, and nothing else.

as for feedback, i feel like preview or que, whatever you wanna call it, should be free, cause the average player probably wont know how useful it is compared to other things ( im just touching up on things that others have not)

[rEiGN]

Off-topic: What's the catch in TB when they ask your CC details / PayPal for $3?

[Kitaru]

i think i remember someone trashing the bomb idea? imma just say my input on it anyways and how it should be kept. it teaches the average player a basic understanding of downstacking, rather than having the 2p garbage system like tf, which just promotes speed and attacking, and nothing else.

One of the big problems is balance. It makes combos even more powerful than they already were by allowing you to downstack combo without sacrificing material, which allows you to build toward your next physical line clear step while still progressing downward.

It's a questionable substitute for real garbage holes. If desired, it would be theoretically possible to allow for real holed garbage; as myndzi and I touched on, it would be feasible to have a constant supply of garbage at the bottom of the field and then move the baseline when attacks are sent. However, this would also cause a change in character of the game, as the focus would significantly shift given the persistent ability to play downstack and the requirement to play around garbage to send build tetrises. I don't think such a drastic change would be well-received, especially when it comes to the general audience.

[myndzi]

One of the big problems is balance. It makes combos even more powerful than they already were by allowing you to downstack combo without sacrificing material, which allows you to build toward your next physical line clear step while still progressing downward.

It's a questionable substitute for real garbage holes. If desired, it would be theoretically possible to allow for real holed garbage; as myndzi and I touched on, it would be feasible to have a constant supply of garbage at the bottom of the field and then move the baseline when attacks are sent. However, this would also cause a change in character of the game, as the focus would significantly shift given the persistent ability to play downstack and the requirement to play around garbage to send build tetrises. I don't think such a drastic change would be well-received, especially when it comes to the general audience.

While I think it would be interesting to have a few rows of always-garbage at the bottom, in the case of TB I think I like the other idea better - when there's garbage, it's lined up with the replay; when there's not, the pieces fall through the floor and just get cut off or something.

I hope we didn't scare the poor guy off

[pokemino]

I really hate the fact that I have to spend energy whenever I play a single player game, such as sprint. I have a habit of misdropping a piece right in the beginning of sprints; in Tetrisfriends or just about any other client, this is no problem because I just start over again. In Tetris Battle, I spam the hard drop button/press forfeit, which expends energy. I find the consequent loss of energy to be absurdly pointless. At least let us restart without penalty in like the first ten or so seconds/pieces. I can somewhat understand if you don't apply the same thing to multiplayer tetris, but it's pointless to lose energy for the singleplayer games because of a misdrop.

tl;dr
You shouldn't take away energy if you restart a singleplayer game, at least in the first few seconds/pieces.

[myndzi]

I'm sorry to be critical, but I have to say that poor play is not a very good argument for the implementation of features...