A)I have spent 0 dollars of my own playing CCG's, yet have played about 15 different versions on thousands of dollars worth of cards. I have friends who are addicted, and are quite happy to play (I have a 1 win 63 loss record for Game of Thrones. No idea how)
B) I have played a couple computer versions of CCGs (Magic, and Marvel Trading Card on DS, Culdecept is kinda one).
Here are my issues with the Eye of Judgement:
1) It combines both the initial cost (Which actually is much lower that I thought, thumbs up) of the software (B) with the cards themselves in booster packs, (A), to get revenue from two sources when one would work fine, particularily since most of these games already are online. Money grabbing is fun, 2 streams, not 1!
2) The Camera seems a bit... random, pointless even. So rather than clicking where you want your card to go, you carefully place it. Also, can the barcode be duplicated? Your opponent doesn't see your cards, they see the image, so get a high quality printer and make 12 copies of those ultra rare boost cards. Your opponent will thank you for it. And how can Sony prove any cheating, maybe you just bought 50 booster decks.
3) Deck control. Nothing says fun like registering your decks 1 by 1, and I presume they have that feature in there, otherwise, woot, I'm playing with a 120 card deck without random draws! Seems like fun for a CCG. 30 card hands? Is there any fucking control for rules, or what?
4) The game itself seems painfully basic. People who are into CCG's with depth will find :Creature/Spell/Kill/repeat a bit boring. Though this is without seeing any spells, which may or may not add a lot of modification, and there appears to be a chance of dodging? Well, luck factors have existed in simple CCG's, like Pokemon before. Do people like that?
5) Expansions: Card games are always being modified, balanced, and expanded on. Great, so are we going to need to buy another piece of fucking software as well as a new deck? 120 cards aren't that much. New class cards? Or did you program 600 cards and are just jerking us around, DLC to unlock them? Hopefully not.
6) 9 fields, goal is to by the first to control 5... why would player 1 do anything but place high defence creatures because he places #5 before player 2? Maybe the game doesn't end for a full turn, but... huh?
Now, there certainly are more talented and intelligent individuals than I who worked on this project, who probably considered these problems and dealt with them. But I havn't heard any decent justification against any of those as of yet. Plus, the Warhawk server issue of "Oh, people were using one split screen to give them an additional view" wasn't solved by the simplicity of "Disconnect player when idle for 5 minutes and disallow spectating", it was solved by not letting you play on Sony's servers with friends at your house. So I'm not certain if I'm giving people too much credit or am just being bitchy.
See Ya George.
"He did not die - He passed Away"
At least following a comedians own jokes makes his death easier.
