BUG: Snitch does not end game and wrong points

[Eforen]

Catching the snitch does not end the game and is only 30 points or something instead of 150. How did they overlook this?!

[ZQFarnzy]

Are people really trying to defend a fictional sport for a novel, that is intentionally imbalanced to make the main characters on the team (the seekers) the only ones that matter in the fiction? Yes, it is imbalanced. Yes, this game fixed it to be competitively viable, and no amount of "Um, well, actually..." from the books is going to change that objective fact.

[SolviteSekai]

Opprinnelig skrevet av CourtJesterCowboy:

Opprinnelig skrevet av gbuglyo:

Haha, okay. And yet you, the serious adult, are here to spend your precious time discussing a video game based on a fictional sport you find dumb and childish. Give me a break.

At least I'm not a hypocrite. I'm a child at heart, and always will be. :)

That's the part I don't get, like obviously these glazer defender people think Quidditch is cool, or they wouldnt be playing... but they also are using Quidditch being "dumb" as a reason to change it into something that is nolonger Quidditch? I cant tell if they are trolling or not. You'd think everyone would want a less cartooney and more official AAA Quidditch experience like Hogwarts Legacy was... I dont get it.

Hogwarts Legacy being a "AAA quality" Assassins Creed tier open world game was such an absurdly huge L for the IP it's crazy.

[gbuglyo]

Opprinnelig skrevet av ZQFarnzy:

Are people really trying to defend a fictional sport for a novel, that is intentionally imbalanced to make the main characters on the team (the seekers) the only ones that matter in the fiction? Yes, it is imbalanced. Yes, this game fixed it to be competitively viable, and no amount of "Um, well, actually..." from the books is going to change that objective fact.

It really isn't that complicated. Unlike this game, the books have millions of fans. Some fans of the books also play video games, and they want to see a lore-accurate adaptation of their favorite fictional sport, Quidditch. That's all that is to it. As for Quidditch being imbalanced: that's only partially true, and it has mostly been clarified and fixed in JKR's later books (most notably, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince). Read up about this online, or simply read my earlier comments here.

Opprinnelig skrevet av SolviteSekai:

Opprinnelig skrevet av CourtJesterCowboy:

That's the part I don't get, like obviously these glazer defender people think Quidditch is cool, or they wouldnt be playing... but they also are using Quidditch being "dumb" as a reason to change it into something that is nolonger Quidditch? I cant tell if they are trolling or not. You'd think everyone would want a less cartooney and more official AAA Quidditch experience like Hogwarts Legacy was... I dont get it.

Hogwarts Legacy being a "AAA quality" Assassins Creed tier open world game was such an absurdly huge L for the IP it's crazy.

So true, fans hated it and it flopped like a... no wait, that's wrong. So much about your comment, then.

[CourtJesterCowboy]

Opprinnelig skrevet av SolviteSekai:

Opprinnelig skrevet av CourtJesterCowboy:

That's the part I don't get, like obviously these glazer defender people think Quidditch is cool, or they wouldnt be playing... but they also are using Quidditch being "dumb" as a reason to change it into something that is nolonger Quidditch? I cant tell if they are trolling or not. You'd think everyone would want a less cartooney and more official AAA Quidditch experience like Hogwarts Legacy was... I dont get it.

Hogwarts Legacy being a "AAA quality" Assassins Creed tier open world game was such an absurdly huge L for the IP it's crazy.

Trolls used to be believable. You will never accomplish 1/100th of that games effect

[CourtJesterCowboy]

Opprinnelig skrevet av ZQFarnzy:

Are people really trying to defend a fictional sport for a novel, that is intentionally imbalanced to make the main characters on the team (the seekers) the only ones that matter in the fiction? Yes, it is imbalanced. Yes, this game fixed it to be competitively viable, and no amount of "Um, well, actually..." from the books is going to change that objective fact.

It’s simple. Use an IP to make sales, and respect the source material. Otherwise we have Rocket League… which is still way better than this Qudditch game…. Because they didn’t respect the source material. If they really dropped an awesome Quidditch game I would throw Rocket League away and become a core player, but we got a watery kids game

[SolviteSekai]

Opprinnelig skrevet av gbuglyo:

Opprinnelig skrevet av ZQFarnzy:

Are people really trying to defend a fictional sport for a novel, that is intentionally imbalanced to make the main characters on the team (the seekers) the only ones that matter in the fiction? Yes, it is imbalanced. Yes, this game fixed it to be competitively viable, and no amount of "Um, well, actually..." from the books is going to change that objective fact.

It really isn't that complicated. Unlike this game, the books have millions of fans. Some fans of the books also play video games, and they want to see a lore-accurate adaptation of their favorite fictional sport, Quidditch. That's all that is to it. As for Quidditch being imbalanced: that's only partially true, and it has mostly been clarified and fixed in JKR's later books (most notably, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince). Read up about this online, or simply read my earlier comments here.

Opprinnelig skrevet av SolviteSekai:

Hogwarts Legacy being a "AAA quality" Assassins Creed tier open world game was such an absurdly huge L for the IP it's crazy.

So true, fans hated it and it flopped like a... no wait, that's wrong. So much about your comment, then.

Pokemon Scarlet and Violet had similar sales.

That's how blind fanboyism works.

[SolviteSekai]

Opprinnelig skrevet av CourtJesterCowboy:

Opprinnelig skrevet av SolviteSekai:

Hogwarts Legacy being a "AAA quality" Assassins Creed tier open world game was such an absurdly huge L for the IP it's crazy.

Trolls used to be believable. You will never accomplish 1/100th of that games effect

I mean dont worry you're getting a live service sequel (since you lapped up the assassins creed generic open world stuff)

[ZQFarnzy]

Opprinnelig skrevet av gbuglyo:

It really isn't that complicated. Unlike this game, the books have millions of fans. Some fans of the books also play video games, and they want to see a lore-accurate adaptation of their favorite fictional sport, Quidditch. That's all that is to it. As for Quidditch being imbalanced: that's only partially true, and it has mostly been clarified and fixed in JKR's later books (most notably, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince). Read up about this online, or simply read my earlier comments here.

I know about the fans. Personally, I'm a fan of both. As a fan, I recognize Quidditch, and it's rules, as a literary device to make the Seeker stand out and make everyone else not matter. I recognized it the first time I read Sorcerer's Stone as a kid. It's not hard to realize how it would not work in a competitive context.

And I know other games have tried to fix it. Quidditch World Cup for the PS2 and Gamecube made it so the Snitch chase is easier if the rest of your team does better in the rest of the match, but even on the hardest difficulty, I would continuously force my opponents to recreate Bulgaria's loss in the World Cup, by being at least 160 points up when the chase started.

The canonical rules would work better in a team manager style Quidditch simulator than an actual competitive game than Quidditch Champions. But you know what? Even then, I wouldn't play it, because all I'd need to do is have a good Seeker to win the game. There's no challenge.

But here, the Seeker has impact, but the other roles actually matter, and unlike other World Cups, the matches are guaranteed to not last weeks because nobody can find the Snitch. A time limit just makes sense, and as a Harry Potter fan, nothing would make me happier than a modern day Hogwarts story where people realize that basing the Snitch off the 150 galleon prize snidget hunt during a match actually doesn't make the game better, and implementing rules similar to this game.

...Because I'm a fan, and would love to see the wizarding world become better, not hang on to what makes it worse.

[gbuglyo]

Opprinnelig skrevet av ZQFarnzy:

Opprinnelig skrevet av gbuglyo:

It really isn't that complicated. Unlike this game, the books have millions of fans. Some fans of the books also play video games, and they want to see a lore-accurate adaptation of their favorite fictional sport, Quidditch. That's all that is to it. As for Quidditch being imbalanced: that's only partially true, and it has mostly been clarified and fixed in JKR's later books (most notably, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince). Read up about this online, or simply read my earlier comments here.

I know about the fans. Personally, I'm a fan of both. As a fan, I recognize Quidditch, and it's rules, as a literary device to make the Seeker stand out and make everyone else not matter. I recognized it the first time I read Sorcerer's Stone as a kid. It's not hard to realize how it would not work in a competitive context.

And I know other games have tried to fix it. Quidditch World Cup for the PS2 and Gamecube made it so the Snitch chase is easier if the rest of your team does better in the rest of the match, but even on the hardest difficulty, I would continuously force my opponents to recreate Bulgaria's loss in the World Cup, by being at least 160 points up when the chase started.

The canonical rules would work better in a team manager style Quidditch simulator than an actual competitive game than Quidditch Champions. But you know what? Even then, I wouldn't play it, because all I'd need to do is have a good Seeker to win the game. There's no challenge.

But here, the Seeker has impact, but the other roles actually matter, and unlike other World Cups, the matches are guaranteed to not last weeks because nobody can find the Snitch. A time limit just makes sense, and as a Harry Potter fan, nothing would make me happier than a modern day Hogwarts story where people realize that basing the Snitch off the 150 galleon prize snidget hunt during a match actually doesn't make the game better, and implementing rules similar to this game.

...Because I'm a fan, and would love to see the wizarding world become better, not hang on to what makes it worse.

I see your point, but that's not how I feel about it. Apart from the changes in how the Seeker works, the game seems to disrespect the lore every step of the way: Beaters flying around beating up players directly with their bats, summoning a Bludger rather than tracking it down and sending it in a direction, the Bludgers not going rogue to target people on their own and ending up feeling like simple ranged weapons in the Beaters' hands, a "Triwizard Quidditch Cup", etc. I could go on and on. Tbh, the game feels more like a Quidditch-inspired game than an actual adaptation to me, and I can't help but feel that this must be part of the reason most HP fans are staying away from it (there are only 2k players on Steam right now, in a peak Saturday hour).

But staying on the topic of the Snitch/Seeker rules: they have been clarified a lot since the first book, most importantly in book 6 and Quidditch Through the Ages. You might want to do a bit of research, the official rules are not that bad. E.g., if you were really focused only on the Seeker as a manager, you'd end up like this guy:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/2878600/discussions/0/4757578099468590733/?tscn=1725579307#c4757578099475614744

[ZQFarnzy]

First point, I kind of agree with you about Beaters. They're braindead easy to play. First of all, I'd recommend a grab instead of a summon, basically you can grab the bludger only if you're close to it. No summoning it from across the pitch. Maybe skills can increase the radius, but no pulling it from across the field to camp the Keeper. Second, I want there to be a minigame to juggle the beater with your club, maybe by pressing a button to a rhythm, to keep it from escaping or attacking you like when you steal the "enemy's" bludger. Third, both bludgers should occasionally hit whoever's close when not kept busy by a beater, though it should still be dodgeable, or kickable in the case of the Keeper.

...As for beaters using their bats, you can't tell me it's never done. Crabb and Goyle would have definitely hit people with clubs on the pitch. I actually made my Beater specialize in tackling, because I found it more engaging than hanging back and summoning bludgers.

As for the seeker, I really don't see myself budging on this. It just doesn't make a competitive game. I absolutely guarantee you that if a "Classic" mode was added, that nobody would play it. Maybe the game should make it a limited-time mode around April First. I know how it is in the stories, but you don't seem to be absorbing that that does not make a good game, in-universe or not, 6th book or Quidditch Through the Ages. (Which I did own, it's just been through years and a couple of younger siblings, so apologies if I can't find it at the moment.) Classic mode would either be won a couple of minutes in by a good Seeker player, or take hours due to beaters and chasers solely ganging up on the seekers.

[gbuglyo]

Opprinnelig skrevet av ZQFarnzy:

First point, I kind of agree with you about Beaters. They're braindead easy to play. First of all, I'd recommend a grab instead of a summon, basically you can grab the bludger only if you're close to it. No summoning it from across the pitch. Maybe skills can increase the radius, but no pulling it from across the field to camp the Keeper. Second, I want there to be a minigame to juggle the beater with your club, maybe by pressing a button to a rhythm, to keep it from escaping or attacking you like when you steal the "enemy's" bludger. Third, both bludgers should occasionally hit whoever's close when not kept busy by a beater, though it should still be dodgeable, or kickable in the case of the Keeper.

...As for beaters using their bats, you can't tell me it's never done. Crabb and Goyle would have definitely hit people with clubs on the pitch. I actually made my Beater specialize in tackling, because I found it more engaging than hanging back and summoning bludgers.

As for the seeker, I really don't see myself budging on this. It just doesn't make a competitive game. I absolutely guarantee you that if a "Classic" mode was added, that nobody would play it. Maybe the game should make it a limited-time mode around April First. I know how it is in the stories, but you don't seem to be absorbing that that does not make a good game, in-universe or not, 6th book or Quidditch Through the Ages. (Which I did own, it's just been through years and a couple of younger siblings, so apologies if I can't find it at the moment.) Classic mode would either be won a couple of minutes in by a good Seeker player, or take hours due to beaters and chasers solely ganging up on the seekers.

Thank you for your well-thought-out response. I completely agree with your suggestions regarding Beaters. Introducing a juggling minigame and restricting the summoning of Bludgers would add a great dynamic. In return, I believe Bludgers should be harder to dodge when accurately targeted (and perhaps easier to dodge during their random, automatic attacks without Beater involvement, if they ever implement that behavior).

Regarding Crabbe and Goyle using bats to attack others, are you certain that happened? I think it might have been depicted in a movie (which isn’t canon like the books), and even then, broadly applying the "Crabbe and Goyle" approach seems inappropriate. Beaters are indeed meant to handle Bludgers, and turning them into direct combatants is not the spirit of Quidditch. It’s a rough sport, but it shouldn’t involve kids whacking each other with bats. (While on topic, I also think that tackling by Chasers should only be possible against the player holding the Quaffle. Right now, the whole game is full of Crabbes and Goyles, it often feels more like a street fight than Quidditch.)

I can respect your views on the Snitch rules, though I don't fully agree. Your idea for a classic mode is excellent. How about introducing a mini-league? As I mentioned in my previous comment (and posted a link), using a league format could lessen the disproportionate impact of the Seeker on the overall score. If we assume equal skill among Seekers, each one would likely catch the Snitch every second game, contributing about 75 points on average to the total score per game, which isn’t excessively high compared to the Chasers’ scoring. (And importantly, teams are ranked by their overall score in a league, not by the number of their wins. Catching the Snitch early can ensure the 150-point bonus goes to you and not to your opponents, while on the other hand, catching it later and letting the game last longer with more goals will benefit both teams more as far as league standings are concerned.)

[ZQFarnzy]

Opprinnelig skrevet av gbuglyo:

Thank you for your well-thought-out response. I completely agree with your suggestions regarding Beaters. Introducing a juggling minigame and restricting the summoning of Bludgers would add a great dynamic. In return, I believe Bludgers should be harder to dodge when accurately targeted (and perhaps easier to dodge during their random, automatic attacks without Beater involvement, if they ever implement that behavior).

Regarding Crabbe and Goyle using bats to attack others, are you certain that happened? I think it might have been depicted in a movie (which isn’t canon like the books), and even then, broadly applying the "Crabbe and Goyle" approach seems inappropriate. Beaters are indeed meant to handle Bludgers, and turning them into direct combatants is not the spirit of Quidditch. It’s a rough sport, but it shouldn’t involve kids whacking each other with bats. (While on topic, I also think that tackling by Chasers should only be possible against the player holding the Quaffle. Right now, the whole game is full of Crabbes and Goyles, it often feels more like a street fight than Quidditch.)

I can respect your views on the Snitch rules, though I don't fully agree. Your idea for a classic mode is excellent. How about introducing a mini-league? As I mentioned in my previous comment (and posted a link), using a league format could lessen the disproportionate impact of the Seeker on the overall score. If we assume equal skill among Seekers, each one would likely catch the Snitch every second game, contributing about 75 points on average to the total score per game, which isn’t excessively high compared to the Chasers’ scoring. (And importantly, teams are ranked by their overall score in a league, not by the number of their wins. Catching the Snitch early can ensure the 150-point bonus goes to you and not to your opponents, while on the other hand, catching it later and letting the game last longer with more goals will benefit both teams more as far as league standings are concerned.)

I'm happy we came to at least mostly a consesus. While I don't think it's what they should work on first, a league option or alternate game mode where there's a penalty to Snitch gauge building, (making it slower,) and classic book Snitch rules could be a great addition. (I just think things like the netcode and 6v6 need cleaning up first, no offense!)

As for the tackling, I looked at the official rules. And while I think the aggression is legal, as "Contact is allowed, but a player may not seize hold of another player's broomstick or any part of their anatomy." Quidditch Champions also allows players to break a rule that even I've been guilty of. Namely: "Beaters are not allowed to send the Bludgers toward the Keeper unless the Quaffle is inside the scoring area." So make of that what you will. Personally, I'd love for beaters to stop spamming quaffles toward keepers. At least tackle so they can kick you back. And no elbows. That's a foul.

[gbuglyo]

Opprinnelig skrevet av ZQFarnzy:

Opprinnelig skrevet av gbuglyo:

Thank you for your well-thought-out response. I completely agree with your suggestions regarding Beaters. Introducing a juggling minigame and restricting the summoning of Bludgers would add a great dynamic. In return, I believe Bludgers should be harder to dodge when accurately targeted (and perhaps easier to dodge during their random, automatic attacks without Beater involvement, if they ever implement that behavior).

Regarding Crabbe and Goyle using bats to attack others, are you certain that happened? I think it might have been depicted in a movie (which isn’t canon like the books), and even then, broadly applying the "Crabbe and Goyle" approach seems inappropriate. Beaters are indeed meant to handle Bludgers, and turning them into direct combatants is not the spirit of Quidditch. It’s a rough sport, but it shouldn’t involve kids whacking each other with bats. (While on topic, I also think that tackling by Chasers should only be possible against the player holding the Quaffle. Right now, the whole game is full of Crabbes and Goyles, it often feels more like a street fight than Quidditch.)

I can respect your views on the Snitch rules, though I don't fully agree. Your idea for a classic mode is excellent. How about introducing a mini-league? As I mentioned in my previous comment (and posted a link), using a league format could lessen the disproportionate impact of the Seeker on the overall score. If we assume equal skill among Seekers, each one would likely catch the Snitch every second game, contributing about 75 points on average to the total score per game, which isn’t excessively high compared to the Chasers’ scoring. (And importantly, teams are ranked by their overall score in a league, not by the number of their wins. Catching the Snitch early can ensure the 150-point bonus goes to you and not to your opponents, while on the other hand, catching it later and letting the game last longer with more goals will benefit both teams more as far as league standings are concerned.)

I'm happy we came to at least mostly a consesus. While I don't think it's what they should work on first, a league option or alternate game mode where there's a penalty to Snitch gauge building, (making it slower,) and classic book Snitch rules could be a great addition. (I just think things like the netcode and 6v6 need cleaning up first, no offense!)

Yeah, we're agreed there too, 6v6 needs to be their priority right now. Still, if they ever introduce a classic mode in a league format, that would be a dream come true for me. :)

Opprinnelig skrevet av ZQFarnzy:

As for the tackling, I looked at the official rules. And while I think the aggression is legal, as "Contact is allowed, but a player may not seize hold of another player's broomstick or any part of their anatomy." Quidditch Champions also allows players to break a rule that even I've been guilty of. Namely: "Beaters are not allowed to send the Bludgers toward the Keeper unless the Quaffle is inside the scoring area." So make of that what you will. Personally, I'd love for beaters to stop spamming quaffles toward keepers. At least tackle so they can kick you back. And no elbows. That's a foul.

That rule makes a lot of sense, even though I have no idea where it is from (I can't recall it from any of the novels or Quidditch Through the Ages, although I haven't reread that one recently). Beaters spamming Keepers in QC is a perfect example of what happens without that rule if people play the meta.

[ZQFarnzy]

Opprinnelig skrevet av gbuglyo:

Opprinnelig skrevet av ZQFarnzy:

As for the tackling, I looked at the official rules. And while I think the aggression is legal, as "Contact is allowed, but a player may not seize hold of another player's broomstick or any part of their anatomy." Quidditch Champions also allows players to break a rule that even I've been guilty of. Namely: "Beaters are not allowed to send the Bludgers toward the Keeper unless the Quaffle is inside the scoring area." So make of that what you will. Personally, I'd love for beaters to stop spamming quaffles toward keepers. At least tackle so they can kick you back. And no elbows. That's a foul.

That rule makes a lot of sense, even though I have no idea where it is from (I can't recall it from any of the novels or Quidditch Through the Ages, although I haven't reread that one recently). Beaters spamming Keepers in QC is a perfect example of what happens without that rule if people play the meta.

I got the rules off the Harry Potter fandom wiki[harrypotter.fandom.com] but they were attributed to (and I remember them from) Quidditch Through the Ages.

[gbuglyo]

Opprinnelig skrevet av ZQFarnzy:

Opprinnelig skrevet av gbuglyo:

That rule makes a lot of sense, even though I have no idea where it is from (I can't recall it from any of the novels or Quidditch Through the Ages, although I haven't reread that one recently). Beaters spamming Keepers in QC is a perfect example of what happens without that rule if people play the meta.

I got the rules off the Harry Potter fandom wiki[harrypotter.fandom.com] but they were attributed to (and I remember them from) Quidditch Through the Ages.

I see, thanks!