Free Johnny's Beyond Card Game Idea

[daring verge]

Johnny pitched a card game idea which was ultimately shelved by the Gaming Subcouncil back in October. It would be a service to the community to let everyone know what that pitch was. While it's understandable that OB is utmost priority, allowing the community to imagine what a Beyond card game could be will stir excitement for the future of the game.

[wild oxide]

I also have an idea for a game called the Beyond Tower. Looking forward to share it with the community when the time is right.

[daring verge]

Ooo nice! Beyond Tower sounds intriguing.

I could imagine playing a Beyond card game while in between/qeueing arena games.

[celest iris]

Any extra utility for Beyond I'm in support of, happy to hear the idea for sure 👍

[marsh marsh]

To be clear, the idea being shelved had nothing to do with the idea itself. But rather the game subcouncil felt that a card game is not the smartest decision for the NEXT Illuvium game after Open Beta

In terms of the market, potential revenue, overlap etc

[daring verge]

Yep... another reason why it should be revealed to the community... so the community can see if that was the right decision.
Now, if the game that was proposed conflicted with the current arena game it would be understandable that it was a wise choice. But what was implied by Johnny was that it would be a simple card game, not something that would compete, or conflict with the scope of the current games. However, the community hasn't had the opportunity to verify one way or another... and seems they should. If it was so clear then no harm no foul... and it still could inspire other ideas to bring more utility to Beyond.

[marsh marsh]

Oh for sure, it was a super fun idea and I'd love for everyone to see it.

But to be clear, it had NOTHING to do with the idea itself. Simply the fact it was a CCG.

I dont believe any amount of community feedback in either direction would have changed how they felt about it

[daring verge]

That's all understandable. The gaming subcouncil during that time had their own subjective reasons, in that very specific time period leading up to arena launch, for making that decision. Now is a different time... different council... different gov structure. Not to say the decision would change... but now seems appropriate to allow the idea to be viewed by the community... especially if it was a fun idea. We all want more fun I think (:

[marsh marsh]

Hahah yeah but that being said the Gaming Subcouncil built a track for these ideas to go through. There's nothing stopping Johnny from using that

[daring verge]

If it's the will of the people, the idea could be revealed... Not with the intention of implementing it per se, but to imagine what one person's idea of a ccg could be... and therefore sharing with the people what's possible. Nothing more, nothing less.

Shelving the idea into the closet, seemingly with the then gaming subcoucil's intention of making it disappear doesn't seem like what the community wants. From everything I've seen since the inception of Beyond, it's been very much a desire of many to see Beyond become a CCG of sorts. And for some, the reason they jumped into Beyond in the first place. So for the gaming subcouncil to make such a huge decision, contrary to the will of the people, seems like should be revisited... One way to do that is by freeing Johnny's pitch from bondage.

[marsh marsh]

Hahahaha yeah I mean I want that too. I am just giving some broader context for anyone who is unaware

[toxic bloom]

is this happening or no?

[viral cave]

Probs post launch

[hot token]

Hey <@&1107754780744487002> it sounds like @daring verge would like to work towards making this a proposal. Anyone up for helping him?

[feral bay]

Of course, but I’d have to give some thought on how to approach this. Not sure we can just write up an IIP for a team member to reveal their idea.

[hot token]

We should let @leaden vine know

[daring verge]

Well, the idea was already submitted to the gaming sub council… so technically it’s out of Johnny’s hands.

[feral bay]

But if it was shot down by the council it remains as only an idea.

How would you structure an IIP for that. What improvement for Illuvium would be proposed by revealing an idea?

[daring verge]

When you say shot down it makes it sound like the idea was bad. From what I remember it wasn't that the idea was bad, but rather that arena release was the priority. Being that the idea was shelved by the then gaming sub council it could be a more accurate assumption that the gaming sub council had a vested interest in keeping Johnny's idea from public eye because they personally wanted arena to be the only focus at that time.

The benefit to the community would be that Beyond players could see movement with the overall direction of Beyond eventually becoming CCG like has been anticipated since the beginning. Beyond has been out for over a year now and we have had ZERO movement towards a CCG becoming a reality. Releasing the idea would show the community what is possible with Beyond and maybe breathe new life into what is starting to become an atrophied segment of Illuvium. We all want to see Beyond be great again... gaining attention for a future CCG would help with that.

And now would be a great time... things are quiet until OB. Why not give ppl something to be excited about?

[feral bay]

I don’t know what the idea was and can’t speak to if it was good or not. The point I’m getting to is there is nothing official about the idea so I don’t think there’s a way to force it to be revealed.

I agree with your thinking that this would be great to hear about and could get the community excited, but I struggle to think of a way to structure a proposal to expose this idea.

A proposal that say Johnny needs to tell everyone about his idea? He can simply say no. This isn’t something currently being worked on by Illuvium to my knowledge.

Best approach may be just to ask him to reveal it.

But if you have an idea how to structure a proposal to make this happen please let me know.

[daring verge]

At some point @leaden vine said he couldn't say anything about it because it was in council's hands. But since it was rejected, maybe he has the freedom to share it now? Idk... Johnny, what say you?

[leaden vine]

Anyone can propose an idea, there's nothing anywhere that said someone, team member or otherwise, can't pitch anything they want.

I was pretty annoyed at the time as the council green lit documenting and sharing the idea, and then, after the work had been done, as a courtesy I shared with them for review... at the last minute they decided it wasn't the right time to share.

With great difficulty I held off on sharing it.

I would love to share the document, but we have waited this long, so I will await a formal 'release' from the council.

[feral bay]

So a proposal can be drafted to release the details of this pitched idea?

And if passed by both council you will share it?

[leaden vine]

I don't think we need an IIP... by formal I just mean an agreement from the council in one of their meetings that they are okay to share.

In the end it's just a pitch ... delaying it has made it far more of a thing than it needs to be 😮

[daring verge]

https://tenor.com/view/conspiracy-theory-explaining-gif-12901943281765003956

[leaden vine]

Notr that the idea was never rejected, it was only delayed.

[daring verge]

Yahh, I just wanna see something fun for Beyond... and I think a lot of others do also. And it's not just a pitch... it's Johnny's pitch.

[leaden vine]

I don't think the council has the right to reject the pitch without community consultation.

I also don't think they have the right to delay the pitch either ... which is why I was torn.

But as I said a decided to abide by their ruling and it would have been pointless if we now release it without a nod from them.

[daring verge]

Well also... that was gov v2 right? Now we are in gov v3... does anything different need to happen? Poke them?

Ayoo <@&1107754780744487002> <@&814435151307866142> can we get Johnny's Idea dusted off the shelf pweeeez?

[leaden vine]

As I said I just want to hear that they agreed to release... but maybe they want to keep waiting.

[feral bay]

Well if there’s no formal IIP needed I’ll support it as a community council member, but ultimately IMC will have to agree.

[daring verge]

@marsh wind @flat plank @keen crag

[leaden vine]

There was no IIP to not release the pitch, and there doesn't need to be one to release it. But as I said its just seems silly to respect the councils wishes and then arbitrarily decide some time later not to, so I just want to hear something from council....

... but if it has your support I had better go reread the doc and remind myself what I've written 😉

[finite loom]

I think they have.... In the End they have the say, community can just say who has a seat in there.

[leaden vine]

... The community council is pivotal in vetting and forwarding Illuvium Improvement proposals(IIPs) and Illuvium Configuration Change Proposals(ICCPs), ensuring community participation...

...The Community Council's key role is to vet proposals and forward them to the IMC, ensuring community perspectives are integrated into decision-making...

...Their role ensures that community voices are effectively communicated and considered at higher decision-making levels...

(Source: Governance v3)

They can't perform that role if they do not seek community input. They don't have to follow it, but they have to get it.

EDIT (for clarity): in this case the council didn't reject the pitch, they simply didn't want to release it at the time.

[finite loom]

Yep, seems right.
What did they say when you told them?

[leaden vine]

I'm not really interested in rehashing the details, and I probably don't remember them correctly!

The crux is:

1. game sub-council didn't want to release a CCG pitch
2. I didn't think they should stop a pitch of any kind going to community as long as it was clear it was only a pitch
3. but I abided by their wishes ('disagree and commit' as Jeff Bezos would say)

Just to be clear its not that gaming sub-council didn't have reasoning behind their position (for example a pitch coming from me has more weight then a random community members idea). Their position was totally reasonable, I just think the community should have seen the pitch and the arguments for and against been made at that point.

But digging deeper ... mostly I was just grumpy because I spent a lot of time crafting the idea only to have it parked at the last minute ... stomps foot like little child 🙂

[finite loom]

Yea, i can feel the disappointement.
But you actually could have just posted as a future game idea in #1020759212172775464 even if you work for illuvium, right? No? .... Maaybee 😏?

[leaden vine]

Yes. I was tempted believe me 😉

[finite loom]

I bet 😄

[leaden vine]

In any case, I'm still keen to release the idea, I actually raised it in a meeting with Aaron and Kieran last week (totally unaware of this thread) ... but given the history I will wait for council to say okay.

[dusty vault]

Ill add this in the agenda for this weeks meeting. But from what I remember, theres a direction not to detract from open beta. However, as mentioned, ill bring this up to see what the current council thinks.

[finite loom]

Even tho i think tcg as next game would be one of the worst if not THE worst possible genre, i root for you to present your hard worked draft of it

[daring verge]

https://tenor.com/view/viyeongg-kid-from-tiktok-giving-side-eye-gif-27574662

[leaden vine]

We have always thought of games in waves, this would, I expect, be one of the second wave of games, along with FPS, or Kart or Fighter or whatever else people want to do. Mostly its a light hearted relatively simple game to keep Beyond interesting.

I mean we have talked about the idea of a Beyond CCG since almost the inception of Beyond. I think it would be pretty hard to do any other kind of game for Beyond other than CCG. So really the question should be...

1. Do we ever want to build a Beyond game?
2. And if so is it this one?

When that happens is a different conversation.

[finite loom]

I agree, tcg would be a good fit for beyond.
I guess one could question if it would be a good idea to start bringing assets in the gaming ecosystem, where there is no time comitement needed and not farmable in OW. If yes, would this be the new Way to go or is beyond the exception? Like if there are other future Games is it going to be a mix of OW assets + an additional collection?

[leaden vine]

I mean Beyond already exists, and Zero already exists, both bring assets in to the ecosystem. Zero specifically has Dyes for example (also Blueprints).

[finite loom]

For cosmetics...

[leaden vine]

Sure but is a land a cosmetic? You don't get land from the Overworld (and it had no time committment).

---

I don't think we've ever said that every single item for every single game needs to come from Overworld.

Overworld brings Illuvials to the players, Illuvials are intended to be the a core asset used in many games (Zero being an exception... although it would be cool to get Illuvials in there one day).

The Beyond CCG pitch I've crafted also includes Illuvials.

---

Anyway, it will be a lot better to talk about this once the pitch is actually released, so lets wait 😛

[finite loom]

Yea... To me Zero is really the exception
And no, of course not, but it should be imo. Since OW Runs are Kind of the pack opener for the ibg universe
If you Start creating multiple asset lines needed for every game but not usable in others, you Start Kind of destroying the ibg thing and increase the amount of $ spent for a gamer to enjoy the ip massively.

Also creating an asset line where you can just whale in for gameplay, changes the esport thinking to a p2w thinking.

[leaden vine]

We've always imagined each game would have its own stuff, as well as its Illuvial connection. For example if we did a Kart game you might get parts for your engine/Kart by winning races, and the Illuvials would be your drivers who grant special abilities.

[leaden vine]

There's 10 paragraphs in the pitch about how we address pay to win mechanics.
Again maybe better to wait 🙂

[finite loom]

So it's more of a play 1 game and if you wana play another one, sell or swap assets and buy the new ones for the other game you wana play, than have core assets and enjoy all different Kind of Genres?

[leaden vine]

I think its very much not not decided given we are still in wave one of games. But I doubt we would do anything as an absolute.

Overworld is a central hub, and we have some games (Arena) where everything comes from Overworld, and other games (Zero) where it doesn't. I think it would be very limiting to all other games if stuff could only come from Overworld. For example it seems very anti web3 to have say a Diablo like game where the items you get are not NFTs.

Anyway we are talking about far term things, who knows how it will evolve... I've got to go, ciao!

[finite loom]

Yea, getting them from gameplay i can see, but not the other way arround (need to buy them from DAO needed for gameplay).
Have a nice evening 🖖

[keen crag]

hi guys, are we going to use the mechanism in IIP-44 to pitch the new game?

imo, this doesnt need an IIP. @leaden vine can just post it

[keen crag]

i agree, anyone can propose anything. Tbh it doesnt make sense to me if council can prevent anyone to do so

[daring verge]

Umm... it's the equivalent of buying a pack of Pokemon cards... that you then play Pokemon with. In this case you buy a d1sk so you can play Beyond ccg. Am I on crack to think it makes sense?

We also have fuel that you could buy from the dao to play ow. Or people minted land from the dao to play zero.

I sense discharge papers are being prepared now for the prisoner's release

[flat plank]

Council should never decide what ideas are voted on, because council ultimately decides on the outcomes.

IIRC the concern last epoch was that we didn't have a framework in place to properly assess or approve ideas around new games to be developed, and I believe that was a big part of why GSC didn't want the idea put forward. Doing due diligence on how new games fit into our economic models, the addressable market for the game/genre/platform, etc. is equally important to community reception, and should be a part of a pitch to get a new game approved. This is just my recollection of the concerns, GSC members can correct me if I'm remembering incorrectly.

If it's shared as "just an idea" and it's not something we're hard committing to developing, I don't see any issue, but like Scruba said, we'll talk it over in our meeting tomorrow.

[viral cave]

Awful judgement by council tbh. Looking forward to seeing your ideas.

[finite loom]

No, this makes totally sense.
I was under the impression, that OW+IZ basically work as core games, where the assets get created to be able to play arena + all games being created in the future and beyond being beyond the universe a fun collection of profile pics where you get cosmetics etc. for all games.
Arena + the future games tradable assets can be created aswell, in those specific games to improve also in those specific games.
For example in a racer you need Illuvials catched in OW, which biodata determines special abilities of your kart, and you get better motorparts etc with gameplay.
Or in a shooter you need weapons and armor created in ow, which determines special abilities of your weapon/armor and you can upgrade your weapons with visor, surpressor whatever with gameplay in the shooter.

So you basically farm Illuvials and create armor and weapons with OW grinding, and increase in equipment of each game based on skill or playtime in that game. But you are able to play all games with just OW asset lines.

If you have to buy or farm assets from OW plus you have to buy from each gamespecific collection from the DAO, depending on how many different games you wana play it gets pretty fast pretty expensive, or you have always to sell your stuff and buy disks or whatever it might be if you wana enjoy one of the other games.

Don't get me wrong... what you said totally works, it can just get to expensive really fast to play Illuvium as an IBG where sit in front of your computer in the evening and ask yourself what game you gona play this evening out of those 10 games. Instead you sit there playing one game or maybe you can choose between 2... but for the average bob it most likely gets too expensive to have competitive collections for more.

[marsh wind]

I wasn't involved in the GSC discussion at that time either (nor have I seen Johnny's proposal) so can't reflect on more than secondhand feedback. The two items I felt were the strongest arguments at the time were:

1. Any idea/proposal coming from the team carries more impact than an idea from a general community member. It's easy for any idea floated to quickly take on a life of its own. Something with a detailed plan and design proposal will immediately have the community assuming it's ready for a formal decision. Remember back in early Q4 of last year, there was a clear need for all of us (team, council, community) to be honing our focus to be open beta relevant only topics. I think we've been pretty successful at that and we're seeing the benefits of that approach. Another potential game project being floated would have likely consumed a week or two of on and off discussions with team, council and community.
2. Lacking a structure and objectives for our next projects means that most ideas sound like a good one. There are thousands of games that would be fun, profitable, interesting, community-growing, emergent, etc. that we could build with this amazing IP in all sorts of ways. Without knowing what our primary strategic focus is for the next wave of game(s), these game ideas are all good to share but should just remain as fun, speculative discussion points in the background until those objectives are defined. We're still (roughly) a year out from timeline before we would start true evaluation of next titles in my opinion so at the time would have been 18 months out.

Currently, I'm pretty indifferent and quite happy to talk it over with the council today. I rarely think sharing an idea has a negative effect, except when coming from leadership members as it carries the weight of their role. I think it still implies the team is focused on something other than open beta, which is not great. The extension of Beyond to a card game is such an easy win, it seems like a no-brainer at some point. I think Johnny is brilliant and personally am very keen to see what he's come up with as I suspect I'd want to play it. It would both give the community something else to talk about for a bit while we get through the last hump til open beta. It would also create negative sentiment in the market that Illuvium is discussing next titles without having been able to fully launch anything other than Beyond.

[wild oxide]

I'm so glad we have you in our IMC @marsh wind
ty for all your work 💪

[marsh wind]

Thank you kindly. I love our community here as you guys are the ones that help motivate the team and council every day

[daring verge]

One way to keep it simply a fun idea to without blowing it up into 'the next big thing' is to post it in this ideas thread. That way it clearly will stem from the intention of just sharing an idea with the community. Maybe others can post their Beyond CCG ideas here as well. I know a couple others have worked on some concepts.

[marsh wind]

I agree in principle. The key difference is when a team member (especially someone in the leadership team) posts something in ideas, it's impossible to assume it's just an idea. I think this was the main reason for the GSC to ask Johnny to hold. But again, if it's positioned in the right way I think there are some potential positives

[leaden vine]

@marsh wind was this unstuck? I'm happy to share if so, and all the caveats we need 😉

(on the point above I actually think the community is quite used to hearing future ideas from me and the founders, I've been talking about far future ideas for Zero for years, spaceports anyone? Yes being a more formal document does add weight, but I think we can handle it)

The document has a nice big disclaimer right at the start:

[marsh wind]

Hey mate. Yes, IMC is comfortable with you sharing. Kieran was going to message you with some of the particulars in the discussion. The main point (that I'll also make publicly for everyone else in the chat here) is that this isn't a formal position of the DAO that this will be the next product. It's one that we think is a good idea and that should be considered in the light of the 'Future Game' IIP from last epoch as a potential option. We don't see harm in sharing the idea as long as that caveat is understood by the community. Your points on sharing general gaming ideas is valid and one that we felt as well

So the TLDR is, Johnny's Proposal can be freed!

[leaden vine]

Any particular ideas on how to share... are we just going to paste the document in Beyond channel with a disclaimer message?

Posting it in announcements seems to be the opposite of what we want to do (with regards to reducing the 'weight' of it)... so I definitely wont do that.

[finite loom]

Create a thread in #1020759212172775464 🙃

[leaden vine]

makes sense then we can keep bulk of discussion isolated to that thread

[finite loom]

Slow Mode probably makes sense, so it doesn't get spammed