Slay the Spire - Ascend a big tower and kill stuff because you can. Is responsible for the "roguelike deckbuilder" fad

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
For the people who played the game is there anything woke about it ?
I've put in around 100 hours, done A10 on all the characters and I can't think of anything in basic gameplay (cards, events, etc.). I didn't read any of the lore stuff you unlock, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's mention of a gay character or something - seems like games can rarley escape the tokenism at bare minimum.
 
The amount of historical revisionism I've seen around Anita in the last 12 or so hours has been baffling to me.

I genuinely don't understand why they hired her. For all intents and purposes she and the rest of her cohort run a protection racket while practically boasting about it. I don't blame people for refunding or not buying this game at all after learning this info seeing as they made a conscious decision to hire her. Personally I'm leaning towards that this was a protection racket payoff because what the fuck could she even consult on? Making sure the sprites aren't too sexist?
 
Last edited:
For the people who played the game is there anything woke about it ?
Nah. I don't really know how you could insert anything either woke or chudly to it, either. The only possible way I can conceptualize it is indeed as protection money to a notorious racketeer, who has perhaps returned from the shadows such that Trump can say Gamergate and finally unleash havoc. The other suggestion is that this is Devolver's doing, which seems more likely to me. I don't see how an indie studio could be this retarded, but an indie publisher is the prime target for racketeering.

The negative reviews for the game since Doormaker have been pretty funny. I think his rework is more than a little overtuned and mechanically punishing, but it's like 90% combo players using chatGPT to complain about the fact that they can't just skip 98% of card pickups and run the same infinite every single run.
 
Anita could have just as easily been a consultant regarding hiring or some shit.

IMO though it was about the designs of the Ancients and new characters, as well as backstories.

Silent is a brown woman from a clan of brown women, Defect is trying to resurrect his friend, the Regent is a goofy fucker and his slaves/minions don't look particularly humanoid with their star heads, Necromancer is female trying to avenge her family, zero fan service with her design.
 
You should see David Jaffe going apeshit over it again. And at the same time, cheering for Anita Sarkeesian like the fat apeshit simp he is.
(Archives)
1778229694841.png 1778229700249.png 1778229704655.png 1778229707953.png
 
I did figure out Doormaker and have been overall successful with him, especially after he was nerfed a bit in v0.103. I was mostly getting tired of only seeing him. At one point 13/16 runs that got to the act 3 boss was him. But now he's gone. New patch notes are interesting.
 
New boss Aeonglass is kind of Timelord. I didn't think Doormaker was too bad, but I think a good player should look at the act three boss and evaluate how they might want to change their deck for it. Looking forward to the alternate act 2, so I don't have to fight those damn cockroaches.
 
You should see David Jaffe going apeshit over it again. And at the same time, cheering for Anita Sarkeesian like the fat apeshit simp he is.
(Archives)
A bit off topic, but the list of "successful woke games" includes games like Dustborn, Last of Us 2, and Avowed.

Then the list is padded out with games like Eldan Ring, Space Marine 2, and Expedition 33. Games that either aren't woke, or were even hated by the left.
 
I don't play on the beta branch so I'm going to get the most out of Doormaker before he's gone. I'm hopeful that their reasoning for getting rid of him (complexity compared to the other bosses) is sincere and that they aren't capitulating to the players who refuse to get good and build strong decks, at least not entirely. This latest version of him I actually really like, he's forced me to think hard about how to make decks that beat him and for doing so I've been kicking his ass almost every time. Maybe that makes him too easy proportional to how many mechanics he has.
 
The amount of historical revisionism I've seen around Anita in the last 12 or so hours has been baffling to me.

I genuinely don't understand why they hired her. For all intents and purposes she and the rest of her cohort run a protection racket while practically boasting about it. I don't blame people for refunding or not buying this game at all after learning this info seeing as they made a conscious decision to hire her. Personally I'm leaning towards that this was a protection racket payoff because what the fuck could she even consult on? Making sure the sprites aren't too sexist?
Basically it comes down to two reasons:

1. They agree with her, and wanted her input while throwing her a bone of money/rep for a successful project.
2. Mega Crit mismanaged the money from the first game and in order to get funding for Slay the Spire 2 it was mandate that Anita was brought on.

Based upon the patch notes looks like it was choice #1.
 
This latest version of him I actually really like, he's forced me to think hard about how to make decks that beat him and for doing so I've been kicking his ass almost every time. Maybe that makes him too easy proportional to how many mechanics he has.
I think the trouble is that his design completely invalidates certain builds, like Hellraiser. Hellraiser isn't a top-tier card or anything, but it's a fun and goofy build that literally cannot beat Doormaker, such that you should just concede the second you enter A3 if you spy that he's the boss. The net result is that he forces you to build decks starting from A1 around the fear that you might go up against him, which makes several entire archetypes are completely useless.

I think their general intent is to encourage variety, hence why they annihilated infinites, and Doormaker's redesign did the opposite.
 
I think the trouble is that his design completely invalidates certain builds, like Hellraiser. Hellraiser isn't a top-tier card or anything, but it's a fun and goofy build that literally cannot beat Doormaker, such that you should just concede the second you enter A3 if you spy that he's the boss. The net result is that he forces you to build decks starting from A1 around the fear that you might go up against him, which makes several entire archetypes are completely useless.

I think their general intent is to encourage variety, hence why they annihilated infinites, and Doormaker's redesign did the opposite.
I play mostly necrobinder. Doormaker made it so taking soul generating cards was really tough since two of three doormaker phases would punish you for it and in A10 you just have to assume you'll fight him.
Doormaker isn't even difficult to beat as necro. Just that he shuts down one of your very basic combo engines feels terrible. You already have test subject who will run you over if you try to soul spam so not sure why the door had to fuck you over for the same combo as well. Even worse that necro struggles with card draw if not for souls. Your other strong draw options include etherial cards which will get fucked in the exhaust phase either way if you play them or not.
Even the heart in act 4 in the original game didn't outright delete certain approaches to deckbuilding.
 
I'm not sure why they would dig up the fossil proto-grifter Anita. The backlash from Chinese players over Doormaker was a complete wildcard I don't think anyone could have seen coming, but this backlash could have been seen by anyone. I don't know what they gain by doing so especially considering Slay the Spire lacks humanoid characters to have a tizzy over whether they are sexualized or not or really any avenue for woke/anti-woke stuff. It just adds a point of controversy for no gain I can gather.
 
should i buy it? its on sale rn and it looks good
It is good, but it's also in Early Access, and will continue to receive influential balance changes biweekly with new content along the way. Slay the Spire 1's Early Access was lauded for being very good, and so far Slay the Spire 2 is shaping up to be another success, but it is changing a lot over time.
 
GI've put in around 100 hours, done A10 on all the characters and I can't think of anything in basic gameplay (cards, events, etc.). I didn't read any of the lore stuff you unlock, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's mention of a gay character or something - seems like games can rarley escape the tokenism at bare minimum.
In the same boat regarding playtime/things complete, and the only vibe shifts I can think of are that there's more character interaction/personality and Silent is presented a little differently (the character select screen makes it obvious she's a woman via the lips, but her cards illustrate her as bulkier and less slender/graceful).

There's still the inevitable lore curveball that will come with the finale, more characters and alternate acts so maybe things will shift. But I'm not really sure I care; StS is totally about understanding how all the pieces work together and building your deck to handle specific challenges. They can re-add Watcher with stance swapping relabelled as gender transitions and it wouldn't undermine the gameplay. AFAIK we don't know what Sarkeesian's involvement was - maybe she consulted on something I really like, or something inoffensive like the accessibility mode. It's telling that no one had wokeness complaints about StS2 until someone bothered reading the credits two months after it hit Early Access and farm clicks from her name.

I don't love the extra lore dumps - StS's implied lore like the bird cultists/ritual dagger/awakened one commonalities and the "never liked you" Time Eater line were delightful and unobtrusive hints at a deeper history, and the epochs and dialogue don't have the same charm. But they don't have any elements of culture war. It's curious that they haven't really taken the opportunity to expand on those breadcrumbs from the original game, at least not yet.

Aeonglass is kind of underwhelming so far, but it confirms they're determined to find new ways to punish purely cardspam strategies. I wouldn't be surprised to see its Status cards have varied effects in a later patch - the current Status is basically a Decay you can play, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them add the debuffs, maybe a Void effect, a Parasite that does damage if you remove it, etc. I'm a little worried about how much trouble they seem to be having nailing down a third Act 3 boss when they have six more bosses to make for Alt Act 2 and 3.

I've really liked what the team has been able to do with its balance tweaks so far. They've made a game that's ~3x bigger than the first one and achieving the perfect balance of unfairness/winnability they landed on with the first game is probably not going to be possible. I'm hoping that their roadmap does include some attention to really tweaking the higher difficulties to make A10 feel closer to the original's A20, though.
 
Back
Top Bottom