Boenobleman Haha yeah, there could have been a lot of interesting discussion about the topic considering that just about every card game has been broken in some way or another at some point in time. You could look at how that actually affects players, how these mistakes slip through the cracks, and how the developers fix these problems. But why do that when you can just hastily publish a load of rubbish attacking Hearthstone and Yugioh?
Which is especially obnoxious since Shudderwock is one of the most fair combo decks we've ever seen while there are several things that are in the game or have been in the game that would make infinitely more sense to bring into a conversation about game balance. Naga giants absolutely wrecked the wild meta for what, like a year or so before they "fixed" it (by changing Naga into a completely different card instead of just undoing the thing they broke in the first place, but that's a rant for another time)? Barnes is still around and still provides an unreasonably high winrate for anybody lucky to play him on turn three or four, Keleseth on two is a similar problem. Undertaker, Patches, classic druid combo and any number of other nerfs from the past would be reasonable things to bring up in their pre-nerf iterations as examples of what not to do. Now that you pointed it out I think this is actually the most irritating part of that video. CCGs get broken all the time and Hearthstone hasn't been an exception, it's not like it would have been difficult to do an analysis of the topic that didn't rely on misrepresenting the rules of the game. Maybe that wouldn't have done as well as a headline of "new card some of you hate BREAKS THE GAME!" though.
He doesn't say that they're broken. He just brings up a situation where something like a new expansion breaks the game, either temporarily or permanently.
In that i have to disagree. The point of the video isn't "card games are broken" is "When card games break", and he showed examples of card games breaking because of OP combos, and after that explanation he introduces the Shudderwock combo.
Probably more accurate to classify the video essay as a fail than a lie as the original creator didn't seem to be willfully misinforming the masses (which is pretty close to the dictionary definition of "lying") so much as just arguing from extreme ignorance and generally being sloppy. Might be useful to edit the video title, if only to eliminate language that disingenuously represents the original video, especially since you state near the end of the video "I don't think austinmcconnell is a bad guy." Perhaps the first part of the title could be "Ignorant Video Essays" or "Video Essay Fails" or something like that so that you, too, can not accidentally spread "fake news." Now if evidence came out that he did lie for views, then that makes the situation much worse and you can feel free to keep that video title. Beyond that, I rather like this video response. The volume level of your voice recording could stand to be boosted by several decibels (I've made similar mistakes in this regard so it's understandable), but the points you make are fairly solid and I appreciate watching someone's ignorance get ripped to shreds.
Thank you very much for the feedback, especially about the mic volume. I'll have a look at that in future. As I've said elsewhere I'm not too great with audio settings but I'd really like to get them right! As far as the video title goes, I think austinmcconnell has to be lying about something. Either he's wilfully lying about how the mechanics work in Hearthstone for it to fit his narrative, or he's lying about having played Hearthstone, because I can't understand how anyone who had played Hearthstone to the extent that they've made a full Shudderwock deck could not know about the crafting system or how Battlecries work. I know accusations of lying might seem a bit harsh, but I think there's fairly substantial evidence for it and if it were always up to the original creator to voluntarily own up to it then the truth would never come out. I hope that doesn't seem too disrespectful!
I guess that's a fair enough reason. Personally I could see a few situations that lead to the level of ignorance he expressed (maybe it's why Blizzard won't give us more deck slots), but on the other hand he does behave as if he knows what he's talking about when he doesn't among other questionable details. As for mic volume. I'm not sure what software you're recording with, but if you're using OBS Studio or something, try adding Gain after adding Noise Suppression and a Noise Gate. There's a more detailed guide on the OBS Forums, but the idea is to remove as much background noise as possible (doesn't seem to be a problem in your commentary as far as I can tell, but never hurts to make sure), then boost what's left so people can clearly hear it. You can also adjust the audio track during editing by increasing the dB level of your voice recording specifically. This will depend on the software you're using as well, but there's usually a convenient volume meter that can be adjusted while the track is selected (or if you're using Audacity, you can Amplify it).
I use Streamlabs OBS for most recording and then edit in Premiere Pro, although I'm quite new to the latter and used to use Vegas so I'm still figuring a lot of it out. I'll have a tinker around with the settings and see what I can come up with, but I wasn't even aware that there was much of a mic problem, so it definitely helps to be told about it. Thanks a lot!
I'd still squint at calling it a lie. What strikes me about this is where the intent comes into the picture; it's the difference between misinformation and disinformation. The former's just wrong, the second's intentionally misrepresentative. Calling someone wrong is a statement about them not having their facts straight. Calling them a liar is a comment on their moral character.
Bit of trivia on that MTG cardback. There was a set (I think it was time spiral) where R&D toyed with the idea of adding of a new color to the color pie, and that color was purple. The idea was that since the set delt with alternate timelines, they were just going to pretend like purple had been part of magic from the start and the fans were the ones being weird in order to immerse the players in the confusion of hopping timelines. What you see on the back is the edited color pie that includes purple. EDIT: It was Planar chaos, not time spiral . The color was to show alternate reality, not alternate time lines aswell.
Yeah a few people have pointed this out. Turns out that if you google 'mtg card back high res' that's the first image that comes up: from Deviant Art with a description explaining that it's an edited version of the card back to include the Time Spiral colour wheel. austinmcconnell didn't even look at where his images were coming from when he made the video.
Foyfluff what's worse is that in his video he claims to have a background in card games including Magic: The Gathering and Yu-Gi-Oh, but similar to the video's content on Hearthstone, he gives incorrect information and doesn't actually appear to have much knowledge of either game. Is he just lying about his experience playing these games? It gives me even less faith to have trust in anything in says in his other videos, which I don't plan on watching at this point because of that.
What's this? A video from someone I've never heard of criticizing a video I watched 3 years ago from a game I quit 6 years ago? How strange Idk who u are but, here you can have my like
@TechPunk Its fine to express an opinion, but its not fine to be factually wrong. Whether or not Shudderwok is broken, the way Mcconnell supports his opinion is either incompetent or dishonest.
Grappling Hook Jones the idea of the video was that shudderwock broke the meta/game and is unfun and you getting butthurt about small missinformations is just pathetic
I love Austin, and I don’t know card games all that well so I had no idea how wrong the video was. After seeing all the complaints I did the research, and am fine with admitting that he fucked up horribly on his video. Still love his content but he rightly lost some credibility.
Foyfluff Well hey I enjoyed your response, it was well explained and definitely not hostile so you deserve respect back. If anything this whole situation has gotten me pretty interested in Hearthstone. TCGs have always confused me but I’ve always had an interest, just downloaded it.
Robyn Cleffa Well I'm glad you enjoyed it and thank you for treating me with that mutual respect. Welcome to Hearthstone! It's not for everyone but it does make for a great time killer, especially on mobile devices. The competitive scene runs deep too if that's your sort of thing. If you have any questions feel free to ask me, whether in a comment, tweet, or in the discord I'll be happy to help!
Nah a 3 card FTK isn't that hard in YGO since most cards are searchable in some way. What annoyed me were his choice of fusions. All were low attack, he didn't deal 8K damage and even used fake cards...js
I'd also like to point out that, contrary to other card games, YuGiOh has a type of card dubbed by the community called, "Hand Traps". This is what allows certain FTK's to be less of a problem than in other card games, provided that they are fragile, and inconstant. For example, the previous YuGiOh format had an FTK called, "Pendulum FTK". It was fairly fragile compared to other FTK's, but even if you stopped the FTK, the player could set up a board that could negate 1-3 cards of your opponents hand. Because the stopped the FTK with a hand trap(or two), they only have 5 cards to start. A single well timed negate can end a turn right there. Also, keep in mind, that the Pendulum FTK player is almost always playing hand traps too. Even though there was a "degenerate" FTK running amok the YuGiOh meta, it was considered one of the healthiest formats of the decade, behind HAT Format. Though it could be taken as how YuGiOh as a game is unhealthy, I'd like to believe it shows that FTK's aren't as much of a problem in it.
Side note Pendulum FTK was not fragile. It was a 2 card combo that only used a small number of different techs to pull off. I do believe other games have hand traps. But yes I agree hand traps have helped to fix the tendency of YuGiOh to break itself
This video strikes me more as someone that played casually, and thought they had a better idea of what they were talking about than they did. It is less less lazy research and more an inaccurate viewpoint they didn’t think to double check.
@@twgok3162 I play hearthstone casually on and off, and the first time I watched the video everything seemed fine. It was only on rewatch when I noticed an error or two, and didn’t see how wrong it was until watching this video. My point is, this definitely feels like someone who assumed they knew what was happening from playing the game, and didn’t think to do research outside of it. Which they should have.
Also, what motive would someone have to lie? Lazy, maybe a bit. But that’s just someone not doing enough research. We’ve all been there. I hate how people get so accusatory so quickly. 90% of what people complain about is a dumb mistake, and 90% of what people say about it is how it is ”clearly done with malicious intent.”
@@twgok3162 I've played this game on and off for several years (very casually), and never knew there was a card-crafting mechanism at all. Not everyone knows every detail about the game.
I also believe in the video he mentions something along the lines of "lifedrinker is a very good card on its own, so adding shudderwock makes it insane" which is just a sure sign that he has no clue how 'good' cards are. Lifedrinker is almost exclusively only good with shudderwock, and most half decent players know that.
To be absolutely fair, Lifedrinker and Saronite Chain Gang both see a fair bit of play outside of this deck. They're both in Healing Zoo, and Lifedrinker occasionally shows up in Tempo Mage lists when those lists are good. That said, they're only there because their abilities synergise with those decks specifically, they're decent cards, but nothing crazy.
Holy shit finally someone adressed this! Austin's video sounded so incredibly entitled. And after the HS video I also started doubting the quality of the other videos
He has once before been rightly accused of plagiarism, on the count of the KFC video. ruclips.net/video/ZDtJ7bte_zg/видео.html This video talks about it a little bit. Truth is a lot of his content is questionable when you really start digging into his arguments.
I love Austin McConnell's videos, but... damn. He really messed up on this one. Makes it harder to trust his fact-checking for all his other videos. Trust is hard to build, easy to break.
b Yeah theyre "just youtube videos" in the same way wikipedia is "just a website" and nonfiction books are "just books". If youre interested in learning new things, or interested in others not being misimformed, then you would hope these videos that reach potentially millions would at least be fact-checked.
I have faith and trust in the guy to learn from his mistakes, and I think it's not like he intentionally lied to his subs. But yeah, he really should've fact checked and learned more about card games before putting pen to paper.
BroudbrunMusicMerge Grappling Hook Jones the idea of the video was that shudderwock broke the meta/game and is unfun and you getting butthurt about small missinformations is just pathetic
Pepper Plays That... wasn't the point of the video. And if it was, you'd hope the point of the video would be better researched. Edit: I gotta say, I was hoping the video would actually address the question he brought up as a starting point better than just asking another related question and leaving it at that. Again, I love his work, and I agree that Hearthstone is kind of a rip-off, but damn he screwed the pooch on this one.
as someone who had enjoyed austin mcconnell's videos previously, i was really excited to see he had posted a video about hearthstone, but i was really dissapointed with the blatant misinformation. this addressed the topic really well
Eoleopeo 64 Grappling Hook Jones the idea of the video was that shudderwock broke the meta/game and is unfun and you getting butthurt about small missinformations is just pathetic
@Pepper Plays Idea of the video was to make $$$. Shudderwock was very fun for me to watch, when that combo went of it was a pinnacle of combo goodness. What you call small missinformation is actually poor research, pretend you know the topic that you talk about and actual lying when implying you actually play the game and did the combo yourself when it is painfully obvious that is very unlikely. You do not see a problem with that? Or you know you can just type butthurt and ignore to address it :P. It makes you look stupid in the eyes of everyone who knows how to think with their head but whatever rocks your boat.
Yeah it's a shame when lazy and under-researched videos do well. The only justice is that it might make people think twice before blindly trusting what he says.
I watched his video having never played Hearthstone, and I just believed everything he said as a result. It was only because this video happened to show up in my recommendations that I found out it wasn’t all true. Not particularly damaging I guess, but I bet the creators of Hearthstone wouldn’t be too happy about potential players having McConnell’s video as their first experience of the game.
The Uberknife Grappling Hook Jones the idea of the video was that shudderwock broke the meta/game and is unfun and you getting butthurt about small missinformations is just pathetic
Pepper Plays the idea of my comment was that a poorly researched video being negative about a game and getting lots of views is bad for both the game and the content creator and you getting butthurt about youtube comments is just hilarious
5:48 that card back is a callback to an inquest (I think, it may be the duelist) magazine's April fools joke (purple mana), so the card is more an inside joke than an actual card back.
Yeah, as others have pointed out it's also a reference to Time Spiral which originally planned to have Purple as a sixth colour of mana. Still though, this cardback was never printed, and given that it's the first result when you search for 'mtg card back high res' I think it's more likely austinmcconnell just used the first picture he found than made a reference to a 1990s MTG magazine that I doubt he had any interest in.
A "lie" suggests knowledge of the truth or the accurate information, which is quite apparent that he didnt have. He made several major mistakes. He didn't lie.
Thank you for making this video, I personally commented on his video about the mistakes he made in it but you actually spotted a lot more than I did. The 70 dollars bit was quite tilting for me as a f2p player, because I put so many hours into this game I enjoy without paying a single penny. (Liked and Subscribed)
So I just watched a video from a channel I never heard of, criticizing a video I never saw, made by a RUclips I've never heard of, talking about a game I dont play. What's wrong with me?
5:45 Excuse me, that's obviously a clever nod to the different colours of dragons in Warcraft. Something that only a true Hearthstone master would think to put in their video.
That video was a little weird to watch, especially given the nature his statements that he has played Hearthstone before. What's particularly sad is that Shudderwock does have significant problems that you could address in a video titled "When Card Games Break." It is incredibly slow and frustrating to go through the animations if you still have a chance to win, it means that an entire game mechanism must be more carefully designed because of Shudderwock, the deck is incredibly oppressive against anything that can't win fast enough, it's an OTK deck that can play like a Control deck. Basically Shudderwock is a more frustrating version of Raza Priest, a deck that was specifically nerfed because it was going to be a problem forever, at least in Wild. Shudderwock is a card that can potentially break a game, just not in the ways discussed.
I agree entirely with everything you've said. If you wanted to make a more accurate version of "When Card Games Break" with these talking points I'd certainly watch and like it. You don't need to have fancy graphics either!
It's worth noting that being a FTP player in a card game like Hearthstone requires a lot of grind/play time, which can be just as annoying as spending a lot of money. I mean if the point is it's not easy to get the card, pointing out there are FTP players doesn't really negate that point because FTP players just sacrifice time instead of money. That's not necessarily bad, it's just a feature of trading card style games, but it does mean there are greater stakes than in normal games. The more effort it takes to earn something in a game the more annoyed players will be if that thing has significant flaws or gets changed, so card games have to be particularly careful with the cards they release since they often demand more time/dedication than other games.
That's true and I agree with everything you've said, but that's not the point austinmcconnell was making. If he had included more sophisticated points of analysis like this then his video would have been not only more accurate but also more interesting.
Depends. For hearthstone there was just recently double gold from quests meaning you basically got AT LEAST a pack per quest. Before that there was the taverns of time where you got gold and dust for quests for like 3 weeks. Assuming you ONLY did the quests for those 3 weeks you got (you get on average 60 gold per quest iirc) 1260 gold and 1260 dust which is a lot for doing next to nothing. You also have gotten about 6 packs and a free legendary since KotFT as well. Throw in the free arena runs which always give you AT LEAST a pack and the game isnt the worst thing to go f2p on depending on the time of the year. Also, even if you dont go truly f2p blizzard periodically does pack sales. I think 1 recently was like $15 for 30 packs or something and then there is the new player one which gives a bunch of classic packs and a guaranteed legendary as well. Is the game p2w? If you want to climb fast it is, but you CAN one trick a tier 1 deck to legend. You'll just have to deal with bad match ups along the way and not be able to counter queue. This is honestly one of the better metas for budget players since there are a few budget friendly decks in the meta such as Zoo which ran 1 legendary and a BUNCH of classic cards and commons before Boomsday.
TsukuyomiREKT let’s all blindly white knight for a rando on the internet because we feel we have some weird connection cause we consume their content !
Da5kone001 Just saying nope was definitely a weird thing for him to comment. Can you please give examples of videos his been misinformed on? I’m genuinely interested since I watch his content and find it interesting and typically don’t fact check him.
If shudderwock worked as he said, then a 4 mana Saronite would completely fill your board with 2/3 *taunts* , he obviously didn't think his video through.
The purple sphere in the back of the mtg card was from a gimmick planned but ultimately scrapped for Time Spiral Block. They were going to print a 6th color and act like it had always been that way, because time travel.
I started playing hearthstone recently, and I remember seeing this video so I went back to search for it, and even I noticed that he'd gotten things wrong, if there was a mechanic that allowed me to activate battlecries from copies I'd be winning a lot more. One note: shaman deck using totem boosts windfury and most of my wins happen by turn 7, so shudderwock would have been no trouble to me if I'd had my current deck then. I appreciate your calm approach to this even though I was 2 years late to this scene.
I appreciate your appreciation! I'm really glad you decided to come back and give this a second look. I think it's difficult for people outside of Hearthstone to appreciate the level of mistakes in Austin's video, but perhaps I didn't communicate them well enough. Good luck in your games!
I wanna also want to point out that the Yu-gi-oh one turn kill combo he showed is very outdated, besides Magical Scientist being Forbidden for a long time, Catapult Turtle got an errata that states its effect is now once per turn, making the FTK Impossible to pull off
Filippo Liao the reason it couldn’t even be a turn one kill EVER is because catapult turtle is past level 4, meaning it can’t be normal summoned without a tribute. Spells like Double Summon or monsters like Knightmare Goblin can help this but his explanation doesn’t work
He explains in the video that you just need a way to summon the two monsters mentioned. The way it was done at the time generally involved cards like Monster Gate and Last Will.
Bob Jankins there were cards that let you summon catapult turtle turn one. Just because you need a tribute to NORMAL summon it doesn't mean you need 2 turns.
Philip Dawson Thanks! A few people have brought the audio to my attention and you're the second to recommend normalisation. It's something I hope to have improved upon by the time of my next video.
I like how McConnell talked about nerfing cards while showing a MTG card. MTG is physical first, they don't nerf, they ban. like jesus, did that video get anything right?
In all honestly I still enjoy Austin's work, while his one video did mess up a lot and it really needs work I still enjoy his other content. I hope he can learn from his mistake and make more researched videos on topics he doesn't fully understand.
The purple circle card back is a fan art alter of the normal card back including the unreleased sixth color (purple) that was pulled from planar chaos.
Oh and fun side note the MtG card with 6 colors is a mock up done because they were thinking about having a sixth color for a while. They ended up making colorless into its own color so it kinda came true.
Also when the card is "nerfed", he makes out like you've wasted all your money that you didn't even need to spend. When in reality you can disenchant it for full dust value, sure some of the combo pieces aren't that viable in other decks and won't provide full dust value when disenchanted but at least it is some form of compensation for A card or deck archetype being weakened.
Exactly, but Shudderwock itself was never even nerfed (so the full dust refund never applied), just the animation times were sped up a bit and limited slightly. There's a good point in his video about the mutability of digital games, but sadly he chose not to explore that and instead focused on a horribly misinformed and false narrative.
Foyfluff They did nerf the number of battlecries that shudderwock can stack up though, and while it was not a complete destruction of the card as in hearthstones usual fashion (and so no full dust refund value was offered), it still did affect the deck in a minor way, and make it slightly less time consuming to sit through the animations. While you rightfully pointed out it was not a even that much of a nerf I was intending to shut down his point that you can spend a lot of money to aquire a card and deck and have that all taken away from you if blizzard decides to nerf it, which is not the case. ^^
Devilfinn Yeah very much the case. My only point was that the 'nerf' has no effect in any normal game. It's very unlikely that you'd get 20 different battlecries off.
I can explain the purple color thing. At one point several years after the game came out, the creators of Magic were testing out a potential 6th color. They ended up scrapping it but they have extensively talked about it’s testing and some people really want WOTC to actually make it. Because of that there are a lot of fake card backs and designs that involve purple.
Exactly my thoughts. I used to like his videos a lot, but now I will never be able to watch any of his videos without fact-checking. He didn't even apologised for what he did, just commented on his video in a somewhat defensive manner, and it's mostly the lack of apology for misleading that now turned me away from him.
Wait wait wait...sorry, think I'm a little confused. So a new duplicated Shudderwock doesn't trigger its Battlecry after being duplicated? Well that's fantastic! Makes the card powerful and effective instead of totally game breaking. But if that's the case why does the footage shown seem to include both the placement of more Shudderwocks as well as the duplication of multiple SW's from a single SW. I mean I could be mistaken (the footage is rather zoomed in and I'm not super familiar with the game) but at 4:42 it seems like a bunch of SW's are duplicated one after the other without new cards being put down. There also seems to be some more multi-duplication at 4:22 where 2 cards appear seemingly without the placement of new cards. Does a duplicated SW somehow use the Saronite Chain Gangs Battlecry even though its own Battlecry wasn't activated? I'm afraid I'm not very familiar with the game so I could be totally wrong but we see new Shudderwocks being placed down at 4:33 and it looks very different from the duplication that seems to be occurring at other points in the video. It seems like Austin really doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to card games but I doubt he'd somehow fake footage just to make a faulty argument.
No worries, I'm happy to explain. The zoom on the footage obscures (and you could argue this is why Austin chose to use the zoom) obscures the player's hand, which is where the extra Shudderwocks come from. The Battlecry of Grumble returns the clones of Shudderwock to your hand and makes them cost 1, allowing you to play multiple 'wocks in one turn. It's strange that Austin chose to mention Grumble as being important to the combo, but then completely neglected to include it or explain what it does.
Well I found this video a year too late, glad someone addresses it. I know to call someone a liar is a pretty big claim but his response in the comments shows that maybe it was the intent. Ignoring the main issue of the video. Honesty I'm in the same boat. Liked a lot of his stuff but it makes me wonder how researched his other stuff is. But Goddamn the dislikes on this.
As far as the dislikes are concerned, that's always going to be the case when criticising someone with a large following. I understand it and empathise, you don't want people you look up to turning out to be fallible. But that's just the way things go. I've had people say that all of these criticisms are nitpicks, but they're really not, it's just that they probably don't know enough about the game to see why these mistakes invalidate Austin's argument, and I suppose it's a failing on my end that I didn't explain that process well enough. Ah well, we live and learn. Thanks for your comment man, glad the video struck a chord with you :)
Great video. As a hearthstone player his mistakes was kind of obvious. Additionally, in his video clip, he plays two extra cards to pull of the combo, murmuring elemental, and fire plume harbinger. If he really played the game recently, then I kind of doubt he would be facing shudderwock at rank 25.
GelberStuhl Suppose it depends how low their hp is haha, you can also get Far Sight discounts on the Shudderwock, but for the most part you're absolutely right
Wizards actually planned and playtested a 6th color (purple) but ended up never implementing it into mtg. Basic land type was supposed to be city or cave
You can't click through animations to speed them up. You can click enemy cards played to make them disappear, but the animations don't speed up at all.
That's true, Shudderwock was much weaker than the other decks at the time (mostly Cubelock and Even Paladin) but since their nerfs Shudderwock has returned and it's actually a potent but pretty balanced meta deck right now.
"I can't for the life of me even figure out a search term in Google images that would allow me to find a picture like this" - It's literally just the fourth result when you search "magic the gathering back of card" It's actually incredibly easy to find with Google, I'm not sure how you could have possibly had trouble finding it. As someone who works in a shop that sells Magic cards, I - like you - noticed immediately that that was not a real Magic card, but I assumed it was for copyright reasons. The reason it's illegal to sell fake Magic cards is not because it's a sneaky thing to do, it's because Wizards of the Coast owns the copyright to every single card they've printed and by trying to sell a fake card you are stealing the copyright owned by Wizards. The same applies to the back of the cards, the backs are also copyrighted. Now, Austin would not have gotten in trouble for simply showing the back of the card, but in all cases with copyright, it's wise to err on the side of cation, and I assumed that's what he was doing. - My general complaint with Austin's video has nothing to do with lying. I think that's unnecessarily overblown and exaggerated. He just didn't fully grasp the topic he was discussing. He wasn't trying to mislead anyone. He was just trying to share something he - a casual player of card games - has experienced with people who don't know anything about card games. That came at the cost of the more serious and competitive crowd who realized the mistakes he made in the video. But that said, *THIS* video just seems pedantic, unnecessary, and drastically overblown for something which was likely just and honest mistake. - EDIT: Also, you *DRASTICALLY* overestimate the amount of knowledge you need to have about a game to play the game. Casual players exist. They don't care enough to intimately learn mechanics. They just play the game. You don't seem to understand that's it's possible to play Hearthstone without having a deep knowledge pool of how a specific card activates, which plays into your belief that there is no way Austin could actually have played the game. You say he doesn't need to have a deep understanding of the game to make a video on it, yet you don't entertain the possibility that maybe that's *actually what happened*.
Hey, firstly I just want to thank you for taking the time to write out such a long comment. It's a bit of a lost art these days so even though you're being critical of me I still appreciate that you've taken the time to express your thoughts very clearly. Firstly, yes it does seem that when you search that it is around the 4th or 5th result. I tried searching a litany of terms before I made that video and really couldn't see it. It's possible that the rankings for it have changed I suppose, but it's more likely that I just didn't see it - genuinely my bad. However, that doesn't exactly let austinmcconnell off the hook for the mistake, which was almost definitely a mistake and not a copyright evasion method. If it was a way for austinmcconnell to evade copyright then why would he still use footage of games, the images of all the Hearthstone and Yugioh cards, Blizzard's official trailer, and the litany of other copyrighted materials he and every other RUclipsr used and uses on a daily basis? It doesn't make any sense that he would go out of his way to include a fake MTG card back (which still has the official 'Magic: the Gathering' and 'Deckmaster' trademarks, which have just as much copyright protection as the colour wheel) to protect himself from copyright issues but would use a myriad of other copyrighted sources. The entire defence is moot anyway because austinmcconnell has been making videos for long enough to know about Fair Use. Every image austinmcconnell used in this video was used for educational purposes, so none of it could be considered a breach of copyright anyway. I know you say he wouldn't have gotten in trouble for it and that he was just "erring on the side of caution" but that's an absolutely ridiculous claim considering the other materials he has used. Instead, what happened is that austinmcconnell chose that image for whatever reason, likely because it's the very first image result for 'mtg card back high res' (this was pointed out to me by another commenter) without checking the source of it (Deviant Art) nor the description of it on the site which explains that it is a mocked up card back that the user made to see what it would look like if Purple had been printed in Future Sight. This was a mistake on austinmcconnell's part resulting from a lack of research, much like the other points in his video. With regards to lying, I know it seems like a serious allegation, but it really must be the case. Austin states both that the only way to get Shudderwock is to pump $70 into the slot machine of packs to have a chance of opening him, and also states that he has played Hearthstone for a short while. He claims that Shudderwock's clones have their battlecries go off too, while footage in the background shows that not happening. He claims that you can't play any cards while your Shudderwock's battlecries are playing, then shows footage of him playing more Shudderwocks while Shudderwock's battlecries are playing. Between the statements he makes about the game and his claim that he has played the game and that he footage is his, one of those two sides must be a lie. Looking at his track record of plagiarism and wilful misinformation so far leads me to believe it's not that far-fetched that he was not being 100% truthful here either. And finally your edit. Casual players do exist, but I think an understanding of Battlecries only trigger when you play them from your hand isn't an 'intimate' knowledge of the game, it's quite basic. Especially for someone claiming 'this is me playing the Shudderwock deck' to think that the Shudderwocks just infinitely activate by themselves while showing footage of more being played. Here's how it would go if you were Austin playing the deck believing that what he said is the truth: "So now I'll play Shudderwock and it will go infinite and win the game..." 30 seconds later "Oh, I haven't won and I only have two Shudderwocks on the field. I guess I was wrong." It seems that the only way you could be so wrong about how this works is if you're just really stupid or unaware. I don't think austinmcconnell is either of those things. It's definitely a possibility that I have entertained, but it's such a stretch to think that he just accidentally got everything wrong in such a way that it conforms to his narrative that it seems far more likely that he just bent the truth where it was most convenient.
I don't really have a strong opinion about what actually happened with the back of the Magic card. I was just explaining what my first thought was when I noticed it while watching the video. Ultimately, I don't think that it matters very much and wouldn't provide much support to *either* of our arguments regardless of which one of us is right. I was just trying to give an alternate perspective on the matter. With that said, I'm going to skip down to your fifth paragraph: I seriously cannot express enough how much I think that calling what Austin did lying is overreacting. I'm not trying to defend the video or its content with this - he clearly made several prominent errors that drastically effect the credibility of the video - but I do not think there is any reason to suspect those errors were made intentionally. If he *WERE* to make such errors intentionally, I don't even understand what benefit he would hope to draw from intentionally misleading his audience. Hanlon's Razor come's to mind right now: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." "Looking at his track record of plagiarism and wilful misinformation" - Okay, back up, what? You didn't mention this at all in your video? What are you talking about here? "but I think an understanding of Battlecries only trigger when you play them from your hand isn't an 'intimate' knowledge of the game, it's quite basic." - I will agree with you that that *IS* basic knowledge, but as a super casual player of Hearthstone myself - I only play once every few months when the mood suddenly hits me - I didn't actually have a full understanding of how Battlecries activated until you explained it in this video. I stand as first hand proof that lack of basic understanding of game mechanics is very possible among casuals.
"I will agree with you that that IS basic knowledge, but as a super casual player of Hearthstone myself - I only play once every few months when the mood suddenly hits me - I didn't actually have a full understanding of how Battlecries activated until you explained it in this video. I stand as first hand proof that lack of basic understanding of game mechanics is very possible among casuals." As he said, if you played the deck even once, you would know that from experience. Sure, you can ignore a mechanic if you don't use it or encounter it often, and sure, the Shudderwock combo is mechanically quite complex, but t doesn't change the fact that if he had indeed played that deck, he couldn't have not seen these mechanics at work. Now, you seem to assume that Foyfluff is accusing Austin of lying about the mechanics of Hearthstone. I don't think that's the case, but that doesn't mean he didn't lie. The most likely thing here is that, unlike what he pretends, he never played the game and had no first-hand experience with the deck. He just heard about Shudderwock from a disgruntled player and thought that it could make a neat video. That doesn't seem too unbelievable and is actually more likely than him not understanding the core mechanic of a deck he played.
Hey, firstly I want to apologise for a delay in replying. Nested comments like this are difficult to find when I scroll through looking for new comments and with the number of notifications I'm getting right now a lot of them get buried, if I ever received one in the first place. In the meantime L'Humanoide Errant des Internets is doing a fantastic job of explaining things in a civil manner exactly as I like it, so top marks to that guy. The only thing I want to add is about your mentioning of Hanlon's Razor. Firstly, thanks for bringing that up because I've always known the adage but had never heard the name for it, are there any more Razors besides this and Occam's I wonder? Anyway, a few commenters have brought up this thing about malice, and that's interesting to me because I've never once said that austinmcconnell is being malicious and I very much do not believe that he is. Lying does not require malice, and I think the reason he has lied is not out of malice but instead to maintain his authority inside of the video and to make the story sound a bit more interesting. As I said in my video, had austinmcconnell made a factually accurate video about Shudderwock it probably wouldn't be all that interesting because it would consist of: "There's this card called Shudderwock and it's pretty good and can win some games, the animations are a bit long which is a little annoying. End." Also regarding plagiarism. It's not something I brought up in the video because I wasn't aware of it before a lot of commenters pointed it out. If you're interested to learn more, here's some links to some videos explaining these allegations. ruclips.net/video/__tQdF3ZnQ4/видео.html (Austin made numerous mistakes in his linguistics video, which he re-purposed almost word for word from a Mental Floss article) ruclips.net/video/ZDtJ7bte_zg/видео.html (Austin re-purposed a smaller channel's video about KFC. Hbomberguy talks a lot about copying someone's style, but from the clips here it's clearly more than just a presentation style that Austin has used. The piece about Austin starts at about 4 minutes in, but the entire video is pretty good.) ruclips.net/video/dFyRQeH9-z8/видео.html (Austin makes a point about being able to 'reset the chip' on an ink cartridge, which is impossible. This guy shows the exact cartridge Austin uses in his video and demonstrates how there is no 'reset button' where Austin claims there is one, which is something Austin must have realised when making the video unless he thinks rattling a paperclip inside of a little slot is what 'resets' a cartridge. This guy gets a bit too angry over the issue, but his point still stands.)
The delay in response is not a problem at all, don't worry about it. Honestly, I find this history of plagiarism you've just presented to be a much more compelling argument then your main argument itself, and I think if you were to attach those videos to this argument it would dramatically increase its effectiveness. It would help drive home the point that this isn't a single instance error but a pattern of his channel. - Anyway, that aside, thank you for taking the time to have a productive discussion with me. You've managed to change my mind on this issue and it seems like these days most people would have just told me to fuck off for having a different thought on the matter.
I'd also like to point out that, contrary to other card games, YuGiOh has a type of card dubbed by the community called, "Hand Traps". This is what allows certain FTK's to be less of a problem than in other card games, provided that they are fragile, and inconstant. For example, the previous YuGiOh format had an FTK called, "Pendulum FTK". It was fairly fragile compared to other FTK's, but even if you stopped the FTK, the player could set up a board that could negate 1-3 cards of your opponents hand. Because the stopped the FTK with a hand trap(or two), they only have 5 cards to start. A single well timed negate can end a turn right there. Also, keep in mind, that the Pendulum FTK player is almost always playing hand traps too. Even though there was a "degenerate" FTK running amok the YuGiOh meta, it was considered one of the healthiest formats of the decade, behind HAT Format. Though it could be taken as how YuGiOh as a game is unhealthy, I'd like to believe it shows that FTK's aren't as much of a problem in it.
Nice fucking audio mixing friend. I love the subtle nuance of having to raise the volume for your gentle whisper voice from across the room, and how it contrasts with the booming volume of mcconnell with the mic down his throat. Really adds to the viewing experience.
Andrew Scarpati Haha, sorry about that. I never noticed that much of a problem when I was editing but you're not the only person to have commented on it. I'll try and make sure it's better for next time.
I will (again) paste my comment form his video here. I will just copy-paste my previous comment here: 1. 1:46 Sometimes those combos are just hard to spot. Imaging creating a 100 card expansion. It adds 100 new cards to a game (or game format) where already at least hundreds of cards exist. Sometimes it just slips through, you can't test every single card interaction in the game (for example in Magic "copy cat combo"). Hearthstone devs generally do a good job of it. 2. 2:46 You have to choose a target for the "restore 3 health", it doesn't simply heal you. 3. 3:20 If you are playing Shudderwock on turn 9 you are: a) very lucky b)doing something horribly wrong. 4. 4:11 THIS ISN'T EVEN EVEN A CORRECT FREAKING CARD BACK FOR MAGIC! Just look at the 6 dots in the middle of it representing the 6 colors of mana in Magic. Oh wait, Magic has only 5 colors... 5. 5:04 As a player who never spent any money on Hearthstone and plays basically and deck he wants I disagree. Just by doing your daily quests you can buy over 70 card packs when a new expansion launches. Oh, and Hearthstone has a crafting system which let's you exchange cards you don't want for those you want. 6. 5:28 You aren't on turn 10. You have 10 mana crystals and you had just shown that a turn before you also had 10 mana crystals. 7. 5:38 Shudderwock isn't a "one turn kill" deck. It generally requires at least 2 turns and a ton of preperations. Also those three cards don't guarantee you the kill. The battlecries are activated in a random order If Grumble's battlecry activates before Saronite's (50% of that happening) you won't get a copy of Shudderwock back to your hand and the "combo" ends. 8. 6:56 Thats not how any of this works. "Battlecry is an ability where a particular effect activates when the card with the Battlecry is played directly from the hand. " A copy of a card isn't directly played from your hand. A huge misunderstanding of the game rules. 9. 7:53 Murmuring Elemental is a 2 mana card, Shudderwock is a 9 mana card. Maximum number of mana crystals in hearthstone is 10. 9+2>10. You have to go through some hoops to achieve that. 10. 8:12 battlecry animations are generally shorter than 3 seconds. You had to really try hard (before the patch) to have a 3 or 4 minute Shudderwock. 11. 9:32 You don't have to wait. If somebody played that many battlecries you don't have to wait, you will die anyway and you can skip the wait by just pressing the "concede" button. Also back in the day, few years ago you couldn't press the concede button in such situation, the Grim Patron deck, a combo deck in my opinion more frustrating than Shudderwock brought the change with it. 12. 9:49 After the release of the Witchwood the Shudderwock deck was just... weak. I din't see any players conceding just because somebody played a Shudderwock deck. 13. 10:04 basically any control deck drags the game out... 14. 10:25 That's a huge overstatement. 15. 10:35 So you are a player who played Hearthstone sometimes and haven't played in over 3 months that decided to do an in depth critique of one of the game's cards? 16. 10:45 Unfortunately the technology doesn't allow Blizzard to make changes to Hearthstone instantly like they do in WoW or Overwatch. 17. 11:14 look point 5 on the list. 18. 11:42 look point 4 on the list. 19. 11:38 I don't know any example of a card being nerfed in a paper card game.
I used to respect austin quite a bit, partially because his videos seemed to radiate confidence and expertise and it felt like we could trust him. That trust is lost, and really, was it ever earned?
As a long-term player of Yugioh myself, I found it somewhat baffling when he decided to pick that particular Yugioh combo. Mass Driver Frogs was about 100x more consistent, and if I wanted to spin it a certain way, I could probably convince him that Exodia is worth playing. I'd say, "Exodia was a broken deck before cards like Ash Blossom and Joyus Spring came out because it used to be possible for you to just lose turn one because your opponent plays royal magical library, and a deck full of spells. Because for every 3 spell cards that you play, it lets you draw 1 card, and there are even some cards that allow you to get this effect in even fewer spells than 3. So your opponent just draws until they have all 5 pieces of Exodia, and they win the game and you can't do anything about it." When in reality, Exodia is probably one of the worst decks to play, even with super rejuvenation being un-banned (yeah, hello from October 2019). It's because to get that absurdly lucky to not only draw Royal Magical Library on the first turn, but also subsequently draw the exact spells that you need to keep your combo going, you would probably want to use it as the barometer for if you should buy a lottery ticket that day. Because you're batting like... 1 in ever 12000 games, you win on the first turn where your opponent just had to sit there and watch you win.
He even says earlier in the video battlecries only trigger when played from hand, yet still says the copy generated on the board activates its battlecries. What a mess if you can't even stay consistent in your ignorance
the_ Bootitan if battlecries worked the way he thinks the game would actually be broken. Chain gang itself would break the game since it would effectively be a 4 mana 14/21 since it would just play 7 copies of itself. Oh wait....that's not what happens....and you have to play chain gang before shudderwock.....and he claimed to play the deck.
From what I understand in duel links you can't craft cards from the main booster expansions. Although in that game in general card acquisition is pretty weird. Booster sets are set up in finite chunks divided into packs that in total contain at least one of each card in the set, and these chunks can be reset at any time. IE I want a 'prevent rat', I pull one and know there's only one in the chunk, I can now reset the chunk to try and get another or keep going to get the rest of the cards. Disclaimer I haven't played much duel links, but I've talked to my friends who do about it many times.
Thank you for addressing this. As a veteran Hearthstone player, all of the incorrect statements were infuriating. It seemed like he just wanted to whine about the game instead of actually explore the topic and educate people.
Thank you for watching! I think this could have been a really interesting topic too, but sadly the actual exploration is not only massively incorrect but also incredibly shallow.
Holy fucking shit, how stupid can people get? It’s about what happens when you break a card game with some stupid overused combo, not how to become a pro at the game and learn literally everything. By the way, there’s no such thing as a veteran card game player. The only people who deserve that title are military units.
Raycevick is pretty much the standard I hold all video essayists to. Well researched, well edited, he makes it very clear when he is giving his opinion seperate from facts, and his voice enchanting
Seems more like he was just wrong about a mechanic, not lying. And considering Blizzard nerfed the card to pretty much address the gist of the concerns brought up in his video I honestly don't see an issue? Oh and googling "mtg card back"? The one from his video is literally the third result.
I believe in the tutorial, when you play the game for the first time, the game explains you how the collection works. So probably you just went through that part really fast. Like many people do with tutorials.
In regards to the Magic card back, Wizards of the Coast (Magics producers) actually toyed with idea of introducing the sixth purple color. Ultimately, they decided against it. I presume he used the one he did to avoid a copy right strike since the six color back is unofficial
It's a nice idea but I think that's quite unlikely. You think he'd get a copyright strike for an image of a cardback but not for footage of games, the images of all the Hearthstone and Yugioh cards, Blizzard's official trailer, and the litany of other copyrighted materials he and every other RUclipsr used and uses on a daily basis? It's almost definitely just the result of incredibly poor research on austinmcconnell's part, completely in line with the res of the video.
Foyfluff I'm honestly not quite sure about that, I'm a viewer and not content creator so I'm not as in the loop about that stuff as I'm sure you guys are. I'm a regular viewer of his and in almost every other video of his, he seems to be quite genuine in his content. But, like everything else on the internet I suppose it should be taken with a grain of salt. Anyway, I appreciate your video bringing light to something that otherwise would have gone unnoticed by most
Fair enough, I've had a massive interest in the behind the scenes stuff of content creators and copyright law for a good while now, so it just helps out a lot in my own content creation now. Thanks for the appreciation, I appreciate it! Not to try and tarnish your idea of austinmcconnell, but this is not the first time he's done some dodgy stuff on RUclips. I haven't dug very deep or anything, but from videos I've watched that have been recommended to me by commenters on this video there's at least two counts of plagiarised videos and one other wilfully misinformed video. I'd really recommend watching this by hbomberguy about plagiarism on RUclips, the segment on austinmcconnell starts at about 4 minutes in, but the rest of the video is great too: ruclips.net/video/ZDtJ7bte_zg/видео.html
Foyfluff funnily enough, I've actually already seen that hbomberguy video, I love his stuff. I didn't realise he'd said anything about Austin though, I'll give it another view. Thank you for the correspondence, you've surely earned my subscription!
I had exactly the same reaction when another commenter told me about it haha, I remembered the SoulBrother and Weegie story but not austinmcconnell's for some reason. Thanks very much though, I appreciate it!
wait a second he said that a battle cry only works when you play the card not when it gets copied but then in Austins video when the shudderwock death trap thing is happening he doesn't mention it which confuses me .-.
I had an identical experience, except with Austin's video on dead letters. Just with my background knowledge of linguistics, i noticed so many inaccuracies. As one example, he strongly implied that W was a letter in the latin alphabet. This is not true.
Quaestor's video 'Austin McConnell, Plagiarism, and Linguistics' tackles this exact issue and might give you that feeling of vindication some of the Hearthstone players here have experienced: ruclips.net/video/__tQdF3ZnQ4/видео.html I actually study Linguistics (although I've purposefully chosen not to study much Old English) so it's interesting that Austin's choices of errors overlap into two of my areas of knowledge.
Yeah I've been told this since making the video. There, the creator explains it's a mocked up card back to see what the MTG back would look like had they went ahead with putting Purple in the Time Spiral block.
In his defense, I really think that the video isn't really for people that play the game a lot. When I was first learning Magic: the gathering a lot of information I was being taught about how to play in the beginning was contradicted with information I learned later on. When I asked about why I was being lied to about the game I was told that it made the game easier to explain at the start so I could get my bearings faster when I learned new rules. I don't think that he was wrong on purpose, just that he had to dumb down a lot of mechanics to explain the problem to people that have never played a card game.
Cat While I think this is a nice idea, I really wouldn't have minded if austinmcconnell had just simplified some details for his audience, but that's not the case: he goes into quite some depth about both the Yugioh FTK and the Shudderwock combo, but in the latter case gets a lot of the combo completely wrong, and in the former makes an absolutely bizarre connection between a combo that kills your opponent potentially before they can play a single card and a combo that requires at the very least 9 turns of setup. The problem isn't just that he's inaccurate, but also that the conclusions he comes to and the narrative he forms from those inaccuracies are not at all reflective of reality. Shudderwock isn't breaking the game, so the central thesis of the video is already not looking so great. It's also nothing like an FTK, so his hook doesn't really hold up, finally, while the mutability of digital games is a really interesting topic, and card games could be a great window into that topic, Shudderwock hasn't actually changed as a card, so it's a terrible representation of the topic which Austin only very briefly touches on. You say you play MTG so I'll demonstrate my point about simplicity with an example from Modern. To say "Goryo's Vengeance / Grishoalbrand decks break the game because they win on Turn 1" is a fine simplification to make, it skips out some of the details that they don't always go Turn 1 and that even when they do it can still occasionally be interacted with. Now to say something like "Krark Clan Ironworks Combo decks are breaking the game because they're combos just like Goryo's Vengeance is" isn't an oversimplification because it's just not true, but it is a good parallel to what austinmcconnell is saying in his video.
As foy said he already went over enough of the combo and mechanics that if he was accurate in his information he could've explained it. The biggest problem with his explanation is how battlecries work. It doesnt take someone much to think "well if copying a card plays its battlecry that means chain gang infinitely copies itself on it's own on turn 4 right?" Another thing is Shudderwock takes multiple turns. Yes you WILL die the turn after they play shudderwock, but the turn Shudderwock itself is played it doesnt do anything besides potentially heal for 6 (sometimes only 3) and summon some 6/6s. If you have lethal on board he cant play the card which is why it's a problem in the meta. It's a problem that it hard counters control (before the recent changes), but it has a bad performance against aggro decks and is not a guaranteed combo at all which I dont think he addressed. You CAN make it 100%, but that requires now running a 6+ card combo and playing "bad" cards so no one runs that variant anymore so usually it's still its 87.5% or whatever success rate.
Well way back when Wizards of the coast bought out D&D there was speculation that they would add a 6th color and print D&D style card and the mana was purple, I think it was void mana or something
Purple was a theorised colour early on in Time Spiral's development, but it never actually saw the light of day and it was never printed on a card back. This card back was a mocked up one by a Deviant Art user who wondered what it would have looked like if they'd went ahead with the Purple idea. www.deviantart.com/lordnyriox/art/Magic-the-Gathering-Six-Color-Card-Back-640666595
I used google since i assumed he used it and search "Magic the Gathering Card Backs" and the 6 color CB was the fourth image of the results. Now most of the rest where the real card back but the 6 color one was the best image quality. He literally choose graphics over truth.
The reason why his opponent lost was that the deck the opponent was using was a slow paced deck that would swarm the field and shudderwock has an easy advantage on slow paced decks also Austin is around rank 20 at that rank people are not using competitive cards or there trying to experiment with cards or if they are using competitive decks there trying-to rank up fast to get to rank legend also of i remember correctly there are 25 ranks at the time of his video
regarding the purple mana symbol on the back of the MTG card, I remember a few years back around the speculation of a new mana type (just turned out to be colourless symbols) people were wondering if they'd add a purple mana to the game. So maybe it's from then?
Harry A bit of sleuthing and some other people's comments have pointed me towards the source for the image, which is Deviant Art, where the creator explains that it's a mocked-up card back to see what it would have looked like if WOTC had gone through with an early plan to print Purple cards in the Time Spiral block. If austinmcconnell had checked where the image had come from, or clicked through to that link, he would have known this, but instead he just copy and pasted an image from Google image search without doing the bare minimum.
Ah fair enough, thanks for the reply. Also thanks for clearing this up. I saw the original video and not playing Hearthstone but do play MtG myself I was like some of this stuff seems a bit dumb, like a 9 drop being overpowered when my understanding was that you could get it out turn 8 at the earliest. Whereas in MTG I can get a 10 drop out turn 4 :D and not being able to concede when you know you've lost
These kinds of videos are always made by people who have literally no knowledge of the subject, they're just looking for quick ad revenue from other people who have no idea.
Charles Nault Purple was an early idea for the Time Spiral block and an April Fool's joke in an old MTG magazine. It has certainly never been printed on the back of a real card.
After going through most of his catalog, I realized Austin is just looking for interesting or trending topics to make low effort, high return essays about. He's passable as an editor, and the claims that he's ripped off the style of others don't really hold up IMO, but he doesn't have anything to add to most of the subjects he brings up. Doing the research necessary to speak definitively about them is significantly more time intensive than simply speaking in an authoritative tone and sinking what little energy he can muster into competent but sterile graphics. As a fellow lazy person, I commend him on the success this has garnered.
Considering that his channel covers a wide range of topics I didn't take the inaccuracies to heart, but I think you're right. If I'd never played Hearthstone and other CCGs I might have been misled.
Thank you for making this video. The guy you're responding to really annoyed me with getting the Battlecry detail of a copied Shudderwock wrong. EDIT: Also, thanks for pointing out the MTG card back error. Jesus, what an error.
He could've used better examples, such as Splinter Twin/ Felidar+Saheeli from MTG as "breaking" a card game, those are 2-card combos that could be and were pulled early in the game. I guess he couldn't bother to do so?
I know I'm way too late to the party and no one will ever read this probably. But I just want to add my thoughts about the video from that Austin guy. He got the battlecry mechanic wrong. Ok. That probably means he lied about the footage being his own. That's awful, but I wouldn't have cared too much. But two things really infuriated me: 1. He heavily implied that there is no other way than spending more than 70 dollars to get that single card, while in reality you have more than one way to get the cards you want for free. I'm playing Hearthstone f2p myself, so that really got on my nerves. 2. The point that nerfing a card means the consumer loses the value of said card, seemingly wasting those 70+ dollars, was a rather big topic in his video, while conveniently leaving out the refunding mechanic. I mean... at this point it's just slander. I just watched that video, had this video here in my recommendations and came to watch that. And I'm just really mad how his video has a few million views by now and yours not even 100k.
Hey, thanks for the support man, I'm glad my video resonated with you. It is a shame that Austin's video still stands with millions of views while mine is hovering around 100k, but on the flipside, this is my most popular video I've ever made, so it's got something going for it. Somewhat annoying though, is the fact that Austin profited heavily from his incorrect and as you say "slanderous" video, while I haven't gotten a penny from mine as I haven't hit the 1,000 subscriber milestone necessary to enter the Partner program. Damn.
@@Foyfluff That sucks. I'm subscribing now just for that! Also, you make Hearthstone content and you played Slay the Spire, so I'm actually interested in your content anyway. Good luck on getting those 1000 subscribers, you definitely deserve it more than the other guy!
Thank you for vindiciating how irritated I was after randomly coming across that video. I haven't even gone through your channel, but I'm subscribing anyways because you seem like a content creator who actually does research!
PineappleDude Aww but you should check out the rest if austinmccknel's vids they're preery great. Don't let one unresearched video spoil an impreesion you have
Shadowmonger I think Austin has some pretty quality content, but this isn't the only video of his that's problematic. Between plagiarism and other instances of wilful misinformation, I'd really rather support creators that still have my trust.
Battlecries won't trigger off of the copies unless those copies are returned to the hand and then played from the hand. That's why Grumble is an important piece of the combo because it's his ability that bounces your other creatures back to your hand. The way austinmcconnell describes it, Grumble wouldn't even need to be played. Also, the footage of multiple Shudderwocks being played contradicts Austin's argument that "you can't perform any other actions until Shudderwock has finished) as he shows footage of multiple Shudderwocks being played while another one is still resolving.
6 лет назад+19
I hate the deck but this kind of decks has existed before. Anyfin Paladin is the exact same thing. You probably can't disrupt it unless you also play murlocs. Which is unlikely.
Dương Thành Vương I think combo decks are just an essential part of a card game's meta. People love to hate them, but they keep control in check and they're in pretty much every card game that exists.
Shudderwock decks are very vulnerable to aggro decks (which are the most popular decks in the game) so you definitely can disrupt it. Anyfin Paladin was more of a midrange deck so it was capable of beating aggro, and it just used Anyfin is Possible as a finisher.
Anyfin had a cap on damage (albeit high BUT control warrior with justicar COULD get there) and couldn't break through taunt. These problems were less so with Ivory Knight being added at the tail end of the rotation making it so you could have upwards of 4 copies. Also, much like Shudderwock Anyfin CAN whiff. The second Anyfin CAN be 6 warleaders and 1 bluegill. It's not likely at all, but it IS a possibility and you needed at least 3 bluegills to guarantee lethal on no armor OR taunt.
Imagine if Battlecries were activated if a minion was summoned... Alarm-o-Bot could maybe have even been decent, not to forget it defeats the entire purpose of tech cards like Dirty Rat
This was incredibly nitpicky, literally the only thing he said that was actually wrong was claiming saronite chain gang caused shudderwock to be recursive, and that's hardly that terrible a mistake since shudderwock is recursive, it just requires grumble or Zola to achieve, everything else just comes down to semantics or pedantry. For example, when you consider the fact that you have to dust 160 commons and 40 rares to craft a legendary, it's still quite the money sink. That distribute of rarities reflects the minimum value of a pack, 1 rare and 4 commons, so to craft any legendary you must entirely dust at most 40 hearthstone packs. So the fact that you can craft a legendary doesn't change the fact that to craft you still have to either purchase dozens of Hearthstone packs converting every card in them into a single legendary card or slowly grind for gold every day, and good luck doing that without a single good legendary to your name. Acquiring a single legendary through crafting either costs the price of some whole games or requires a full-time job level of dedication to hearthstone. Most hardcore players just don't realize this because they have already dropped several hundred dollars on Hearthstone over the years or just play it like it is a full-time job and don't think twice about it, but this is very alienating to people who are interested in Hearthstone but don't want to dedicate this much of their resources and time to it. Also, after play shudderwock and exhausting any options you have left you then have to wait for all the shudderwocks to playout before anything can happen just like he said, a bit of pedantry doesn't change this fact, what he said wasn't wrong and what you said doesn't contradict what he said, this desperation for gotchas doesn't make you look good. It's a shame this is how this discussion is taking place be cause there is a real problem with the balance between aggro/combo/control in hearthstone is fucked up and has always been fucked up, because aggro counters combo, combo counters control, and control is shit and has always been shit compared the the degeneracy of aggro and combo so aggro runs wild and combo just exists to fuck over any meager pathetic attempt at control. Hearthstone needs to rein back the power of aggro decks, give control some actual control tools and create combos that aren't just one turn kill nonsense.
The magic card back is real. At some point, wotc was considering a 6th color, purple and thus that card back. In the end thought, purple was never added and the no physical card exists with that card back. Wizards themselves has even used the image on recent livestreams.
Thanks for this. I only play Hearthstone on my phone with net decks I can craft with dust but holy moly did his video drive me up the wall with inaccuracies and omissions.
DockZock Haha no, thank you for watching! Also, what's this 'crafting', and 'dust' you speak of? Is that shorthand for 'spending hundreds of dollars on packs to have a chance at opening the cards you want'?
He made a non-apology in the comments of that video: "As several Hearthstone players have correctly pointed out, I didn't quite explain some of Shudderwock's properties correctly/fully. While an "infinite loop" didn't occur precisely as I described, it was still possible with the combination of Grumble, Worldshaker, Saronite Chain Gang, and Murmuring Elemental. If you'd like to learn precisely how all of it worked, there are plenty of in-depth articles that can explain it (and the rest of the card game) in great detail. Feel free to Google something like "How The Shudderwock Combo Works". Don't listen to some filthy casual like me."
My biggest problem with the video was that it didn't talk about the topic, but really just talk about one combo, and not how card games are broken
Boenobleman Haha yeah, there could have been a lot of interesting discussion about the topic considering that just about every card game has been broken in some way or another at some point in time. You could look at how that actually affects players, how these mistakes slip through the cracks, and how the developers fix these problems.
But why do that when you can just hastily publish a load of rubbish attacking Hearthstone and Yugioh?
Yeah, this. Considering he has a spiel about Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon TCG in the beginning, I thought he would address those as well.
Which is especially obnoxious since Shudderwock is one of the most fair combo decks we've ever seen while there are several things that are in the game or have been in the game that would make infinitely more sense to bring into a conversation about game balance.
Naga giants absolutely wrecked the wild meta for what, like a year or so before they "fixed" it (by changing Naga into a completely different card instead of just undoing the thing they broke in the first place, but that's a rant for another time)? Barnes is still around and still provides an unreasonably high winrate for anybody lucky to play him on turn three or four, Keleseth on two is a similar problem. Undertaker, Patches, classic druid combo and any number of other nerfs from the past would be reasonable things to bring up in their pre-nerf iterations as examples of what not to do.
Now that you pointed it out I think this is actually the most irritating part of that video. CCGs get broken all the time and Hearthstone hasn't been an exception, it's not like it would have been difficult to do an analysis of the topic that didn't rely on misrepresenting the rules of the game. Maybe that wouldn't have done as well as a headline of "new card some of you hate BREAKS THE GAME!" though.
He doesn't say that they're broken. He just brings up a situation where something like a new expansion breaks the game, either temporarily or permanently.
In that i have to disagree.
The point of the video isn't "card games are broken" is "When card games break", and he showed examples of card games breaking because of OP combos, and after that explanation he introduces the Shudderwock combo.
Probably more accurate to classify the video essay as a fail than a lie as the original creator didn't seem to be willfully misinforming the masses (which is pretty close to the dictionary definition of "lying") so much as just arguing from extreme ignorance and generally being sloppy. Might be useful to edit the video title, if only to eliminate language that disingenuously represents the original video, especially since you state near the end of the video "I don't think austinmcconnell is a bad guy." Perhaps the first part of the title could be "Ignorant Video Essays" or "Video Essay Fails" or something like that so that you, too, can not accidentally spread "fake news."
Now if evidence came out that he did lie for views, then that makes the situation much worse and you can feel free to keep that video title.
Beyond that, I rather like this video response. The volume level of your voice recording could stand to be boosted by several decibels (I've made similar mistakes in this regard so it's understandable), but the points you make are fairly solid and I appreciate watching someone's ignorance get ripped to shreds.
Thank you very much for the feedback, especially about the mic volume. I'll have a look at that in future. As I've said elsewhere I'm not too great with audio settings but I'd really like to get them right!
As far as the video title goes, I think austinmcconnell has to be lying about something. Either he's wilfully lying about how the mechanics work in Hearthstone for it to fit his narrative, or he's lying about having played Hearthstone, because I can't understand how anyone who had played Hearthstone to the extent that they've made a full Shudderwock deck could not know about the crafting system or how Battlecries work. I know accusations of lying might seem a bit harsh, but I think there's fairly substantial evidence for it and if it were always up to the original creator to voluntarily own up to it then the truth would never come out. I hope that doesn't seem too disrespectful!
I guess that's a fair enough reason. Personally I could see a few situations that lead to the level of ignorance he expressed (maybe it's why Blizzard won't give us more deck slots), but on the other hand he does behave as if he knows what he's talking about when he doesn't among other questionable details.
As for mic volume. I'm not sure what software you're recording with, but if you're using OBS Studio or something, try adding Gain after adding Noise Suppression and a Noise Gate. There's a more detailed guide on the OBS Forums, but the idea is to remove as much background noise as possible (doesn't seem to be a problem in your commentary as far as I can tell, but never hurts to make sure), then boost what's left so people can clearly hear it.
You can also adjust the audio track during editing by increasing the dB level of your voice recording specifically. This will depend on the software you're using as well, but there's usually a convenient volume meter that can be adjusted while the track is selected (or if you're using Audacity, you can Amplify it).
I use Streamlabs OBS for most recording and then edit in Premiere Pro, although I'm quite new to the latter and used to use Vegas so I'm still figuring a lot of it out. I'll have a tinker around with the settings and see what I can come up with, but I wasn't even aware that there was much of a mic problem, so it definitely helps to be told about it. Thanks a lot!
Interest shit you said literally everything I wanted to say
I'd still squint at calling it a lie. What strikes me about this is where the intent comes into the picture; it's the difference between misinformation and disinformation. The former's just wrong, the second's intentionally misrepresentative. Calling someone wrong is a statement about them not having their facts straight. Calling them a liar is a comment on their moral character.
Bit of trivia on that MTG cardback. There was a set (I think it was time spiral) where R&D toyed with the idea of adding of a new color to the color pie, and that color was purple. The idea was that since the set delt with alternate timelines, they were just going to pretend like purple had been part of magic from the start and the fans were the ones being weird in order to immerse the players in the confusion of hopping timelines. What you see on the back is the edited color pie that includes purple. EDIT: It was Planar chaos, not time spiral . The color was to show alternate reality, not alternate time lines aswell.
Yeah a few people have pointed this out. Turns out that if you google 'mtg card back high res' that's the first image that comes up: from Deviant Art with a description explaining that it's an edited version of the card back to include the Time Spiral colour wheel. austinmcconnell didn't even look at where his images were coming from when he made the video.
Foyfluff what's worse is that in his video he claims to have a background in card games including Magic: The Gathering and Yu-Gi-Oh, but similar to the video's content on Hearthstone, he gives incorrect information and doesn't actually appear to have much knowledge of either game. Is he just lying about his experience playing these games? It gives me even less faith to have trust in anything in says in his other videos, which I don't plan on watching at this point because of that.
Wait No, nope nope, purple magic color was a joke article made by scrye magazine, I have that issue lying around my room actually
CraisPlais post a video of it.
Cody my bad it's Inquest, not scrye
mtg.gamepedia.com/Purple
Why waste my time hunting around for a magazine when I can just send you this link?
What's this?
A video from someone I've never heard of criticizing a video I watched 3 years ago from a game I quit 6 years ago?
How strange
Idk who u are but, here you can have my like
I honestly think Austin, simply, just doesn’t understand how the game works
Jesus you don't need to hate on him. He expressed his own opinion on the subject, and shudderwock was broken, so you can't fault him for that.
TechPunk that ain’t even hate man
@TechPunk Its fine to express an opinion, but its not fine to be factually wrong. Whether or not Shudderwok is broken, the way Mcconnell supports his opinion is either incompetent or dishonest.
TechPunk dude, you're overreacting a ridiculous amount right now broham.
Grappling Hook Jones the idea of the video was that shudderwock broke the meta/game and is unfun and you getting butthurt about small missinformations is just pathetic
I love Austin, and I don’t know card games all that well so I had no idea how wrong the video was. After seeing all the complaints I did the research, and am fine with admitting that he fucked up horribly on his video. Still love his content but he rightly lost some credibility.
I couldn't ask for a better response than that, thanks for hearing me out and having a level head about things.
Foyfluff
Well hey I enjoyed your response, it was well explained and definitely not hostile so you deserve respect back. If anything this whole situation has gotten me pretty interested in Hearthstone. TCGs have always confused me but I’ve always had an interest, just downloaded it.
Robyn Cleffa Well I'm glad you enjoyed it and thank you for treating me with that mutual respect. Welcome to Hearthstone! It's not for everyone but it does make for a great time killer, especially on mobile devices. The competitive scene runs deep too if that's your sort of thing. If you have any questions feel free to ask me, whether in a comment, tweet, or in the discord I'll be happy to help!
Foyfluff
Thank you! That’s very kind and I’ll be sure to take up the offer if need be.
This is the nicest comment thread on RUclips that I’ve seen in a while
I was surprised when he was complaining about a 3 card combo. Cuz that's a lot of cards for even FTK decks in Yugioh.
Traplover7 tf no it isnt
Nah a 3 card FTK isn't that hard in YGO since most cards are searchable in some way.
What annoyed me were his choice of fusions. All were low attack, he didn't deal 8K damage and even used fake cards...js
I'd also like to point out that, contrary to other card games, YuGiOh has a type of card dubbed by the community called, "Hand Traps". This is what allows certain FTK's to be less of a problem than in other card games, provided that they are fragile, and inconstant. For example, the previous YuGiOh format had an FTK called, "Pendulum FTK". It was fairly fragile compared to other FTK's, but even if you stopped the FTK, the player could set up a board that could negate 1-3 cards of your opponents hand. Because the stopped the FTK with a hand trap(or two), they only have 5 cards to start. A single well timed negate can end a turn right there. Also, keep in mind, that the Pendulum FTK player is almost always playing hand traps too. Even though there was a "degenerate" FTK running amok the YuGiOh meta, it was considered one of the healthiest formats of the decade, behind HAT Format. Though it could be taken as how YuGiOh as a game is unhealthy, I'd like to believe it shows that FTK's aren't as much of a problem in it.
Side note Pendulum FTK was not fragile. It was a 2 card combo that only used a small number of different techs to pull off. I do believe other games have hand traps. But yes I agree hand traps have helped to fix the tendency of YuGiOh to break itself
By fragile I mean easily stopped
This video strikes me more as someone that played casually, and thought they had a better idea of what they were talking about than they did. It is less less lazy research and more an inaccurate viewpoint they didn’t think to double check.
U literally have to play one game to know it's wrong, either way his lazy or lying
@@twgok3162 I play hearthstone casually on and off, and the first time I watched the video everything seemed fine. It was only on rewatch when I noticed an error or two, and didn’t see how wrong it was until watching this video. My point is, this definitely feels like someone who assumed they knew what was happening from playing the game, and didn’t think to do research outside of it. Which they should have.
Also, what motive would someone have to lie? Lazy, maybe a bit. But that’s just someone not doing enough research. We’ve all been there. I hate how people get so accusatory so quickly. 90% of what people complain about is a dumb mistake, and 90% of what people say about it is how it is ”clearly done with malicious intent.”
@@thecode327 well what about him pretending the dust system doesn't exist and that u have to keep buying packs to get a shudderwock
@@twgok3162 I've played this game on and off for several years (very casually), and never knew there was a card-crafting mechanism at all. Not everyone knows every detail about the game.
I also believe in the video he mentions something along the lines of "lifedrinker is a very good card on its own, so adding shudderwock makes it insane" which is just a sure sign that he has no clue how 'good' cards are. Lifedrinker is almost exclusively only good with shudderwock, and most half decent players know that.
To be absolutely fair, Lifedrinker and Saronite Chain Gang both see a fair bit of play outside of this deck. They're both in Healing Zoo, and Lifedrinker occasionally shows up in Tempo Mage lists when those lists are good. That said, they're only there because their abilities synergise with those decks specifically, they're decent cards, but nothing crazy.
Holy shit finally someone adressed this! Austin's video sounded so incredibly entitled. And after the HS video I also started doubting the quality of the other videos
Beary Boy You didnt start wondering when he said Last Jedi was fucking awesome?
We meet each other once again.
He has once before been rightly accused of plagiarism, on the count of the KFC video. ruclips.net/video/ZDtJ7bte_zg/видео.html This video talks about it a little bit. Truth is a lot of his content is questionable when you really start digging into his arguments.
Ruzinus _
I mean that’s an opinion
Did it hurt when your mother dropped you on your head as a child?
I love Austin McConnell's videos, but... damn. He really messed up on this one. Makes it harder to trust his fact-checking for all his other videos. Trust is hard to build, easy to break.
b Yeah theyre "just youtube videos" in the same way wikipedia is "just a website" and nonfiction books are "just books". If youre interested in learning new things, or interested in others not being misimformed, then you would hope these videos that reach potentially millions would at least be fact-checked.
I have faith and trust in the guy to learn from his mistakes, and I think it's not like he intentionally lied to his subs. But yeah, he really should've fact checked and learned more about card games before putting pen to paper.
b dude haha who cares lol. Its like, just a comment, why respond, you sound sooooo mad haha
Im just joshing ya, you are an idiot though.
BroudbrunMusicMerge Grappling Hook Jones the idea of the video was that shudderwock broke the meta/game and is unfun and you getting butthurt about small missinformations is just pathetic
Pepper Plays
That... wasn't the point of the video. And if it was, you'd hope the point of the video would be better researched.
Edit: I gotta say, I was hoping the video would actually address the question he brought up as a starting point better than just asking another related question and leaving it at that.
Again, I love his work, and I agree that Hearthstone is kind of a rip-off, but damn he screwed the pooch on this one.
as someone who had enjoyed austin mcconnell's videos previously, i was really excited to see he had posted a video about hearthstone, but i was really dissapointed with the blatant misinformation. this addressed the topic really well
Eoleopeo 64 Grappling Hook Jones the idea of the video was that shudderwock broke the meta/game and is unfun and you getting butthurt about small missinformations is just pathetic
Pepper you're one sad, sad clown.
@Pepper Plays
Idea of the video was to make $$$.
Shudderwock was very fun for me to watch, when that combo went of it was a pinnacle of combo goodness.
What you call small missinformation is actually poor research, pretend you know the topic that you talk about and actual lying when implying you actually play the game and did the combo yourself when it is painfully obvious that is very unlikely.
You do not see a problem with that?
Or you know you can just type butthurt and ignore to address it :P. It makes you look stupid in the eyes of everyone who knows how to think with their head but whatever rocks your boat.
My reaction to watching that video:
"Okay... that's a lie... that's wrong... that's wrong...
How many views does this video have? Oh no....."
Yeah it's a shame when lazy and under-researched videos do well. The only justice is that it might make people think twice before blindly trusting what he says.
Eh anything to stop hearthstone
I watched his video having never played Hearthstone, and I just believed everything he said as a result. It was only because this video happened to show up in my recommendations that I found out it wasn’t all true.
Not particularly damaging I guess, but I bet the creators of Hearthstone wouldn’t be too happy about potential players having McConnell’s video as their first experience of the game.
The Uberknife Grappling Hook Jones the idea of the video was that shudderwock broke the meta/game and is unfun and you getting butthurt about small missinformations is just pathetic
Pepper Plays the idea of my comment was that a poorly researched video being negative about a game and getting lots of views is bad for both the game and the content creator and you getting butthurt about youtube comments is just hilarious
5:48 that card back is a callback to an inquest (I think, it may be the duelist) magazine's April fools joke (purple mana), so the card is more an inside joke than an actual card back.
Yeah, as others have pointed out it's also a reference to Time Spiral which originally planned to have Purple as a sixth colour of mana. Still though, this cardback was never printed, and given that it's the first result when you search for 'mtg card back high res' I think it's more likely austinmcconnell just used the first picture he found than made a reference to a 1990s MTG magazine that I doubt he had any interest in.
With the logic he used, Saronite Chain Gang would be the
most overpowered card ever, because it would summon 7 2/3 taunts for 4 mana.
A "lie" suggests knowledge of the truth or the accurate information, which is quite apparent that he didnt have. He made several major mistakes. He didn't lie.
He said he did this in the game. You can't do this in the game.
Thank you for making this video, I personally commented on his video about the mistakes he made in it but you actually spotted a lot more than I did. The 70 dollars bit was quite tilting for me as a f2p player, because I put so many hours into this game I enjoy without paying a single penny. (Liked and Subscribed)
Thanks very much!
So I just watched a video from a channel I never heard of, criticizing a video I never saw, made by a RUclips I've never heard of, talking about a game I dont play. What's wrong with me?
The internet is a wonderful thing isn't it?
5:45 Excuse me, that's obviously a clever nod to the different colours of dragons in Warcraft. Something that only a true Hearthstone master would think to put in their video.
TMOSP Love it, it's the only explanation.
That video was a little weird to watch, especially given the nature his statements that he has played Hearthstone before. What's particularly sad is that Shudderwock does have significant problems that you could address in a video titled "When Card Games Break." It is incredibly slow and frustrating to go through the animations if you still have a chance to win, it means that an entire game mechanism must be more carefully designed because of Shudderwock, the deck is incredibly oppressive against anything that can't win fast enough, it's an OTK deck that can play like a Control deck. Basically Shudderwock is a more frustrating version of Raza Priest, a deck that was specifically nerfed because it was going to be a problem forever, at least in Wild. Shudderwock is a card that can potentially break a game, just not in the ways discussed.
I agree entirely with everything you've said. If you wanted to make a more accurate version of "When Card Games Break" with these talking points I'd certainly watch and like it. You don't need to have fancy graphics either!
It's worth noting that being a FTP player in a card game like Hearthstone requires a lot of grind/play time, which can be just as annoying as spending a lot of money. I mean if the point is it's not easy to get the card, pointing out there are FTP players doesn't really negate that point because FTP players just sacrifice time instead of money. That's not necessarily bad, it's just a feature of trading card style games, but it does mean there are greater stakes than in normal games. The more effort it takes to earn something in a game the more annoyed players will be if that thing has significant flaws or gets changed, so card games have to be particularly careful with the cards they release since they often demand more time/dedication than other games.
That's true and I agree with everything you've said, but that's not the point austinmcconnell was making. If he had included more sophisticated points of analysis like this then his video would have been not only more accurate but also more interesting.
Depends. For hearthstone there was just recently double gold from quests meaning you basically got AT LEAST a pack per quest. Before that there was the taverns of time where you got gold and dust for quests for like 3 weeks. Assuming you ONLY did the quests for those 3 weeks you got (you get on average 60 gold per quest iirc) 1260 gold and 1260 dust which is a lot for doing next to nothing. You also have gotten about 6 packs and a free legendary since KotFT as well. Throw in the free arena runs which always give you AT LEAST a pack and the game isnt the worst thing to go f2p on depending on the time of the year. Also, even if you dont go truly f2p blizzard periodically does pack sales. I think 1 recently was like $15 for 30 packs or something and then there is the new player one which gives a bunch of classic packs and a guaranteed legendary as well.
Is the game p2w? If you want to climb fast it is, but you CAN one trick a tier 1 deck to legend. You'll just have to deal with bad match ups along the way and not be able to counter queue. This is honestly one of the better metas for budget players since there are a few budget friendly decks in the meta such as Zoo which ran 1 legendary and a BUNCH of classic cards and commons before Boomsday.
Yeah, his content is usually very interesting but this video of his definitely a very weak one.
Finnally somebody saying that normally his content is good!
He’s misinformed about a lot of his videos it feels like he just really needs to get those videos out there
TsukuyomiREKT let’s all blindly white knight for a rando on the internet because we feel we have some weird connection cause we consume their content !
Da5kone001 Just saying nope was definitely a weird thing for him to comment. Can you please give examples of videos his been misinformed on? I’m genuinely interested since I watch his content and find it interesting and typically don’t fact check him.
EggsAndRice should prolly fact check everything
If shudderwock worked as he said, then a 4 mana Saronite would completely fill your board with 2/3 *taunts* , he obviously didn't think his video through.
The purple sphere in the back of the mtg card was from a gimmick planned but ultimately scrapped for Time Spiral Block. They were going to print a 6th color and act like it had always been that way, because time travel.
I don't think Austin has even watched a single Shudderwock combo.
I started playing hearthstone recently, and I remember seeing this video so I went back to search for it, and even I noticed that he'd gotten things wrong, if there was a mechanic that allowed me to activate battlecries from copies I'd be winning a lot more. One note: shaman deck using totem boosts windfury and most of my wins happen by turn 7, so shudderwock would have been no trouble to me if I'd had my current deck then. I appreciate your calm approach to this even though I was 2 years late to this scene.
I appreciate your appreciation! I'm really glad you decided to come back and give this a second look. I think it's difficult for people outside of Hearthstone to appreciate the level of mistakes in Austin's video, but perhaps I didn't communicate them well enough. Good luck in your games!
I wanna also want to point out that the Yu-gi-oh one turn kill combo he showed is very outdated, besides Magical Scientist being Forbidden for a long time, Catapult Turtle got an errata that states its effect is now once per turn, making the FTK Impossible to pull off
in the video he is simply recounting a memory from when those cards were first released, he never said it continues to be a problem
All of that is irrelevant to the point he was making, so that part was fine.
Filippo Liao the reason it couldn’t even be a turn one kill EVER is because catapult turtle is past level 4, meaning it can’t be normal summoned without a tribute. Spells like Double Summon or monsters like Knightmare Goblin can help this but his explanation doesn’t work
He explains in the video that you just need a way to summon the two monsters mentioned. The way it was done at the time generally involved cards like Monster Gate and Last Will.
Bob Jankins there were cards that let you summon catapult turtle turn one. Just because you need a tribute to NORMAL summon it doesn't mean you need 2 turns.
Building on the mtg card back nitpick, the deckmaster logo is missing the iconic small blue swoosh
Good spot!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_normalization#Loudness_normalization
Philip Dawson Thanks! A few people have brought the audio to my attention and you're the second to recommend normalisation. It's something I hope to have improved upon by the time of my next video.
I like how McConnell talked about nerfing cards while showing a MTG card. MTG is physical first, they don't nerf, they ban. like jesus, did that video get anything right?
"And in time all things are possible" - MTG now has Arena, a digital client with a digital format where cards are nerfed instead of banned.
In all honestly I still enjoy Austin's work, while his one video did mess up a lot and it really needs work I still enjoy his other content. I hope he can learn from his mistake and make more researched videos on topics he doesn't fully understand.
The purple circle card back is a fan art alter of the normal card back including the unreleased sixth color (purple) that was pulled from planar chaos.
"you're forced to watch yourself lose"
Oh my goodness he must've played this game for three minutes
Oh and fun side note the MtG card with 6 colors is a mock up done because they were thinking about having a sixth color for a while. They ended up making colorless into its own color so it kinda came true.
Also when the card is "nerfed", he makes out like you've wasted all your money that you didn't even need to spend. When in reality you can disenchant it for full dust value, sure some of the combo pieces aren't that viable in other decks and won't provide full dust value when disenchanted but at least it is some form of compensation for A card or deck archetype being weakened.
Exactly, but Shudderwock itself was never even nerfed (so the full dust refund never applied), just the animation times were sped up a bit and limited slightly. There's a good point in his video about the mutability of digital games, but sadly he chose not to explore that and instead focused on a horribly misinformed and false narrative.
Foyfluff They did nerf the number of battlecries that shudderwock can stack up though, and while it was not a complete destruction of the card as in hearthstones usual fashion (and so no full dust refund value was offered), it still did affect the deck in a minor way, and make it slightly less time consuming to sit through the animations. While you rightfully pointed out it was not a even that much of a nerf I was intending to shut down his point that you can spend a lot of money to aquire a card and deck and have that all taken away from you if blizzard decides to nerf it, which is not the case. ^^
Devilfinn Yeah very much the case. My only point was that the 'nerf' has no effect in any normal game. It's very unlikely that you'd get 20 different battlecries off.
I can explain the purple color thing. At one point several years after the game came out, the creators of Magic were testing out a potential 6th color. They ended up scrapping it but they have extensively talked about it’s testing and some people really want WOTC to actually make it. Because of that there are a lot of fake card backs and designs that involve purple.
Exactly my thoughts. I used to like his videos a lot, but now I will never be able to watch any of his videos without fact-checking. He didn't even apologised for what he did, just commented on his video in a somewhat defensive manner, and it's mostly the lack of apology for misleading that now turned me away from him.
Dirty Rat is very big.
Gordon R You need a big rat for big problems
Thanks for uploading this, I had heard about the original video and was curious but I didn't want to watch to give unearned views
Teddy P Thank you for watching!
As long as it has nice animations and editing, people don't care about the fact that it is a complete lie
Well, you can thank youtube's recommendation algorithms today for a new sub. Very well done video!
TranZienT Thanks very much! I know people complain about them a lot but right now I guess I have no complaints!
Wait wait wait...sorry, think I'm a little confused. So a new duplicated Shudderwock doesn't trigger its Battlecry after being duplicated? Well that's fantastic! Makes the card powerful and effective instead of totally game breaking. But if that's the case why does the footage shown seem to include both the placement of more Shudderwocks as well as the duplication of multiple SW's from a single SW. I mean I could be mistaken (the footage is rather zoomed in and I'm not super familiar with the game) but at 4:42 it seems like a bunch of SW's are duplicated one after the other without new cards being put down. There also seems to be some more multi-duplication at 4:22 where 2 cards appear seemingly without the placement of new cards. Does a duplicated SW somehow use the Saronite Chain Gangs Battlecry even though its own Battlecry wasn't activated?
I'm afraid I'm not very familiar with the game so I could be totally wrong but we see new Shudderwocks being placed down at 4:33 and it looks very different from the duplication that seems to be occurring at other points in the video. It seems like Austin really doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to card games but I doubt he'd somehow fake footage just to make a faulty argument.
No worries, I'm happy to explain.
The zoom on the footage obscures (and you could argue this is why Austin chose to use the zoom) obscures the player's hand, which is where the extra Shudderwocks come from. The Battlecry of Grumble returns the clones of Shudderwock to your hand and makes them cost 1, allowing you to play multiple 'wocks in one turn.
It's strange that Austin chose to mention Grumble as being important to the combo, but then completely neglected to include it or explain what it does.
Well I found this video a year too late, glad someone addresses it. I know to call someone a liar is a pretty big claim but his response in the comments shows that maybe it was the intent.
Ignoring the main issue of the video.
Honesty I'm in the same boat. Liked a lot of his stuff but it makes me wonder how researched his other stuff is. But Goddamn the dislikes on this.
As far as the dislikes are concerned, that's always going to be the case when criticising someone with a large following. I understand it and empathise, you don't want people you look up to turning out to be fallible. But that's just the way things go. I've had people say that all of these criticisms are nitpicks, but they're really not, it's just that they probably don't know enough about the game to see why these mistakes invalidate Austin's argument, and I suppose it's a failing on my end that I didn't explain that process well enough. Ah well, we live and learn.
Thanks for your comment man, glad the video struck a chord with you :)
Great video. As a hearthstone player his mistakes was kind of obvious. Additionally, in his video clip, he plays two extra cards to pull of the combo, murmuring elemental, and fire plume harbinger. If he really played the game recently, then I kind of doubt he would be facing shudderwock at rank 25.
7:55 You actually can never OTK turn 9, you can only do 6 damage at that point and set up the OTK for turn 10
GelberStuhl Suppose it depends how low their hp is haha, you can also get Far Sight discounts on the Shudderwock, but for the most part you're absolutely right
Wizards actually planned and playtested a 6th color (purple) but ended up never implementing it into mtg. Basic land type was supposed to be city or cave
Cant believe this only has 600 views. I'll stick around and see what you make next. Cheers!
The number keeps going up! Thanks for supporting me
You can't click through animations to speed them up. You can click enemy cards played to make them disappear, but the animations don't speed up at all.
Also everyone stopped playing shudderwok shaman like 3 months in because it was destroyed by cubelock and aggro
It is very back
That's true, Shudderwock was much weaker than the other decks at the time (mostly Cubelock and Even Paladin) but since their nerfs Shudderwock has returned and it's actually a potent but pretty balanced meta deck right now.
Shudderwock was at the time of your comment tier 1...
"I can't for the life of me even figure out a search term in Google images that would allow me to find a picture like this"
-
It's literally just the fourth result when you search "magic the gathering back of card"
It's actually incredibly easy to find with Google, I'm not sure how you could have possibly had trouble finding it.
As someone who works in a shop that sells Magic cards, I - like you - noticed immediately that that was not a real Magic card, but I assumed it was for copyright reasons. The reason it's illegal to sell fake Magic cards is not because it's a sneaky thing to do, it's because Wizards of the Coast owns the copyright to every single card they've printed and by trying to sell a fake card you are stealing the copyright owned by Wizards.
The same applies to the back of the cards, the backs are also copyrighted.
Now, Austin would not have gotten in trouble for simply showing the back of the card, but in all cases with copyright, it's wise to err on the side of cation, and I assumed that's what he was doing.
-
My general complaint with Austin's video has nothing to do with lying. I think that's unnecessarily overblown and exaggerated. He just didn't fully grasp the topic he was discussing. He wasn't trying to mislead anyone. He was just trying to share something he - a casual player of card games - has experienced with people who don't know anything about card games. That came at the cost of the more serious and competitive crowd who realized the mistakes he made in the video. But that said, *THIS* video just seems pedantic, unnecessary, and drastically overblown for something which was likely just and honest mistake.
-
EDIT: Also, you *DRASTICALLY* overestimate the amount of knowledge you need to have about a game to play the game.
Casual players exist. They don't care enough to intimately learn mechanics. They just play the game. You don't seem to understand that's it's possible to play Hearthstone without having a deep knowledge pool of how a specific card activates, which plays into your belief that there is no way Austin could actually have played the game.
You say he doesn't need to have a deep understanding of the game to make a video on it, yet you don't entertain the possibility that maybe that's *actually what happened*.
Hey, firstly I just want to thank you for taking the time to write out such a long comment. It's a bit of a lost art these days so even though you're being critical of me I still appreciate that you've taken the time to express your thoughts very clearly.
Firstly, yes it does seem that when you search that it is around the 4th or 5th result. I tried searching a litany of terms before I made that video and really couldn't see it. It's possible that the rankings for it have changed I suppose, but it's more likely that I just didn't see it - genuinely my bad. However, that doesn't exactly let austinmcconnell off the hook for the mistake, which was almost definitely a mistake and not a copyright evasion method.
If it was a way for austinmcconnell to evade copyright then why would he still use footage of games, the images of all the Hearthstone and Yugioh cards, Blizzard's official trailer, and the litany of other copyrighted materials he and every other RUclipsr used and uses on a daily basis? It doesn't make any sense that he would go out of his way to include a fake MTG card back (which still has the official 'Magic: the Gathering' and 'Deckmaster' trademarks, which have just as much copyright protection as the colour wheel) to protect himself from copyright issues but would use a myriad of other copyrighted sources. The entire defence is moot anyway because austinmcconnell has been making videos for long enough to know about Fair Use. Every image austinmcconnell used in this video was used for educational purposes, so none of it could be considered a breach of copyright anyway. I know you say he wouldn't have gotten in trouble for it and that he was just "erring on the side of caution" but that's an absolutely ridiculous claim considering the other materials he has used.
Instead, what happened is that austinmcconnell chose that image for whatever reason, likely because it's the very first image result for 'mtg card back high res' (this was pointed out to me by another commenter) without checking the source of it (Deviant Art) nor the description of it on the site which explains that it is a mocked up card back that the user made to see what it would look like if Purple had been printed in Future Sight. This was a mistake on austinmcconnell's part resulting from a lack of research, much like the other points in his video.
With regards to lying, I know it seems like a serious allegation, but it really must be the case. Austin states both that the only way to get Shudderwock is to pump $70 into the slot machine of packs to have a chance of opening him, and also states that he has played Hearthstone for a short while. He claims that Shudderwock's clones have their battlecries go off too, while footage in the background shows that not happening. He claims that you can't play any cards while your Shudderwock's battlecries are playing, then shows footage of him playing more Shudderwocks while Shudderwock's battlecries are playing. Between the statements he makes about the game and his claim that he has played the game and that he footage is his, one of those two sides must be a lie. Looking at his track record of plagiarism and wilful misinformation so far leads me to believe it's not that far-fetched that he was not being 100% truthful here either.
And finally your edit. Casual players do exist, but I think an understanding of Battlecries only trigger when you play them from your hand isn't an 'intimate' knowledge of the game, it's quite basic. Especially for someone claiming 'this is me playing the Shudderwock deck' to think that the Shudderwocks just infinitely activate by themselves while showing footage of more being played. Here's how it would go if you were Austin playing the deck believing that what he said is the truth:
"So now I'll play Shudderwock and it will go infinite and win the game..."
30 seconds later
"Oh, I haven't won and I only have two Shudderwocks on the field. I guess I was wrong."
It seems that the only way you could be so wrong about how this works is if you're just really stupid or unaware. I don't think austinmcconnell is either of those things. It's definitely a possibility that I have entertained, but it's such a stretch to think that he just accidentally got everything wrong in such a way that it conforms to his narrative that it seems far more likely that he just bent the truth where it was most convenient.
I don't really have a strong opinion about what actually happened with the back of the Magic card. I was just explaining what my first thought was when I noticed it while watching the video. Ultimately, I don't think that it matters very much and wouldn't provide much support to *either* of our arguments regardless of which one of us is right. I was just trying to give an alternate perspective on the matter.
With that said, I'm going to skip down to your fifth paragraph:
I seriously cannot express enough how much I think that calling what Austin did lying is overreacting. I'm not trying to defend the video or its content with this - he clearly made several prominent errors that drastically effect the credibility of the video - but I do not think there is any reason to suspect those errors were made intentionally.
If he *WERE* to make such errors intentionally, I don't even understand what benefit he would hope to draw from intentionally misleading his audience.
Hanlon's Razor come's to mind right now: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
"Looking at his track record of plagiarism and wilful misinformation"
-
Okay, back up, what? You didn't mention this at all in your video? What are you talking about here?
"but I think an understanding of Battlecries only trigger when you play them from your hand isn't an 'intimate' knowledge of the game, it's quite basic."
-
I will agree with you that that *IS* basic knowledge, but as a super casual player of Hearthstone myself - I only play once every few months when the mood suddenly hits me - I didn't actually have a full understanding of how Battlecries activated until you explained it in this video. I stand as first hand proof that lack of basic understanding of game mechanics is very possible among casuals.
"I will agree with you that that IS basic knowledge, but as a super casual player of Hearthstone myself - I only play once every few months when the mood suddenly hits me - I didn't actually have a full understanding of how Battlecries activated until you explained it in this video. I stand as first hand proof that lack of basic understanding of game mechanics is very possible among casuals."
As he said, if you played the deck even once, you would know that from experience. Sure, you can ignore a mechanic if you don't use it or encounter it often, and sure, the Shudderwock combo is mechanically quite complex, but t doesn't change the fact that if he had indeed played that deck, he couldn't have not seen these mechanics at work.
Now, you seem to assume that Foyfluff is accusing Austin of lying about the mechanics of Hearthstone. I don't think that's the case, but that doesn't mean he didn't lie. The most likely thing here is that, unlike what he pretends, he never played the game and had no first-hand experience with the deck. He just heard about Shudderwock from a disgruntled player and thought that it could make a neat video. That doesn't seem too unbelievable and is actually more likely than him not understanding the core mechanic of a deck he played.
Hey, firstly I want to apologise for a delay in replying. Nested comments like this are difficult to find when I scroll through looking for new comments and with the number of notifications I'm getting right now a lot of them get buried, if I ever received one in the first place. In the meantime L'Humanoide Errant des Internets is doing a fantastic job of explaining things in a civil manner exactly as I like it, so top marks to that guy.
The only thing I want to add is about your mentioning of Hanlon's Razor. Firstly, thanks for bringing that up because I've always known the adage but had never heard the name for it, are there any more Razors besides this and Occam's I wonder? Anyway, a few commenters have brought up this thing about malice, and that's interesting to me because I've never once said that austinmcconnell is being malicious and I very much do not believe that he is. Lying does not require malice, and I think the reason he has lied is not out of malice but instead to maintain his authority inside of the video and to make the story sound a bit more interesting.
As I said in my video, had austinmcconnell made a factually accurate video about Shudderwock it probably wouldn't be all that interesting because it would consist of: "There's this card called Shudderwock and it's pretty good and can win some games, the animations are a bit long which is a little annoying. End."
Also regarding plagiarism. It's not something I brought up in the video because I wasn't aware of it before a lot of commenters pointed it out. If you're interested to learn more, here's some links to some videos explaining these allegations.
ruclips.net/video/__tQdF3ZnQ4/видео.html (Austin made numerous mistakes in his linguistics video, which he re-purposed almost word for word from a Mental Floss article)
ruclips.net/video/ZDtJ7bte_zg/видео.html (Austin re-purposed a smaller channel's video about KFC. Hbomberguy talks a lot about copying someone's style, but from the clips here it's clearly more than just a presentation style that Austin has used. The piece about Austin starts at about 4 minutes in, but the entire video is pretty good.)
ruclips.net/video/dFyRQeH9-z8/видео.html (Austin makes a point about being able to 'reset the chip' on an ink cartridge, which is impossible. This guy shows the exact cartridge Austin uses in his video and demonstrates how there is no 'reset button' where Austin claims there is one, which is something Austin must have realised when making the video unless he thinks rattling a paperclip inside of a little slot is what 'resets' a cartridge. This guy gets a bit too angry over the issue, but his point still stands.)
The delay in response is not a problem at all, don't worry about it.
Honestly, I find this history of plagiarism you've just presented to be a much more compelling argument then your main argument itself, and I think if you were to attach those videos to this argument it would dramatically increase its effectiveness. It would help drive home the point that this isn't a single instance error but a pattern of his channel.
-
Anyway, that aside, thank you for taking the time to have a productive discussion with me. You've managed to change my mind on this issue and it seems like these days most people would have just told me to fuck off for having a different thought on the matter.
I don’t even play Hearthstone, I play Mtg, but when I watched he video I felt that something about it was wrong.
I'd also like to point out that, contrary to other card games, YuGiOh has a type of card dubbed by the community called, "Hand Traps". This is what allows certain FTK's to be less of a problem than in other card games, provided that they are fragile, and inconstant. For example, the previous YuGiOh format had an FTK called, "Pendulum FTK". It was fairly fragile compared to other FTK's, but even if you stopped the FTK, the player could set up a board that could negate 1-3 cards of your opponents hand. Because the stopped the FTK with a hand trap(or two), they only have 5 cards to start. A single well timed negate can end a turn right there. Also, keep in mind, that the Pendulum FTK player is almost always playing hand traps too. Even though there was a "degenerate" FTK running amok the YuGiOh meta, it was considered one of the healthiest formats of the decade, behind HAT Format. Though it could be taken as how YuGiOh as a game is unhealthy, I'd like to believe it shows that FTK's aren't as much of a problem in it.
Nice fucking audio mixing friend. I love the subtle nuance of having to raise the volume for your gentle whisper voice from across the room, and how it contrasts with the booming volume of mcconnell with the mic down his throat. Really adds to the viewing experience.
Andrew Scarpati Haha, sorry about that. I never noticed that much of a problem when I was editing but you're not the only person to have commented on it. I'll try and make sure it's better for next time.
Oof the snark
I will (again) paste my comment form his video here.
I will just copy-paste my previous comment here:
1. 1:46 Sometimes those combos are just hard to spot. Imaging creating a 100 card expansion. It adds 100 new cards to a game (or game format) where already at least hundreds of cards exist. Sometimes it just slips through, you can't test every single card interaction in the game (for example in Magic "copy cat combo"). Hearthstone devs generally do a good job of it.
2. 2:46 You have to choose a target for the "restore 3 health", it doesn't simply heal you.
3. 3:20 If you are playing Shudderwock on turn 9 you are: a) very lucky b)doing something horribly wrong.
4. 4:11 THIS ISN'T EVEN EVEN A CORRECT FREAKING CARD BACK FOR MAGIC! Just look at the 6 dots in the middle of it representing the 6 colors of mana in Magic. Oh wait, Magic has only 5 colors...
5. 5:04 As a player who never spent any money on Hearthstone and plays basically and deck he wants I disagree. Just by doing your daily quests you can buy over 70 card packs when a new expansion launches. Oh, and Hearthstone has a crafting system which let's you exchange cards you don't want for those you want.
6. 5:28 You aren't on turn 10. You have 10 mana crystals and you had just shown that a turn before you also had 10 mana crystals.
7. 5:38 Shudderwock isn't a "one turn kill" deck. It generally requires at least 2 turns and a ton of preperations. Also those three cards don't guarantee you the kill. The battlecries are activated in a random order If Grumble's battlecry activates before Saronite's (50% of that happening) you won't get a copy of Shudderwock back to your hand and the "combo" ends.
8. 6:56 Thats not how any of this works. "Battlecry is an ability where a particular effect activates when the card with the Battlecry is played directly from the hand. " A copy of a card isn't directly played from your hand. A huge misunderstanding of the game rules.
9. 7:53 Murmuring Elemental is a 2 mana card, Shudderwock is a 9 mana card. Maximum number of mana crystals in hearthstone is 10. 9+2>10. You have to go through some hoops to achieve that.
10. 8:12 battlecry animations are generally shorter than 3 seconds. You had to really try hard (before the patch) to have a 3 or 4 minute Shudderwock.
11. 9:32 You don't have to wait. If somebody played that many battlecries you don't have to wait, you will die anyway and you can skip the wait by just pressing the "concede" button. Also back in the day, few years ago you couldn't press the concede button in such situation, the Grim Patron deck, a combo deck in my opinion more frustrating than Shudderwock brought the change with it.
12. 9:49 After the release of the Witchwood the Shudderwock deck was just... weak. I din't see any players conceding just because somebody played a Shudderwock deck.
13. 10:04 basically any control deck drags the game out...
14. 10:25 That's a huge overstatement.
15. 10:35 So you are a player who played Hearthstone sometimes and haven't played in over 3 months that decided to do an in depth critique of one of the game's cards?
16. 10:45 Unfortunately the technology doesn't allow Blizzard to make changes to Hearthstone instantly like they do in WoW or Overwatch.
17. 11:14 look point 5 on the list.
18. 11:42 look point 4 on the list.
19. 11:38 I don't know any example of a card being nerfed in a paper card game.
I like Austin a lot but this isnt the first time I’ve seen his videos knocked and his work is clearly a lot better produced than conceived
I looked it up and it took me all of two seconds to find the fake magic card back
I watched Austin's video and I didn't realise he made so many mistakes! Thank you for informing me.
I used to respect austin quite a bit, partially because his videos seemed to radiate confidence and expertise and it felt like we could trust him. That trust is lost, and really, was it ever earned?
Nope. like you said he “radiated” expertise. That’s why you should always fact check and check sources.
I actually enjoy his videos as they are well made but everyone can be criticised in someway
As a long-term player of Yugioh myself, I found it somewhat baffling when he decided to pick that particular Yugioh combo. Mass Driver Frogs was about 100x more consistent, and if I wanted to spin it a certain way, I could probably convince him that Exodia is worth playing.
I'd say, "Exodia was a broken deck before cards like Ash Blossom and Joyus Spring came out because it used to be possible for you to just lose turn one because your opponent plays royal magical library, and a deck full of spells. Because for every 3 spell cards that you play, it lets you draw 1 card, and there are even some cards that allow you to get this effect in even fewer spells than 3. So your opponent just draws until they have all 5 pieces of Exodia, and they win the game and you can't do anything about it." When in reality, Exodia is probably one of the worst decks to play, even with super rejuvenation being un-banned (yeah, hello from October 2019). It's because to get that absurdly lucky to not only draw Royal Magical Library on the first turn, but also subsequently draw the exact spells that you need to keep your combo going, you would probably want to use it as the barometer for if you should buy a lottery ticket that day. Because you're batting like... 1 in ever 12000 games, you win on the first turn where your opponent just had to sit there and watch you win.
He even says earlier in the video battlecries only trigger when played from hand, yet still says the copy generated on the board activates its battlecries. What a mess if you can't even stay consistent in your ignorance
the_ Bootitan if battlecries worked the way he thinks the game would actually be broken. Chain gang itself would break the game since it would effectively be a 4 mana 14/21 since it would just play 7 copies of itself. Oh wait....that's not what happens....and you have to play chain gang before shudderwock.....and he claimed to play the deck.
From what I understand in duel links you can't craft cards from the main booster expansions. Although in that game in general card acquisition is pretty weird. Booster sets are set up in finite chunks divided into packs that in total contain at least one of each card in the set, and these chunks can be reset at any time. IE I want a 'prevent rat', I pull one and know there's only one in the chunk, I can now reset the chunk to try and get another or keep going to get the rest of the cards. Disclaimer I haven't played much duel links, but I've talked to my friends who do about it many times.
What a bizarre system! I've never played Duel Links but I might have to give it a look for that alone.
I heard there is a free online Yu-Gi-Oh system, haven't tried it but probably worth looking into first
i already felt like something was off about that video
Austin's next vid: I was bullied by a youtuber
Nah, his next vid would be a correction video where he rips this one off
Thank you for addressing this. As a veteran Hearthstone player, all of the incorrect statements were infuriating. It seemed like he just wanted to whine about the game instead of actually explore the topic and educate people.
Thank you for watching! I think this could have been a really interesting topic too, but sadly the actual exploration is not only massively incorrect but also incredibly shallow.
Yuri, PLZ stop stealing my team's heals.
Holy fucking shit, how stupid can people get? It’s about what happens when you break a card game with some stupid overused combo, not how to become a pro at the game and learn literally everything. By the way, there’s no such thing as a veteran card game player. The only people who deserve that title are military units.
Raycevick is pretty much the standard I hold all video essayists to. Well researched, well edited, he makes it very clear when he is giving his opinion seperate from facts, and his voice enchanting
when a youtuber breaks
Seems more like he was just wrong about a mechanic, not lying. And considering Blizzard nerfed the card to pretty much address the gist of the concerns brought up in his video I honestly don't see an issue? Oh and googling "mtg card back"? The one from his video is literally the third result.
YOU CAN CRAFT CARDS YOU DONT HAVE? How have I missed/forgot this!?
I believe in the tutorial, when you play the game for the first time, the game explains you how the collection works. So probably you just went through that part really fast. Like many people do with tutorials.
In regards to the Magic card back, Wizards of the Coast (Magics producers) actually toyed with idea of introducing the sixth purple color. Ultimately, they decided against it. I presume he used the one he did to avoid a copy right strike since the six color back is unofficial
It's a nice idea but I think that's quite unlikely. You think he'd get a copyright strike for an image of a cardback but not for footage of games, the images of all the Hearthstone and Yugioh cards, Blizzard's official trailer, and the litany of other copyrighted materials he and every other RUclipsr used and uses on a daily basis? It's almost definitely just the result of incredibly poor research on austinmcconnell's part, completely in line with the res of the video.
Foyfluff I'm honestly not quite sure about that, I'm a viewer and not content creator so I'm not as in the loop about that stuff as I'm sure you guys are. I'm a regular viewer of his and in almost every other video of his, he seems to be quite genuine in his content. But, like everything else on the internet I suppose it should be taken with a grain of salt. Anyway, I appreciate your video bringing light to something that otherwise would have gone unnoticed by most
Fair enough, I've had a massive interest in the behind the scenes stuff of content creators and copyright law for a good while now, so it just helps out a lot in my own content creation now.
Thanks for the appreciation, I appreciate it! Not to try and tarnish your idea of austinmcconnell, but this is not the first time he's done some dodgy stuff on RUclips. I haven't dug very deep or anything, but from videos I've watched that have been recommended to me by commenters on this video there's at least two counts of plagiarised videos and one other wilfully misinformed video. I'd really recommend watching this by hbomberguy about plagiarism on RUclips, the segment on austinmcconnell starts at about 4 minutes in, but the rest of the video is great too: ruclips.net/video/ZDtJ7bte_zg/видео.html
Foyfluff funnily enough, I've actually already seen that hbomberguy video, I love his stuff. I didn't realise he'd said anything about Austin though, I'll give it another view. Thank you for the correspondence, you've surely earned my subscription!
I had exactly the same reaction when another commenter told me about it haha, I remembered the SoulBrother and Weegie story but not austinmcconnell's for some reason. Thanks very much though, I appreciate it!
He explicitly defines Battlecry as "when you play it from your hand"
If they worked how he says, then Saronite would fill the board
wait a second he said that a battle cry only works when you play the card not when it gets copied but then in Austins video when the shudderwock death trap thing is happening he doesn't mention it which confuses me .-.
Austin lied, misinformed, whatever you wanna call it. He hasn't played the game.
I had an identical experience, except with Austin's video on dead letters. Just with my background knowledge of linguistics, i noticed so many inaccuracies. As one example, he strongly implied that W was a letter in the latin alphabet. This is not true.
Quaestor's video 'Austin McConnell, Plagiarism, and Linguistics' tackles this exact issue and might give you that feeling of vindication some of the Hearthstone players here have experienced: ruclips.net/video/__tQdF3ZnQ4/видео.html
I actually study Linguistics (although I've purposefully chosen not to study much Old English) so it's interesting that Austin's choices of errors overlap into two of my areas of knowledge.
If you search "magic the gathering card back" the fourth result on google images is the one Austin shows and it's from DeviantArt
Yeah I've been told this since making the video. There, the creator explains it's a mocked up card back to see what the MTG back would look like had they went ahead with putting Purple in the Time Spiral block.
In his defense, I really think that the video isn't really for people that play the game a lot.
When I was first learning Magic: the gathering a lot of information I was being taught about how to play in the beginning was contradicted with information I learned later on.
When I asked about why I was being lied to about the game I was told that it made the game easier to explain at the start so I could get my bearings faster when I learned new rules.
I don't think that he was wrong on purpose, just that he had to dumb down a lot of mechanics to explain the problem to people that have never played a card game.
Cat While I think this is a nice idea, I really wouldn't have minded if austinmcconnell had just simplified some details for his audience, but that's not the case: he goes into quite some depth about both the Yugioh FTK and the Shudderwock combo, but in the latter case gets a lot of the combo completely wrong, and in the former makes an absolutely bizarre connection between a combo that kills your opponent potentially before they can play a single card and a combo that requires at the very least 9 turns of setup.
The problem isn't just that he's inaccurate, but also that the conclusions he comes to and the narrative he forms from those inaccuracies are not at all reflective of reality. Shudderwock isn't breaking the game, so the central thesis of the video is already not looking so great. It's also nothing like an FTK, so his hook doesn't really hold up, finally, while the mutability of digital games is a really interesting topic, and card games could be a great window into that topic, Shudderwock hasn't actually changed as a card, so it's a terrible representation of the topic which Austin only very briefly touches on.
You say you play MTG so I'll demonstrate my point about simplicity with an example from Modern. To say "Goryo's Vengeance / Grishoalbrand decks break the game because they win on Turn 1" is a fine simplification to make, it skips out some of the details that they don't always go Turn 1 and that even when they do it can still occasionally be interacted with. Now to say something like "Krark Clan Ironworks Combo decks are breaking the game because they're combos just like Goryo's Vengeance is" isn't an oversimplification because it's just not true, but it is a good parallel to what austinmcconnell is saying in his video.
As foy said he already went over enough of the combo and mechanics that if he was accurate in his information he could've explained it. The biggest problem with his explanation is how battlecries work. It doesnt take someone much to think "well if copying a card plays its battlecry that means chain gang infinitely copies itself on it's own on turn 4 right?"
Another thing is Shudderwock takes multiple turns. Yes you WILL die the turn after they play shudderwock, but the turn Shudderwock itself is played it doesnt do anything besides potentially heal for 6 (sometimes only 3) and summon some 6/6s. If you have lethal on board he cant play the card which is why it's a problem in the meta. It's a problem that it hard counters control (before the recent changes), but it has a bad performance against aggro decks and is not a guaranteed combo at all which I dont think he addressed. You CAN make it 100%, but that requires now running a 6+ card combo and playing "bad" cards so no one runs that variant anymore so usually it's still its 87.5% or whatever success rate.
@@amethonys2798 87.5% Success rate when played*
Well way back when Wizards of the coast bought out D&D there was speculation that they would add a 6th color and print D&D style card and the mana was purple, I think it was void mana or something
Purple was a theorised colour early on in Time Spiral's development, but it never actually saw the light of day and it was never printed on a card back. This card back was a mocked up one by a Deviant Art user who wondered what it would have looked like if they'd went ahead with the Purple idea. www.deviantart.com/lordnyriox/art/Magic-the-Gathering-Six-Color-Card-Back-640666595
I used google since i assumed he used it and search "Magic the Gathering Card Backs" and the 6 color CB was the fourth image of the results. Now most of the rest where the real card back but the 6 color one was the best image quality. He literally choose graphics over truth.
Oso *chose
he mostly likely just didn’t know
They had a special edition with 6 colors, dumbass
it was a fan made card that he shown www.deviantart.com/lordnyriox/art/Magic-the-Gathering-Six-Color-Card-Back-640666595
I wish you explained more why his real-time opponent lost. To the novice, his "endless-cycle" looked impressive
The reason why his opponent lost was that the deck the opponent was using was a slow paced deck that would swarm the field and shudderwock has an easy advantage on slow paced decks also Austin is around rank 20 at that rank people are not using competitive cards or there trying to experiment with cards or if they are using competitive decks there trying-to rank up fast to get to rank legend also of i remember correctly there are 25 ranks at the time of his video
Yo I really enjoyed this video, I've been ignoring his vid in my recommendations simply cause of my gut and because of this I'm glad I did
King Of Pestilence NotAPenis Thanks for watching!
regarding the purple mana symbol on the back of the MTG card, I remember a few years back around the speculation of a new mana type (just turned out to be colourless symbols) people were wondering if they'd add a purple mana to the game. So maybe it's from then?
Harry A bit of sleuthing and some other people's comments have pointed me towards the source for the image, which is Deviant Art, where the creator explains that it's a mocked-up card back to see what it would have looked like if WOTC had gone through with an early plan to print Purple cards in the Time Spiral block. If austinmcconnell had checked where the image had come from, or clicked through to that link, he would have known this, but instead he just copy and pasted an image from Google image search without doing the bare minimum.
Ah fair enough, thanks for the reply. Also thanks for clearing this up. I saw the original video and not playing Hearthstone but do play MtG myself I was like some of this stuff seems a bit dumb, like a 9 drop being overpowered when my understanding was that you could get it out turn 8 at the earliest. Whereas in MTG I can get a 10 drop out turn 4 :D and not being able to concede when you know you've lost
These kinds of videos are always made by people who have literally no knowledge of the subject, they're just looking for quick ad revenue from other people who have no idea.
Purple was a theory color that was considered before doing colorless in battle for zendikar block
Charles Nault Purple was an early idea for the Time Spiral block and an April Fool's joke in an old MTG magazine. It has certainly never been printed on the back of a real card.
After going through most of his catalog, I realized Austin is just looking for interesting or trending topics to make low effort, high return essays about. He's passable as an editor, and the claims that he's ripped off the style of others don't really hold up IMO, but he doesn't have anything to add to most of the subjects he brings up. Doing the research necessary to speak definitively about them is significantly more time intensive than simply speaking in an authoritative tone and sinking what little energy he can muster into competent but sterile graphics.
As a fellow lazy person, I commend him on the success this has garnered.
Considering that his channel covers a wide range of topics I didn't take the inaccuracies to heart, but I think you're right. If I'd never played Hearthstone and other CCGs I might have been misled.
Thank you for making this video. The guy you're responding to really annoyed me with getting the Battlecry detail of a copied Shudderwock wrong.
EDIT: Also, thanks for pointing out the MTG card back error. Jesus, what an error.
No problem, thanks for watching and commenting!
He could've used better examples, such as Splinter Twin/ Felidar+Saheeli from MTG as "breaking" a card game, those are 2-card combos that could be and were pulled early in the game. I guess he couldn't bother to do so?
I stopped watching his video 1/2 way through. I found it boring (austinmcconnell's video) and a lot of inconsistencies you pointed out. Great video
I'm glad to hear it's not just me who thought the video was ruined by these mistakes :)
I know I'm way too late to the party and no one will ever read this probably. But I just want to add my thoughts about the video from that Austin guy.
He got the battlecry mechanic wrong. Ok. That probably means he lied about the footage being his own. That's awful, but I wouldn't have cared too much. But two things really infuriated me:
1. He heavily implied that there is no other way than spending more than 70 dollars to get that single card, while in reality you have more than one way to get the cards you want for free. I'm playing Hearthstone f2p myself, so that really got on my nerves.
2. The point that nerfing a card means the consumer loses the value of said card, seemingly wasting those 70+ dollars, was a rather big topic in his video, while conveniently leaving out the refunding mechanic.
I mean... at this point it's just slander. I just watched that video, had this video here in my recommendations and came to watch that. And I'm just really mad how his video has a few million views by now and yours not even 100k.
Hey, thanks for the support man, I'm glad my video resonated with you. It is a shame that Austin's video still stands with millions of views while mine is hovering around 100k, but on the flipside, this is my most popular video I've ever made, so it's got something going for it.
Somewhat annoying though, is the fact that Austin profited heavily from his incorrect and as you say "slanderous" video, while I haven't gotten a penny from mine as I haven't hit the 1,000 subscriber milestone necessary to enter the Partner program. Damn.
@@Foyfluff That sucks. I'm subscribing now just for that! Also, you make Hearthstone content and you played Slay the Spire, so I'm actually interested in your content anyway. Good luck on getting those 1000 subscribers, you definitely deserve it more than the other guy!
@@Lindbluete Thanks man, I really appreciate it!
Thank you for the explanations. I watched his video and was confused since it went against what I knew about the game.
the shudderwock combo couldn't be played until turn 10.
Thank you for vindiciating how irritated I was after randomly coming across that video. I haven't even gone through your channel, but I'm subscribing anyways because you seem like a content creator who actually does research!
Hey man, thanks I really appreciate it! Hopefully you'll find my other and future videos just as well thought through :)
PineappleDude
Aww but you should check out the rest if austinmccknel's vids they're preery great. Don't let one unresearched video spoil an impreesion you have
Shadowmonger I think Austin has some pretty quality content, but this isn't the only video of his that's problematic. Between plagiarism and other instances of wilful misinformation, I'd really rather support creators that still have my trust.
You said the battlecry’s wouldn’t trigger off the copies, but didn’t I just watch the footage of that exact thing happening not a minute later?
Battlecries won't trigger off of the copies unless those copies are returned to the hand and then played from the hand. That's why Grumble is an important piece of the combo because it's his ability that bounces your other creatures back to your hand. The way austinmcconnell describes it, Grumble wouldn't even need to be played. Also, the footage of multiple Shudderwocks being played contradicts Austin's argument that "you can't perform any other actions until Shudderwock has finished) as he shows footage of multiple Shudderwocks being played while another one is still resolving.
I hate the deck but this kind of decks has existed before. Anyfin Paladin is the exact same thing. You probably can't disrupt it unless you also play murlocs. Which is unlikely.
Dương Thành Vương I think combo decks are just an essential part of a card game's meta. People love to hate them, but they keep control in check and they're in pretty much every card game that exists.
Shudderwock decks are very vulnerable to aggro decks (which are the most popular decks in the game) so you definitely can disrupt it. Anyfin Paladin was more of a midrange deck so it was capable of beating aggro, and it just used Anyfin is Possible as a finisher.
Anyfin had a cap on damage (albeit high BUT control warrior with justicar COULD get there) and couldn't break through taunt. These problems were less so with Ivory Knight being added at the tail end of the rotation making it so you could have upwards of 4 copies. Also, much like Shudderwock Anyfin CAN whiff. The second Anyfin CAN be 6 warleaders and 1 bluegill. It's not likely at all, but it IS a possibility and you needed at least 3 bluegills to guarantee lethal on no armor OR taunt.
Imagine if Battlecries were activated if a minion was summoned... Alarm-o-Bot could maybe have even been decent, not to forget it defeats the entire purpose of tech cards like Dirty Rat
This was incredibly nitpicky, literally the only thing he said that was actually wrong was claiming saronite chain gang caused shudderwock to be recursive, and that's hardly that terrible a mistake since shudderwock is recursive, it just requires grumble or Zola to achieve, everything else just comes down to semantics or pedantry. For example, when you consider the fact that you have to dust 160 commons and 40 rares to craft a legendary, it's still quite the money sink. That distribute of rarities reflects the minimum value of a pack, 1 rare and 4 commons, so to craft any legendary you must entirely dust at most 40 hearthstone packs. So the fact that you can craft a legendary doesn't change the fact that to craft you still have to either purchase dozens of Hearthstone packs converting every card in them into a single legendary card or slowly grind for gold every day, and good luck doing that without a single good legendary to your name. Acquiring a single legendary through crafting either costs the price of some whole games or requires a full-time job level of dedication to hearthstone. Most hardcore players just don't realize this because they have already dropped several hundred dollars on Hearthstone over the years or just play it like it is a full-time job and don't think twice about it, but this is very alienating to people who are interested in Hearthstone but don't want to dedicate this much of their resources and time to it. Also, after play shudderwock and exhausting any options you have left you then have to wait for all the shudderwocks to playout before anything can happen just like he said, a bit of pedantry doesn't change this fact, what he said wasn't wrong and what you said doesn't contradict what he said, this desperation for gotchas doesn't make you look good.
It's a shame this is how this discussion is taking place be cause there is a real problem with the balance between aggro/combo/control in hearthstone is fucked up and has always been fucked up, because aggro counters combo, combo counters control, and control is shit and has always been shit compared the the degeneracy of aggro and combo so aggro runs wild and combo just exists to fuck over any meager pathetic attempt at control. Hearthstone needs to rein back the power of aggro decks, give control some actual control tools and create combos that aren't just one turn kill nonsense.
The magic card back is real. At some point, wotc was considering a 6th color, purple and thus that card back. In the end thought, purple was never added and the no physical card exists with that card back. Wizards themselves has even used the image on recent livestreams.
Thanks for this. I only play Hearthstone on my phone with net decks I can craft with dust but holy moly did his video drive me up the wall with inaccuracies and omissions.
DockZock Haha no, thank you for watching! Also, what's this 'crafting', and 'dust' you speak of? Is that shorthand for 'spending hundreds of dollars on packs to have a chance at opening the cards you want'?
He made a non-apology in the comments of that video:
"As several Hearthstone players have correctly pointed out, I didn't quite explain some of Shudderwock's properties correctly/fully. While an "infinite loop" didn't occur precisely as I described, it was still possible with the combination of Grumble, Worldshaker, Saronite Chain Gang, and Murmuring Elemental. If you'd like to learn precisely how all of it worked, there are plenty of in-depth articles that can explain it (and the rest of the card game) in great detail. Feel free to Google something like "How The Shudderwock Combo Works". Don't listen to some filthy casual like me."
Haha yes I saw that a couple of days ago, seems like a bit of a copout, though it's something I suppose.
I guess that Austin *Rushed* this video
Well now I want to die...
part of it was to try and simplify it for people who have never even played a card game like that, but a large portion of the video was just incorrect