I used to be skeptical about the complaints regarding the Infinite Climb, but my perspective has changed recently. Let me explain why I believe the Infinite Climb is more harmful than helpful for Snap and suggest what Second Dinner should consider implementing instead.
I've seen a lot of discussion about the Infinite Climb, and many players dread it, often feeling significant stress. While some level of stress can be beneficial—after all, games need goals and achievements to provide a sense of satisfaction—there's a line to be drawn.
What surprised me during a recent conversation about Infinite was that many of the top players in the game also dislike the Infinite Climb. Despite often reaching the top ranks on the first day, they still share feelings of rank anxiety and dread similar to those expressed by lower-skilled players. For many, the Infinite Climb is at best a chore; for others, it feels like just a hurdle that must be overcome before the “real” game begins.
To share my personal experience, I have hit infinite every season that I've played. I usually get there within 1-7 days. In the earliest days before global launch, it would take me a couple of weeks and would be my main goal for the season. After the changes to rank progress, it's become a lot more trivial, which has actually detracted from its value for me personally. It's just the thing I need to do before the “real” game starts. I usually take a break of a day or two after hitting Infinite. Some people take even more time off. That can't be desirable player behavior for Second Dinner.
If lower skill players hate the infinite climb, middle tier players do too, and even the best players in the game dislike it, who is this feature for? Second Dinner should get rid of it.
Complaints about tech
Second Dinner has stated multiple times recently that they see a lot of complaints about “tech” in the game and have begun to defend tech when designing new cards and limited-time game modes. But is the complaint really about tech, or is it about losing on the ladder? Players tend to complain about anything that beats them, but losing an important ranked match is a lot more frustrating than losing a LTGM game. Perhaps the ranked system itself is driving negative sentiment about tech and cards perceived as “toxic.”
The same could be argued about meta complaints. I see complaints often about people “facing the same decks over and over.” This is exacerbated by the way people tend to try to grind hard for infinite. It makes the game feel more artificially stale than it otherwise would. And there are complaints about bots all around. Some complain that they don't see enough of them. Others complain they see too many and it's less engaging than facing humans. Others feel like bot behavior is inconsistent or unfair. All of these complaints are magnified by the way the Infinite Climb is structured.
It seems unwise to have so much negative sentiment built into the game. An achievement that leads to lower engagement after achieving it has to be seen as a problem. There are a ton of examples of achievements in games that are the primary goal of the player base, and less engagement after hitting the achievement makes a lot of sense. However, this has not been the case in Snap for a very long time. Players don't want to hit Infinite as an achievement. They want to relieve themselves of the burden and unlock post-infinite play.
The effect on new players
One of Second Dinner's primary focal points has been improving the new player experience. If you haven't checked it out for a long time, you might be surprised to learn they've done a great job. There are great login rewards, you get a new card nearly every day, and there is a lot more to do in the game now than when I started. But when a new player hits Infinite for the first time, it's almost always a negative experience. Suddenly, they're in the deep end of the pool with only real players, some of whom are vastly more experienced and skillful. This thermocline between low series laddering and post-infinite play can't be great for new player retention. To fulfill their long-term goals for Snap, they should change it.
How to change it
Option A: Total replacement with casual and ranked modes
One option is to do away with the Infinite Climb entirely. You could have two queues, one ranked and one unranked. This two-queue approach is the approach a lot of games take to ensure both casual and competitive players have a place. The counterargument to this system is the bifurcation of queues, which would lead to longer wait times. However, we already have a lack of players in the post-infinite queue at the beginning of each season, and there are a lot of players that rarely make Infinite that would be happy to try their hand in the more difficult queue. The casual queue can always be heavy on bots to soften queue times and push players craving more human opponents into the ranked queue. Global queues are a major technical hurdle, but that would do wonders for this system as well.
However, there are prominent risks associated with such a massive change. Any major shake-up, even if well-received, is going to result in shedding some players. If Second Dinner wants to avoid those risks, there are softer options.
Option B: Rank floors
The concept of rank floors has been addressed before.
There are quite a few negative incentives and consequences that come with ranked floors — Glenn is totally right here. One player betting on the outcome of a game (with cubes) while at a rank floor against someone who isn't, is inherently unfair. I was long opposed to rank floors because of this. I've totally come around on the idea, though. We already have situations like this when facing bots that try to win vs bots that throw. Having to try to guess which type of bot you're up against is incredibly unpleasant. The disparity in stakes between someone at a rank floor and someone at rank 89 isn't ideal, but it would hardly be the worst thing climbers face. In exchange for a massive boost to player morale and a reduction in player anxiety, some play behaviors would shift. Players would likely play a little more cautiously when close to moving up and more recklessly at a rank floor. You can always retreat.
Option C: Include progress from other game modes
Second Dinner is spending a lot of their development time and resources on new game modes. And yet, a lot of the sentiment I see around them is anxiety at having too much to complete. Players who take 2-3 weeks to hit Infinite feel the crunch when new game modes pop up. They're faced with the choice of engaging in the new mode or ensuring they hit Infinite. The game modes are supposed to be fun, not just obligatory-rewards hamster wheels, and having them hook into the Infinite climb in some way would help change this perception. Each game mode win should add a cube to the Infinite Climb. It is a way to avoid losses by making LGTM losses not have an effect on the ladder. This way, people wouldn't feel like they're neglecting ladder by playing the cool new mode, and it also provides a sure (though slow by design) way to make ladder progress for everyone.
Option D: Make it easier
They should make the climb even easier. Adding progress from LGTMs would do this, but they could also do more. The drop in rank has been reduced several times, but they could make it even smaller. Or non-existent for players in the 70s. Truly make it trivial for top players by starting them at 93. Ensure bots always spawn when a player is near a rank floor. There are a variety of options.
“It will devalue infinite”
This is the counterargument to all of this. But this ship has sailed! No top player, or even many highly-engaged players, put much stock in hitting Infinite as a valuable accomplishment. It was already massively devalued when they added the rank bonuses. It was an accomplishment in the early days of the game. Now it's just a time-consuming chore or anxiety-inducing hurdle. Devalue it more! It is no longer serving a popular purpose. For the sake of player sentiment, change the Infinite Climb!