Marvel Snap’s first League event has struck out in the first innings, marred by claims of exploits compromising the event's competitive integrity. In response, Second Dinner decided to award the exclusive top prize, the Deadpool emote, to all participants. You’d be forgiven for missing this development, as there was no in-game announcement or notification on their website. Many players likely continued striving for the top of their respective leaderboards until the timer ran out. We’ll talk about the alleged “exploit” later, but bigger issues with leagues need addressing.
So, what exactly was the Deadpool League?
The official news page offered scant details—not a good sign when marketing can't say much about it, just a couple of hundred words. This 48-hour event placed 30 players of ‘similar skill’ on a leaderboard, where playing your normal games earned or lost you points. Rewards were given based on final rankings, with the top three receiving an exclusive prize.
That all sounds… fine, right? So, what’s the problem? Well, the event was just not enjoyable. Sorry, but it felt empty and aimless, lacking real direction or purpose. Players were left grinding for points without any engaging mechanics or meaningful rewards. The event structure seemed hastily put together, with no clear identity or unique features to set it apart. It was as if the main point was missing, leaving this player feeling frustrated and unfulfilled.
These types of marathon or grind leaderboard events also promote excessive play and are, quite simply, unhealthy. While Snap has raised awareness for and supported social issues in the past, social responsibility within its own events, including player health and well-being, is not on that list.
The seemingly odd design choices and event structure make sense once you understand the original design intent for Leagues.
Did you also find it odd that ranks 4 and 5 had the exact same reward? And the only difference between rank 4 and rank 15 was the number of boosters? Did you then wonder who leagues were designed for and what’s the point of only truly rewarding the top 3? Or why was it set up as a marathon grind leaderboard? Or that, depending on the luck of your leaderboard allocation, you might need significantly more or fewer points than someone else to get to the top 3? Or why did this event, with an exclusive reward, run for only 48 hours, which is even less time than weekend missions? Or why they wanted to needlessly remind you after every game exactly how many points you lost or gained, even if you weren't participating or had stopped participating and were happy with your rank?
The Missing Puzzle Piece
I’m talking about Perks—the missing piece of the puzzle and the reason for so much empty oddness in this event.
In the original design, Perks were temporary 'boosts' that you could buy, giving you a time-limited bonus, such as double points from games or a point shield not to lose points. Let that sink in for a moment. I’m not sure how they reconciled the concept of 'competitive integrity’ with literally paying to win and warping the rules of the event; it’s certainly worthy of a Gold medal in mental gymnastics, though.
Second Dinner faced severe backlash over this egregious monetization and pledged to remove it. However, the damage was done, revealing that the entire league system was nothing more than a vehicle designed to sell perks. If you look at screenshots from the trial, you will see Perks prominently placed, taking up a significant portion of the screen space within the Leagues UI. Now, without them, it's all just empty. Leagues needed more than just the removal of perks; they needed a rework because pushing perks appears to have been the primary purpose.
This event’s reward structure also alienated most of the player base, which had no hope of getting into the top 3, and the unfortunate bottom half, which would only receive boosters. Don’t even get me started on using boosters as a differentiator between reward ranks or as a solitary reward anywhere in this game—that’s an article all by itself. Suffice it to say, it’s silly, and I’m not having it. Besides, no credits were given away in this event, so more boosters, even if they’re for Deadpool, are just added to the pile.
When you break it all down, half the field got ‘nothing,’ the next 5 got a border, and the next 7 after that got a border and a mystery variant (aka pixel variant). Third place got the same, plus the ‘exclusive’ emote. Second place actually has their border replaced with a different one—apparently, there wasn’t enough in the budget to spare an extra border for second place. First place loses the mystery variant and gets a premium mystery variant instead (no pixels, guaranteed! as they like to say). Again, it seems we can’t give both, but first place also gets two of second place’s borders. Plus… oh, that’s it actually.
In case you need a summary for something so short: a border, a (pixel) variant, grind for an emote, grind really hard for a second border, and freedom from pixels. This is not inspiring or encouraging play beyond the top 3, except to maybe qualify for the mystery variant. Realistically, only a couple of people beyond rank 3 actually have a chance of grinding enough to secure a top 3 position. So, this event is designed for a minority of the player base to participate actively.
Without the perk monetization leveraging the stressors built into a marathon grind leaderboard to make money from, and with the majority of the player base not considered for the event, I’m left wondering: why run the event this way at all? There are far better ways to increase engagement, offer rewards, and design systems where all players feel included and can earn meaningful rewards. Healthier event designs are certainly possible.
Some might argue, “Free is free,” “You don’t have to participate if you don’t want to,” or "You get stuff for doing nothing!” Well… no. The bottom half only gets boosters, which are usually nearly worthless. No one thinks, “I’m going to play more games to get 20 extra Deadpool boosters.” Plus, your time is valuable and limited. The constant pop-up reminder after every game telling you that you lost -50 points is also hard to ignore—it’s in your face every game.
Second Dinner has cited ‘competitive integrity’ for two consecutive events in response to player engagement issues. This indicates a deeper problem: the need for a comprehensive redesign of the event systems rather than quick fixes.
So, what’s the solution?
We need improved rewards and structures that promote healthy, balanced gameplay and respect for the players. A 48-hour grind fest, where only the top three receive prizes, is an outdated approach that taps into unhealthy player psychology. It’s disappointing to see this in 2024.
There are many ways to create a healthier event structure. Firstly, event-exclusive rewards should be accessible to more than just the top 3 out of 30 players. Everyone should have a fair chance to earn rewards if they put in the effort. Secondly, the effort required should be consistent. It’s unreasonable that one group might need 40k points for the top 3 while another only needs 10k.
A linear, point-based milestone system, where every 100 points on the track earns a reward, would be much better than an exponential system with widely spaced rewards.
Another approach could be a shop, similar to Conquest, where players can use their points to claim various prizes in the preferred order without time gates. This way, players can tailor their experience to get exactly what they want, choosing between cosmetics or progression and making interesting choices about using their points.
In both cases, points would come from a fixed number of daily/weekly missions. Extra premium weekly missions for season pass holders could make progress easier but wouldn’t be necessary to complete the track. There could be a second track exclusively for season pass holders or a one-off purchase just for the event track. An additional event-relevant cosmetic reward could be claimable for season pass holders.
This much healthier system would engage the entire player base rather than 15% of it. Everyone would feel like they’re making progress and getting something for the time they put into playing. Surprisingly, we don’t have systems like this, especially when the mission and shop systems already exist and are being underutilized.
Leagues appear to have been designed as a monetization strategy first and then dressed up as an event second. With perks removed, the emptiness and lack of purpose are evident. Monetization can be included but shouldn't define an event.
The event encourages continuous grinding to stay competitive, leading to unhealthy gaming habits. Players have lives outside the game—this should be respected. Given the wide age range of players due to the nature of the comic IP, Second Dinner also needs to be mindful of this.
Ok, let’s talk about this ‘exploit’
In Conquest’s proving grounds, players would take turns resigning so both could gain points for the leaderboard. This behavior was facilitated by the game's design, which allowed players to communicate only through emojis, making it difficult to coordinate but still possible through mutual understanding. When you think about it, it is actually impressive. Players worked together in a symbiotic relationship to help each other achieve their goals. It was also obvious, and similar things have happened before when weekend missions have been difficult to complete. While it made it an absolute pain if you actually wanted to play in proving grounds, it also made it extremely easy to clear certain missions and bounties.
While Second Dinner labeled this behavior as an exploit, it's important to consider the context:
No Bugs or Glitches: The players did not use any bugs or glitches. They took advantage of the game's point system and conquest format.
Intended Use of Game Mechanics: The resigning and point-gaining mechanics are part of the game's design. Players used these mechanics in a way that was not explicitly intended but was allowed by the system.
Fairness and Competitive Integrity: The behavior undermines the competitive integrity of the event, as it allows players to gain points without genuine competition. This can be seen as contrary to the spirit of fair play, even if it doesn't involve a technical exploit.
While the behavior in Marvel Snap's Deadpool League may not fit the strict definition of an exploit (since it doesn't involve bugs or glitches), it does manipulate the game's mechanics in a way that undermines fair competition. This highlights a design flaw in the event's structure, which Second Dinner has said they will fix for the next League event. Will this be enough to make Leagues a fun and enjoyable experience? Probably not, because it's still a grind. So, while it may change the final point total, it doesn't change how much you'd have to grind to get there.
Conclusion
Having played mobile games that used week-long infinite grind leaderboards to determine rewards and even placed first in them, I understand the effort involved. These archaic, outdated formats from gacha games do not promote healthy play patterns, and developers must improve.
Marvel Snap’s Deadpool League event highlights the need for a fundamental redesign of its system to avoid encouraging unhealthy play patterns. We need better reward systems with meaningful rewards and interesting daily and weekly missions that aren’t a chore or imbalanced in their requirements or point amounts. Events should be designed so that more of the player base can engage with them and feel included.
While the monetization aspect was removed from leagues, the rest of the system was still designed with monetization at its core. Simply turning off that part doesn’t address the underlying issues. The system inherently promotes unhealthy play patterns; the rewards and structure no longer make sense.
If you can give everyone the exclusive emote and a border due to an exploit, you could have created a healthy milestone reward system from the start that more players can access instead of relying on unhealthy leaderboard systems.
League events seemed to prioritize monetization in their first iteration and still force engagement through unhealthy grinding. We need engaging content that players want to participate with because it’s fun and rewarding, not because they feel compelled to grind for rewards.
The gaming community deserves systems that value their time and effort and promote a healthy and enjoyable competitive environment. In its current state, I am not looking forward to the next league marathon grind at all.
