The problem is that when Blizzard has a game that is available on multiple platforms they pick one platform to be the "main platform" and tend to balance the game around that player base. High skill players play almost exclusively on computers while Blizzard is pretty clearly trying to make Hearthstone a phone/tablet game. The same problem is happening in Overwatch where console players get no love, no access to the PTR, balance changes are done around computer players and even on the Blizzard forums Jeff Kaplan will respond to complaint threads with 10 pages but complaints from console players will go to like 50 pages and never get a response.
We often forget that Blizzard doesn't owe us anything just because we are good. Legend players make up less than 1% of the 50+ million players so why listen to them when you have 30 million players who are willing to spend money at rank 20 and below? Blizzard is a business and having a game that competes with candy crush is a lot more profitable than a game that is good for the top 1,000 players.
Here's some reasons that I feel show Blizzard never intended Hearthstone to be some super hardcore competitive game and they've been viewing at as a phone game for quit some time now.
The game at it's core is silly and whimsical. The art, the voice lines, the characters, the boards are all fairly simple and childish. I think this is Blizzard realizing people are starting to play video games earlier and earlier so they are moving away from the Diablo style and more toward Overwatch/Hearthstone style.
They continually nerf long combo decks and push curvestone decks. Long combo decks are the only decks that play different on mobile than they do on computers just due to the amount of time they take to pull off the combo. I usually wind up roping when trying to win with miracle rogue or patron warrior and if I was trying to do this on my phone I probably would never be able to pull it off.A powerful deck that can only really be done on a computer isn't what Blizzard wants.
Hearthstone is set up like a microtransaction mobile game. If 2 players start at the exact same time but one decides to drop $100 and the other is f2p the one who payed will win almost 100% of the time they play each other.
Arena in my opinion is harder to play on a phone than casual or ranked on a phone and Blizzard has shown they really don't care about arena balance at all in the last few expansions.
According to Blizzard themselves 75% of the player base is below rank 15. Anyone that even plays 2 or 3 ranked games a day can probably climb higher than that meaning probably around 50% of all players just play a game or two in casual probably at work or on the bus or something.
Blizzard announced more expansions per year which also means more money per year in case you had forgotten they're a business.
The Hearthstone FAQ section on their actual site has 20 questions, 12 of which are just about playing on a phone or tablet.
Pro players, streamers, legend players and most high level players are not particularly fond of the last 2-3 metas and are souring on the game as a whole but profits are continuing to go up and Blizzard has been pumping out aggro curvestone every expansion for over a year now.
It isn't that Blizzard is trying to drive out good players or that they hate legend players but they are trying to make a phone game that maximizes player base and therefore profit. No one says candy crush is an e-sport but it made over $200,000,000 last year and any company that has the ability to make a successful phone game but doesn't tap into that market is just foolish. Unfortunately for us on this forum though top 10 in the app store and fun yet complex high level gameplay don't typically go hand in hand.
This sounds like a salt thread. Of course Blizzard cares about the 1%, they just don't care -as much-, which should make obvious sense since they're only the 1%. I'm sure others will poke all kinds of holes at all your points. The one about expansions is especially puzzling. Does anyone actually want less expansions to be released? Lol.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Regular NA Arena Leaderboard player. Reached #1 in NA arena leaderboard in May 2018 with a 9.07 average!
Is this remotely surprising? Ever since Activision took over Blizzard every single game design decision has been focused on milking as much cash as possible out of a franchise, they greatly homogenized and simplified World of Warcraft and introduced legalized gold selling and buying levels, they launched Diablo 3 with a real money auction house, and ever since they realised the commercial viability of Hearthstone they've pushed the aggro curvestone theme as hard as possible to ensure many games are decided by turn 3 or 4 for the casual phone user.
The irony is, whilst their crude methods provide an an upfront cash injection to their business it greatly damages their product and reduces their lifespan. World of Warcaft subscription number have been in a freefall since Wrath to the point where they now won't even disclose official numbers, the outcry over the state of Diablo 3 on launch incredibly forced them to backtrack on their monetization of that game and damaged the reputation of the franchise, and with the growing unrest over the ActiBlizzard-enforced curvestone gameplay many pros will look to jump ship to other games and I predict Hearthstone to stagnate badly over the next 12-18 months.
What ActiBlizzard fail to realize, or simply don't care about, is that their merciless milking of each franchise alienates the original core audience and many of the high-level players, and those people turning their back on the game hurts the competitive scene and general community sentiment around the game. This negativity then filters down into the common masses who ActiBlizzard desperately gutted each franchise in order to cater for/extract money from, and eventually sends each game into a downward spiral.
Is this remotely surprising? Ever since Activision took over Blizzard every single game design decision has been focused on milking as much cash as possible out of a franchise, they greatly homogenized and simplified World of Warcraft and introduced legalized gold selling and buying levels, they launched Diablo 3 with a real money auction house, and ever since they realised the commercial viability of Hearthstone they've pushed the aggro curvestone theme as hard as possible to ensure many games are decided by turn 3 or 4 for the casual phone user.
The irony is, whilst their crude methods provide an an upfront cash injection to their business it greatly damages their product and reduces their lifespan. World of Warcaft subscription number have been in a freefall since Wrath to the point where they now won't even disclose official numbers, the outcry over the state of Diablo 3 on launch incredibly forced them to backtrack on their monetization of that game and damaged the reputation of the franchise, and with the growing unrest over the ActiBlizzard-enforced curvestone gameplay many pros will look to jump ship to other games and I predict Hearthstone to stagnate badly over the next 12-18 months.
What ActiBlizzard fail to realize, or simply don't care about, is that their merciless milking of each franchise alienates the original core audience and many of the high-level players, and those people turning their back on the game hurts the competitive scene and general community sentiment around the game. This negativity then filters down into the common masses who ActiBlizzard desperately gutted each franchise in order to cater for/extract money from, and eventually sends each game into a downward spiral.
Implying blizzard gave two fucks about competitive players on their games before they joined with activision.
you answered your own question....Why would they when its a statistically minuscule portion of their playerbase? People don't realize that hearthpwn and reddit make up less than 1% of their users. As long as their bottom line doesn't see an impact, and the game keeps increasing in sales growth nothing will change. What motivation does blizzard have catering to a vocal minority that accounts for 1% of their revenue?
If you yourself made a game where 1% of players say it sucks and 99% says it's good and are willing to pay for it, would you make changes to accommodate the 1%
I find it so strange that everybody tries to reduce everything to money in video game design.
"They're a company, which means that the only thing they care about is money. Clearly they'll cut every corner, rip off every sucker, and sell any grandmother needed to improve their profits!"
Executives? Maybe. The actual designers? No. People don't go into video game design for the money. They go into it because they LOVE video games. They loved them so much they want to spend most of their day, day after day, thinking about them and working on them. These people do not sit around contemplating how to manipulate their own game for money. Why should there be any incentive on their end to make a bad game when they could make a good one?
"You're missing how companies have expectations, though. Even if the developers don't endorse these practices they will clearly be coerced by their higher-ups who only care about the bottom line."
On what basis do you make this claim? Every single thing I have ever watched that has come from Blizzard's developers has them looking engaged and excited about their craft. They don't look like poor dupes who are being oppressed by the capitalist system to churn out golden eggs for their overlords. Ben Brode is easily the most visible example: if that man's laugh is fake then he should quit game design now and go earn an Oscar for his acting. That he would make videos at home, when he is off the clock, should give you some indication of how much he's thinking about this even as he's on paternity leave.
I think it's much simpler to explain it the way it has already been pointed out: this game wasn't designed around perfectionist top players. It didn't start that way and it never will be that way. It has huge elements of randomness which ensure that no matter how skilled you are, there is always a reasonable chance that the other guy will win. This inherent surprise factor in each game is what has made it such a runaway hit with people, both for playing and viewing. It gives it the broad appeal that it has.
Now, does this mean they don't care at all about top end players? No. It just means that they have to weigh the needs of the few versus the needs of the many. Several of their changes have been specifically targeted at the high-end scene, such as concerns that Patron Warrior was too good at high skill levels or that Yogg was too effective as a tournament tool. Failing to change the game to fit the vision of a small fraction of its playerbase isn't "ignoring" them for money; it is hearing them, but politely disagreeing with them on what would make the game best for everybody.
Anyway, end rant I guess. I just get exhausted and a little angry when players denigrate the hard work and excitement by equating it with money.
This company cut its teeth on Warcraft (2) and Lost Vikings and Rock and Roll racing. Silliness has been at its core since the start. The studio that made Diablo 1 wasn't even Blizzard to begin with and didn't last.
only retard or newbie believe this games need a lot of skill. Only 10% skill in this games. Don't tell me control vs control =skill. Yes, some extend of skill compare to aggro but outcome of the games decide by RNG. ie:good kazakus RNG, cabal tome into cabal tome, draw leeroy combo in turn 10 have exact lethal when.opponent left 20hp etc.
only retard or newbie believe this games need a lot of skill. Only 10% skill in this games. Don't tell me control vs control =skill. Yes, some extend of skill compare to aggro but outcome of the games decide by RNG. ie:good kazakus RNG, cabal tome into cabal tome, draw leeroy combo in turn 10 have exact lethal when.opponent left 20hp etc.
You talk like 10% skill is nothing. Thats the difference between a 40 and 60 percent winrate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You really thought I had something interesting to say at the bottom of my posts?
This company cut its teeth on Warcraft (2) and Lost Vikings and Rock and Roll racing. Silliness has been at its core since the start. The studio that made Diablo 1 wasn't even Blizzard to begin with and didn't last.
Lol that is why diablo 3 was so bad after diablo 2 core employees of that studio left the Blizzard
Is this remotely surprising? Ever since Activision took over Blizzard every single game design decision has been focused on milking as much cash as possible out of a franchise, they greatly homogenized and simplified World of Warcraft and introduced legalized gold selling and buying levels, they launched Diablo 3 with a real money auction house, and ever since they realised the commercial viability of Hearthstone they've pushed the aggro curvestone theme as hard as possible to ensure many games are decided by turn 3 or 4 for the casual phone user.
The irony is, whilst their crude methods provide an an upfront cash injection to their business it greatly damages their product and reduces their lifespan. World of Warcaft subscription number have been in a freefall since Wrath to the point where they now won't even disclose official numbers, the outcry over the state of Diablo 3 on launch incredibly forced them to backtrack on their monetization of that game and damaged the reputation of the franchise, and with the growing unrest over the ActiBlizzard-enforced curvestone gameplay many pros will look to jump ship to other games and I predict Hearthstone to stagnate badly over the next 12-18 months.
What ActiBlizzard fail to realize, or simply don't care about, is that their merciless milking of each franchise alienates the original core audience and many of the high-level players, and those people turning their back on the game hurts the competitive scene and general community sentiment around the game. This negativity then filters down into the common masses who ActiBlizzard desperately gutted each franchise in order to cater for/extract money from, and eventually sends each game into a downward spiral.
Implying blizzard gave two fuc ks about competitive players on their games before they joined with activision.
They did though, imo every one of blizzards titles suffered terribly after the sellout. Hearthstone is actually fairing the best of all their core title and thats probably do to accessibility and cheap upkeep by comparison.
At OP though, your post just reeks of elitist attitude and is generally salty.
Just look at any of Blizzard's HS advertisement videos/trailers. There's barely any focus on the actual mechanics of the game itself - instead they emphasize colorful and zany characters, and your 'average Joe' dressing up in bad costumes to play a mobile game. In fact, if someone were completely new to Hearthstone/card games in general, I'd be surprised if they were able to actually figure out what the game even is, other than the fact that it's on mobiles and involves cards in some way.
only retard or newbie believe this games need a lot of skill. Only 10% skill in this games. Don't tell me control vs control =skill. Yes, some extend of skill compare to aggro but outcome of the games decide by RNG. ie:good kazakus RNG, cabal tome into cabal tome, draw leeroy combo in turn 10 have exact lethal when.opponent left 20hp etc.
You talk like 10% skill is nothing. Thats the difference between a 40 and 60 percent winrate.
Yep, like every card game... Ever play poker? How the hell do the same players make it to the final table all the time in a game of 90% luck? That 10% skill goes a long long long way in success in card based games.
only retard or newbie believe this games need a lot of skill. Only 10% skill in this games. Don't tell me control vs control =skill. Yes, some extend of skill compare to aggro but outcome of the games decide by RNG. ie:good kazakus RNG, cabal tome into cabal tome, draw leeroy combo in turn 10 have exact lethal when.opponent left 20hp etc.
You talk like 10% skill is nothing. Thats the difference between a 40 and 60 percent winrate.
Yep, like every card game... Ever play poker? How the hell do the same players make it to the final table all the time in a game of 90% luck? That 10% skill goes a long long long way in success in card based games.
Poker is bad example,you can FOLD in that game and be done with the hand,in hearstone you can't and must play till the end with the cards you draw
I'm not a fan of the poker comparison either. There's folding, bluffing, trying to read the other players and playing the odds. The only aspect that Hearthstone has is playing the odds and that's something that less than 10% of players seem to do. Often it's "wow I sure hope they don't have a board clear cause I'm gonna dump my hand on turn 3", if they have it they win if they don't you win.
I'm not a fan of the poker comparison either. There's folding, bluffing, trying to read the other players and playing the odds. The only aspect that Hearthstone has is playing the odds and that's something that less than 10% of players seem to do. Often it's "wow I sure hope they don't have a board clear cause I'm gonna dump my hand on turn 3", if they have it they win if they don't you win.
less than 10% of people who play poker play the odds, really try to bluff, and do more than try to get the best hand and hope it works. Of course that's why pro players love to bring in regular folks who don't as they tend to get torn to pieces.
Meanwhile our .top players chew through the bulk of the ladder easily every month before they actually start trying at the high legend level. And those tend to read their opponent's plays to the point where a slight delay on a card drop can 'signal' what their other cards hold. They also analyze their odds as well. Bluffing is rarely done. This game is less about deception as it is about information.
Of course almost everyone doesn't play that way, in hearthstone, poker, starcraft, LoL, or elsewhere. Thus 'casual' 'casual/competitive' and 'competitive'.
As I tend to say: This game has a low skill ceiling compared to other games, but most players haven't even gotten off the floor.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The problem is that when Blizzard has a game that is available on multiple platforms they pick one platform to be the "main platform" and tend to balance the game around that player base. High skill players play almost exclusively on computers while Blizzard is pretty clearly trying to make Hearthstone a phone/tablet game. The same problem is happening in Overwatch where console players get no love, no access to the PTR, balance changes are done around computer players and even on the Blizzard forums Jeff Kaplan will respond to complaint threads with 10 pages but complaints from console players will go to like 50 pages and never get a response.
We often forget that Blizzard doesn't owe us anything just because we are good. Legend players make up less than 1% of the 50+ million players so why listen to them when you have 30 million players who are willing to spend money at rank 20 and below? Blizzard is a business and having a game that competes with candy crush is a lot more profitable than a game that is good for the top 1,000 players.
Here's some reasons that I feel show Blizzard never intended Hearthstone to be some super hardcore competitive game and they've been viewing at as a phone game for quit some time now.
It isn't that Blizzard is trying to drive out good players or that they hate legend players but they are trying to make a phone game that maximizes player base and therefore profit. No one says candy crush is an e-sport but it made over $200,000,000 last year and any company that has the ability to make a successful phone game but doesn't tap into that market is just foolish. Unfortunately for us on this forum though top 10 in the app store and fun yet complex high level gameplay don't typically go hand in hand.
there is no high skill players.
Just lucky players
This sounds like a salt thread. Of course Blizzard cares about the 1%, they just don't care -as much-, which should make obvious sense since they're only the 1%. I'm sure others will poke all kinds of holes at all your points. The one about expansions is especially puzzling. Does anyone actually want less expansions to be released? Lol.
Regular NA Arena Leaderboard player.
Reached #1 in NA arena leaderboard in May 2018 with a 9.07 average!
Meh it's because Hearthstone is meant to be quick games.truth is,if you actually want game-deciding decisions, play Magic The gathering or Faeria
Is this remotely surprising? Ever since Activision took over Blizzard every single game design decision has been focused on milking as much cash as possible out of a franchise, they greatly homogenized and simplified World of Warcraft and introduced legalized gold selling and buying levels, they launched Diablo 3 with a real money auction house, and ever since they realised the commercial viability of Hearthstone they've pushed the aggro curvestone theme as hard as possible to ensure many games are decided by turn 3 or 4 for the casual phone user.
The irony is, whilst their crude methods provide an an upfront cash injection to their business it greatly damages their product and reduces their lifespan. World of Warcaft subscription number have been in a freefall since Wrath to the point where they now won't even disclose official numbers, the outcry over the state of Diablo 3 on launch incredibly forced them to backtrack on their monetization of that game and damaged the reputation of the franchise, and with the growing unrest over the ActiBlizzard-enforced curvestone gameplay many pros will look to jump ship to other games and I predict Hearthstone to stagnate badly over the next 12-18 months.
What ActiBlizzard fail to realize, or simply don't care about, is that their merciless milking of each franchise alienates the original core audience and many of the high-level players, and those people turning their back on the game hurts the competitive scene and general community sentiment around the game. This negativity then filters down into the common masses who ActiBlizzard desperately gutted each franchise in order to cater for/extract money from, and eventually sends each game into a downward spiral.
Keep Calm and RAG FACE
Holy shit airalert3 you nailed it
you answered your own question....Why would they when its a statistically minuscule portion of their playerbase? People don't realize that hearthpwn and reddit make up less than 1% of their users. As long as their bottom line doesn't see an impact, and the game keeps increasing in sales growth nothing will change. What motivation does blizzard have catering to a vocal minority that accounts for 1% of their revenue?
If you yourself made a game where 1% of players say it sucks and 99% says it's good and are willing to pay for it, would you make changes to accommodate the 1%
Don't be naive.
If you got the coin, the Mercenaries get going. Vote for The Mercenary for CCC #3.
I find it so strange that everybody tries to reduce everything to money in video game design.
"They're a company, which means that the only thing they care about is money. Clearly they'll cut every corner, rip off every sucker, and sell any grandmother needed to improve their profits!"
Executives? Maybe. The actual designers? No. People don't go into video game design for the money. They go into it because they LOVE video games. They loved them so much they want to spend most of their day, day after day, thinking about them and working on them. These people do not sit around contemplating how to manipulate their own game for money. Why should there be any incentive on their end to make a bad game when they could make a good one?
"You're missing how companies have expectations, though. Even if the developers don't endorse these practices they will clearly be coerced by their higher-ups who only care about the bottom line."
On what basis do you make this claim? Every single thing I have ever watched that has come from Blizzard's developers has them looking engaged and excited about their craft. They don't look like poor dupes who are being oppressed by the capitalist system to churn out golden eggs for their overlords. Ben Brode is easily the most visible example: if that man's laugh is fake then he should quit game design now and go earn an Oscar for his acting. That he would make videos at home, when he is off the clock, should give you some indication of how much he's thinking about this even as he's on paternity leave.
I think it's much simpler to explain it the way it has already been pointed out: this game wasn't designed around perfectionist top players. It didn't start that way and it never will be that way. It has huge elements of randomness which ensure that no matter how skilled you are, there is always a reasonable chance that the other guy will win. This inherent surprise factor in each game is what has made it such a runaway hit with people, both for playing and viewing. It gives it the broad appeal that it has.
Now, does this mean they don't care at all about top end players? No. It just means that they have to weigh the needs of the few versus the needs of the many. Several of their changes have been specifically targeted at the high-end scene, such as concerns that Patron Warrior was too good at high skill levels or that Yogg was too effective as a tournament tool. Failing to change the game to fit the vision of a small fraction of its playerbase isn't "ignoring" them for money; it is hearing them, but politely disagreeing with them on what would make the game best for everybody.
Anyway, end rant I guess. I just get exhausted and a little angry when players denigrate the hard work and excitement by equating it with money.
WHEN did they become actiblizzard
Omicron016#1732
This company cut its teeth on Warcraft (2) and Lost Vikings and Rock and Roll racing. Silliness has been at its core since the start. The studio that made Diablo 1 wasn't even Blizzard to begin with and didn't last.
only retard or newbie believe this games need a lot of skill. Only 10% skill in this games. Don't tell me control vs control =skill. Yes, some extend of skill compare to aggro but outcome of the games decide by RNG. ie:good kazakus RNG, cabal tome into cabal tome, draw leeroy combo in turn 10 have exact lethal when.opponent left 20hp etc.
You really thought I had something interesting to say at the bottom of my posts?
Just look at any of Blizzard's HS advertisement videos/trailers. There's barely any focus on the actual mechanics of the game itself - instead they emphasize colorful and zany characters, and your 'average Joe' dressing up in bad costumes to play a mobile game. In fact, if someone were completely new to Hearthstone/card games in general, I'd be surprised if they were able to actually figure out what the game even is, other than the fact that it's on mobiles and involves cards in some way.
less than 10% of people who play poker play the odds, really try to bluff, and do more than try to get the best hand and hope it works. Of course that's why pro players love to bring in regular folks who don't as they tend to get torn to pieces.
Meanwhile our .top players chew through the bulk of the ladder easily every month before they actually start trying at the high legend level. And those tend to read their opponent's plays to the point where a slight delay on a card drop can 'signal' what their other cards hold. They also analyze their odds as well. Bluffing is rarely done. This game is less about deception as it is about information.
Of course almost everyone doesn't play that way, in hearthstone, poker, starcraft, LoL, or elsewhere. Thus 'casual' 'casual/competitive' and 'competitive'.
As I tend to say: This game has a low skill ceiling compared to other games, but most players haven't even gotten off the floor.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.