Might impact to new hardcore players. Not to mention that excluding the 20 dollars to buy the game the economy will be very good. Tier 1 decks will be cheap tho it will cost real money but common cards going around 10 cents uncomon 20 and rare 1 dollar makes the packs a good purchase for only 2 dollars with 12 cards and at least a rare.
Best economy card game. Gameplay wise seems daunting
Valve don't want you to grind for stuff, they want you to play the game because you want to just play the game. It sounds like they are preparing numerous game modes that are popular in mtg and real life card games to replicate that feeling of playing irl with friends.
Unfortunately, the only way to play the game is to pay, pay, pay, since you cannot get the cards other way than paying for them real money.
With HS, you can easily be F2P, collecting gold between expansions and crafting what you miss for decks. With Artifact, it's Pay To Win, because unless you will buy packs for real money and have luck or buy good/required cards for real money, you cannot win.
As far as I know you are supposed to be able to trade cards with other players. I personally hate trading instead of crafting in a CCG, but maybe there are people who want to do it.
@Topic: I don't think Hearthstone will even realize when artifact starts.
I am pretty excited for Artifact, the game looks really interesting when you make the effort to assimilate the rules. I think in the long run it is actually cheaper than HS. I don't have the time to grind a card game for 1000+ hours anymore so I definitely prefer giving 50 bucks for cards I want, that I will be able to sell afterwards if I do desire, rather than 50 bucks in a pack-filled HS expansion, opening cards from all the different classes and left with no way to build a proper deck with one of them. So yeah I really prefer p2p approach in Artifact.
That being said, even if the game turns out to be good, I don't see it taking HS spot in any way. I can't see a mobile version of this game and it generally doesn't aim at casual players. Furthermore, it's steam- based sharing model can not be implemented in China because of gouvernment rules so I fail to see how the game could establish itself there.
HS will always be the king but that's not to say the other games are shit.
Blizzard is not trying to create a CCG, it's trying to create a TCG on PC. Just think about it:
-You have to pay to start to play (Starter deck in TCG)
-The packs cost real money (like in a TCG)
-The card can be sold for money
I think that if they possesed the machinery needed they could have made this game just a real card game, but because it cost less if it's digital they choose that way, and there is nothing wrong with it, this game will cost tens times less than any real TCG and from a guy who played both YuGiOh and MtG and spent a lot of money, this seems the best way. If I am going to buy it I will use the profit I make from Tf2 to buy singles and sell everything I don't need, but I can see why a lot of people will avoid this game.
the problem with digital TCGS will be the equivalent of shoebox of commons, let's be dead honest here, people rarely buy single commons, they either buy the playset or just get most commons in the set with a heavy investment, if you can't do anything with those commons, their market value devaluates and their servers get overc rowded because they're basically storing useless information in their cloud, this is why the PTCGO client has a looooooooooooooooooooot of crashes and malfunctions, they have thousands of players storing what't the equivalent of at least one shoebox of commons each, data that doesn't get used and that they can't simply delete because that would be a disservice to the players.
...and their servers get overc rowded because they're basically storing useless information in their cloud, this is why the PTCGO client has a looooooooooooooooooooot of crashes and malfunctions, they have thousands of players storing what't the equivalent of at least one shoebox of commons each, data that doesn't get used and that they can't simply delete because that would be a disservice to the players.
I don't get that. Why does it matter on a computer whether I have 2 cards of a common or 130? They just store a different digit as information of how many I have (here it's 130 instead of 2). It's not that they have to store the image of the card 130 times.
I am pretty excited for Artifact, the game looks really interesting when you make the effort to assimilate the rules. I think in the long run it is actually cheaper than HS. I don't have the time to grind a card game for 1000+ hours anymore so I definitely prefer giving 50 bucks for cards I want, that I will be able to sell afterwards if I do desire, rather than 50 bucks in a pack-filled HS expansion, opening cards from all the different classes and left with no way to build a proper deck with one of them. So yeah I really prefer p2p approach in Artifact.
That being said, even if the game turns out to be good, I don't see it taking HS spot in any way. I can't see a mobile version of this game and it generally doesn't aim at casual players. Furthermore, it's steam- based sharing model can not be implemented in China because of gouvernment rules so I fail to see how the game could establish itself there.
HS will always be the king but that's not to say the other games are shit.
Mobile is already announced and every single casual player who has tried the game, from hearthstone to no experience at all has said they had a hang of it after only a couple of matches. The complexity has been exaggerated. The depth you will find here is in strategy which HS lacks. I fully expect Artifact to take Hearthstone's crown as the most streamed/watched/played game after it hits. People are sleeping on it because it's marketing has been rather tame but just you wait until everyone's favorite Hearthstone streamers become Artifact streamers and the stubborn community starts to check it out.
I watched Amaz stream a repeat of a stream and by the end of it, people were telling him to turn it up because the game was more interesting than him talking. It also doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the majority of these streamers are just miserable when the play Hearthstone anymore. Thijs, dog, savjz, firebat, zalae and etc are interested in prize pools and competing too. I have no doubt they are going to start getting dollar signs in their eyes when valve starts throwing massive prizes out there.
There are other card games out that have similar to vastly different environments. Hearthstone won't change just because a new card game is doing things differently. They might take note of how people feel based on the success of Artifact, but if they haven't changed things based on card games in the past, it's unlikely they will when Artifact drops.
The only people I see saying Artifact will do anything to hearthstone sound just like paid advertisers. They all parrot the same lines, and it's usually streamers who are huge sellouts so you have to take every recommendation they make with a huge grain of salt. Unless you think they honestly enjoy the various mobile games they are paid to shill a couple hours a week.
Do I have to remind everyone about what happened at the reveal?
Saying Artifact will affect Hearthstone in any way shape or form is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Especially with the new information that's been released, a paid card game, who wants that? Card trading, could very well land them in hot water again with countries such as Belgium due to that being how Loot Boxes/Card Packs were defined as gambling, with the contents being tradable in a marketplace. And also knowing Valve's past I don't trust them saying they're going make an affordable market, just look at games like CSGO and tell me they're not gonna try and monetise the shit out of this game. Hell I don't even think the playbase of Hearthstone will drop even a 1% when Artifact releases.
Blizzard is not trying to create a CCG, it's trying to create a TCG on PC. Just think about it:
-You have to pay to start to play (Starter deck in TCG)
-The packs cost real money (like in a TCG)
-The card can be sold for money
I think that if they possesed the machinery needed they could have made this game just a real card game, but because it cost less if it's digital they choose that way, and there is nothing wrong with it, this game will cost tens times less than any real TCG and from a guy who played both YuGiOh and MtG and spent a lot of money, this seems the best way. If I am going to buy it I will use the profit I make from Tf2 to buy singles and sell everything I don't need, but I can see why a lot of people will avoid this game.
the problem with digital TCGS will be the equivalent of shoebox of commons, let's be dead honest here, people rarely buy single commons, they either buy the playset or just get most commons in the set with a heavy investment, if you can't do anything with those commons, their market value devaluates and their servers get overc rowded because they're basically storing useless information in their cloud, this is why the PTCGO client has a looooooooooooooooooooot of crashes and malfunctions, they have thousands of players storing what't the equivalent of at least one shoebox of commons each, data that doesn't get used and that they can't simply delete because that would be a disservice to the players.
You're describing a typical MMO with an auction house. Right down to people selling random crap by the thousands. That's long since been solved.
If Artifact is so horrible that they fall apart on an issue that MMOs over a decade old can handle without a problem, they don't deserve to exist.
As far as the 'shoebox problem' on the player side, it's a basic element of games like MTG. Artifact is literally targetting folks who want MTG on digital and sick of waiting for Wizard's to figure it out. Also according to them, each pack is going to have a 'legenday rank' card at minimum. So instead of a Giggling, you're getting a Lich King or Millhouse every pack. It's honestly sounding much more cash friendly than most other card games.
What they are saying now sounds VERY appealing to the demographics they are after. If they can handle the balancing and backend (which is like saying "I hope this FPS knows how to get the guns to work" I admit) then I'd probably recommend it if you want..well.. digital MTG.
Having to pay to play, pay to buy packs, or pay to get individual cards is going to kill most interest in the game. It's true that for people in HS who are already paying the system won't be so bad; it would actually be better in the long-term. But that's also where the problem lies. The up-front payment is a tough pill to swallow for those that aren't already set on playing the game already.
There-in lies the problem for Artifact. They're forcing people to pick and invest in their game without allowing them to try first. Not only that, if they're HS players already there's a chance that those players are already invested in HS. Speaking personally I played HS since launch as a F2P before finally pre-ordering packs in Un'goro.
The only reason anyone is paying any attention to this game is based off of the Valve name alone. If this were from a no-name developer I doubt anyone would care at all. And even on that point it mainly concerns esports viability.
You know what WOULD make it an instant success though? If it was bundled with Half-Life 3.
If anything, they will make more gold and dust rich events, and hand out more free stuff. Why wasn't that an option? I doubt they will change the dust/gold values.
The main issue will alwyas be retaining the playerbase rather than competing CCGs. If people stop playing and paying, they will take actions to keep us around.
I can't wait for the time when people complain about the price of a tier 1 deck in Artifact. It will definitely be more expensive then Hearthstone for sure since it is a open economy. I suppose Valve main objective is earning money by charging commission in the market rather than by selling card packs.
Hearthstone - 50g - 180g per day (if you complete all your wins, plus your quest - not counting arena runs). Also offer's reduced prices for bulk purchasing of packs not exceeding $1.50/pack Artifact - $2/pack
Hearthstone - no card trading Artifact - card trading
Hearthstone - 9 playable decks to start, plus additional quests to unlock more, tavern brawl for a free pack every week. Artifact - 2 playable decks to start.
Hearthstone - large e-sports participation Artifact - no e-sports participation at this point.
Sorry, but artifact doesn't even come close to where Hearthstone is at. Even the purchasing of packs is considerably better than Artifact. In fact, the only people I've heard considering going to Artifact are the ones who complain about Hearthstone being "unfair" the most. Otherwise its a general positive attitude towards the game. This expansion has seen more criticism than most, but overall Hearthstone is still a powerhouse compared to other online tcg's.
Might impact to new hardcore players. Not to mention that excluding the 20 dollars to buy the game the economy will be very good. Tier 1 decks will be cheap tho it will cost real money but common cards going around 10 cents uncomon 20 and rare 1 dollar makes the packs a good purchase for only 2 dollars with 12 cards and at least a rare.
Best economy card game. Gameplay wise seems daunting
As far as I know you are supposed to be able to trade cards with other players. I personally hate trading instead of crafting in a CCG, but maybe there are people who want to do it.
@Topic: I don't think Hearthstone will even realize when artifact starts.
I am pretty excited for Artifact, the game looks really interesting when you make the effort to assimilate the rules. I think in the long run it is actually cheaper than HS. I don't have the time to grind a card game for 1000+ hours anymore so I definitely prefer giving 50 bucks for cards I want, that I will be able to sell afterwards if I do desire, rather than 50 bucks in a pack-filled HS expansion, opening cards from all the different classes and left with no way to build a proper deck with one of them. So yeah I really prefer p2p approach in Artifact.
That being said, even if the game turns out to be good, I don't see it taking HS spot in any way. I can't see a mobile version of this game and it generally doesn't aim at casual players. Furthermore, it's steam- based sharing model can not be implemented in China because of gouvernment rules so I fail to see how the game could establish itself there.
HS will always be the king but that's not to say the other games are shit.
the problem with digital TCGS will be the equivalent of shoebox of commons, let's be dead honest here, people rarely buy single commons, they either buy the playset or just get most commons in the set with a heavy investment, if you can't do anything with those commons, their market value devaluates and their servers get overc rowded because they're basically storing useless information in their cloud, this is why the PTCGO client has a looooooooooooooooooooot of crashes and malfunctions, they have thousands of players storing what't the equivalent of at least one shoebox of commons each, data that doesn't get used and that they can't simply delete because that would be a disservice to the players.
I don't get that. Why does it matter on a computer whether I have 2 cards of a common or 130? They just store a different digit as information of how many I have (here it's 130 instead of 2). It's not that they have to store the image of the card 130 times.
Mobile is already announced and every single casual player who has tried the game, from hearthstone to no experience at all has said they had a hang of it after only a couple of matches. The complexity has been exaggerated. The depth you will find here is in strategy which HS lacks. I fully expect Artifact to take Hearthstone's crown as the most streamed/watched/played game after it hits. People are sleeping on it because it's marketing has been rather tame but just you wait until everyone's favorite Hearthstone streamers become Artifact streamers and the stubborn community starts to check it out.
I watched Amaz stream a repeat of a stream and by the end of it, people were telling him to turn it up because the game was more interesting than him talking. It also doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the majority of these streamers are just miserable when the play Hearthstone anymore. Thijs, dog, savjz, firebat, zalae and etc are interested in prize pools and competing too. I have no doubt they are going to start getting dollar signs in their eyes when valve starts throwing massive prizes out there.
There are other card games out that have similar to vastly different environments. Hearthstone won't change just because a new card game is doing things differently. They might take note of how people feel based on the success of Artifact, but if they haven't changed things based on card games in the past, it's unlikely they will when Artifact drops.
Come visit my Card Emporium. Strange things, you will find inside...
Come take the test, if you're daring. Feel free to show me your results in a message.
The only people I see saying Artifact will do anything to hearthstone sound just like paid advertisers. They all parrot the same lines, and it's usually streamers who are huge sellouts so you have to take every recommendation they make with a huge grain of salt. Unless you think they honestly enjoy the various mobile games they are paid to shill a couple hours a week.
This times 1000. Artifacts mug is 100% hype.
You're describing a typical MMO with an auction house. Right down to people selling random crap by the thousands. That's long since been solved.
If Artifact is so horrible that they fall apart on an issue that MMOs over a decade old can handle without a problem, they don't deserve to exist.
As far as the 'shoebox problem' on the player side, it's a basic element of games like MTG. Artifact is literally targetting folks who want MTG on digital and sick of waiting for Wizard's to figure it out. Also according to them, each pack is going to have a 'legenday rank' card at minimum. So instead of a Giggling, you're getting a Lich King or Millhouse every pack. It's honestly sounding much more cash friendly than most other card games.
What they are saying now sounds VERY appealing to the demographics they are after. If they can handle the balancing and backend (which is like saying "I hope this FPS knows how to get the guns to work" I admit) then I'd probably recommend it if you want..well.. digital MTG.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Blizzard will try to keep up with Valve and boost revenue by selling hats for Jaina.
Anger is the punishment we give ourselves for someone else's mistake.
Having to pay to play, pay to buy packs, or pay to get individual cards is going to kill most interest in the game. It's true that for people in HS who are already paying the system won't be so bad; it would actually be better in the long-term. But that's also where the problem lies. The up-front payment is a tough pill to swallow for those that aren't already set on playing the game already.
There-in lies the problem for Artifact. They're forcing people to pick and invest in their game without allowing them to try first. Not only that, if they're HS players already there's a chance that those players are already invested in HS. Speaking personally I played HS since launch as a F2P before finally pre-ordering packs in Un'goro.
The only reason anyone is paying any attention to this game is based off of the Valve name alone. If this were from a no-name developer I doubt anyone would care at all. And even on that point it mainly concerns esports viability.
You know what WOULD make it an instant success though? If it was bundled with Half-Life 3.
I understood that reference
Nice
If anything, they will make more gold and dust rich events, and hand out more free stuff. Why wasn't that an option? I doubt they will change the dust/gold values.
The main issue will alwyas be retaining the playerbase rather than competing CCGs. If people stop playing and paying, they will take actions to keep us around.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
I can't wait for the time when people complain about the price of a tier 1 deck in Artifact. It will definitely be more expensive then Hearthstone for sure since it is a open economy. I suppose Valve main objective is earning money by charging commission in the market rather than by selling card packs.
Wizards of the Coast is making MTG:A the same model as hearthstone, because even they know that a pure tcg simulation is a fucking stupid idea.
Anger is the punishment we give ourselves for someone else's mistake.
hearthstone > artifact
MTG:A >>> artifact
artifact a shit
Let's compare side-by-side
Hearthstone - Free to play
Artifact - $20.00
Hearthstone - 50g - 180g per day (if you complete all your wins, plus your quest - not counting arena runs). Also offer's reduced prices for bulk purchasing of packs not exceeding $1.50/pack
Artifact - $2/pack
Hearthstone - no card trading
Artifact - card trading
Hearthstone - deck sharing
Artifact - deck sharing
Hearthstone - 9 playable decks to start, plus additional quests to unlock more, tavern brawl for a free pack every week.
Artifact - 2 playable decks to start.
Hearthstone - large e-sports participation
Artifact - no e-sports participation at this point.
Sorry, but artifact doesn't even come close to where Hearthstone is at. Even the purchasing of packs is considerably better than Artifact. In fact, the only people I've heard considering going to Artifact are the ones who complain about Hearthstone being "unfair" the most. Otherwise its a general positive attitude towards the game. This expansion has seen more criticism than most, but overall Hearthstone is still a powerhouse compared to other online tcg's.
The Lich King
What's the point of trading if everything is so cheap and easy to get? I highly doubt that's how it's going to pan out in the end.
It'll definitely siphon off a bit of HS's player base, but you're high if you think the marketing team will directly change proces as a result