And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
They have to announce some key legendaries and epics just to hype it up, but every single card? Why? Why do we need to know about pack filler? Let there be SOME surprise like "oh hey what is this thing I just opened" instead of "aw man that's the shitty one I saw online" over and over.
Lol. Blizzard/Hearthstone has to let people know what they are paying for. Otherwise, they would be in trouble.
It is beyond stupid to me that they release every single card prior to the launch. It kills every bit of suspense. They have to announce some key legendaries and epics just to hype it up, but every single card? Why? Why do we need to know about pack filler? Let there be SOME surprise like "oh hey what is this thing I just opened" instead of "aw man that's the shitty one I saw online" over and over.
Lol, beyond stupid huh ?
Blizzard/Hearthstone has to let people know what they are paying for. Otherwise, they would be in trouble.
And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
My dude chillax! Businesses are manipulating the masses for thousands of years! Basicly were all manipulators from the moment we were born and learnt that we get the milk the moment we cry. It’s human nature, the other half of the coin is that we get to play a pretty fun game in wich we now (thanks to the stream)can get the feeling wich decks will rule the meta the first few weeks. This will lead some people into making mistakes in crafting decks but hey! Life is full of risks
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Experimental/hardcore rogue player.If you have any questions, comments, etc about rogues Contact me!
And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
My dude chillax! Businesses are manipulating the masses for thousands of years! Basicly were all manipulators from the moment we were born and learnt that we get the milk the moment we cry. It’s human nature, the other half of the coin is that we get to play a pretty fun game in wich we now (thanks to the stream)can get the feeling wich decks will rule the meta the first few weeks. This will lead some people into making mistakes in crafting decks but hey! Life is full of risks
I understand where you're coming from. You might want to understand where I come from: not what is, but what could, what should, what can be better, what is the right thing to do: better balance, raise the floor, more diversity, harder win conditions.....
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
My dude chillax! Businesses are manipulating the masses for thousands of years! Basicly were all manipulators from the moment we were born and learnt that we get the milk the moment we cry. It’s human nature, the other half of the coin is that we get to play a pretty fun game in wich we now (thanks to the stream)can get the feeling wich decks will rule the meta the first few weeks. This will lead some people into making mistakes in crafting decks but hey! Life is full of risks
I understand where you're coming from. You might want to understand where I come from: not what is, but what could, what should, what can be better, what is the right thing to do: better balance, raise the floor, more diversity, harder win conditions.....
It seems to me that you have two things to do.
1) quit hearthstone, this terrible, manipulative, poorly balanced cash grab of a game, together with all its forums full of mind controlled fan boys
2) start your own, perfectly balanced yet more diverse, hard to win yet exceptionally fun (and possibly entirely free to play?) game to lead the misguided masses out of they misguided appreciation of Hearthstone and into the perfect utopia you know can exist.
Guys really?! Is that a real problem? I saw some streams and it was cool for me, brainstorming myself when I hit the pack opening, check some potential. I think its good. It enhances me cause wanna be a better deckbuilder of my own collection. Who cares about that some Ppl insta netdeck?! The game is always evolving. The real problem is some of us qq-ing everything about what we dont like. Play something else then. I dont really understand why anybody opens a topic like that. #goodoldtimeseverythingwasbetter meh
And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
My dude chillax! Businesses are manipulating the masses for thousands of years! Basicly were all manipulators from the moment we were born and learnt that we get the milk the moment we cry. It’s human nature, the other half of the coin is that we get to play a pretty fun game in wich we now (thanks to the stream)can get the feeling wich decks will rule the meta the first few weeks. This will lead some people into making mistakes in crafting decks but hey! Life is full of risks
I understand where you're coming from. You might want to understand where I come from: not what is, but what could, what should, what can be better, what is the right thing to do: better balance, raise the floor, more diversity, harder win conditions.....
I do think I understand a little bit where you’re coming from. My advise would be in this discussion but also in life. Strife for goals and happiness. Striving for fairness is a journey that will never end. The closest thing to achieve fairness is a self-sacrificing life style. For now in hearthstone terms. The way to enjoy this game is by playing it competetivly (excuse my english). By trying to win in tournaments you will approach hearthstone in a different way. You block out it’s flaws because you’re only interested in the goal. The road to the goal and eventually achieving it both generate happiness.
I think that’s how hearthstone is meant to be played; either casually playing it or play it as an esport. Again excuse me for my bad grammar.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Experimental/hardcore rogue player.If you have any questions, comments, etc about rogues Contact me!
And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
My dude chillax! Businesses are manipulating the masses for thousands of years! Basicly were all manipulators from the moment we were born and learnt that we get the milk the moment we cry. It’s human nature, the other half of the coin is that we get to play a pretty fun game in wich we now (thanks to the stream)can get the feeling wich decks will rule the meta the first few weeks. This will lead some people into making mistakes in crafting decks but hey! Life is full of risks
I understand where you're coming from. You might want to understand where I come from: not what is, but what could, what should, what can be better, what is the right thing to do: better balance, raise the floor, more diversity, harder win conditions.....
It seems to me that you have two things to do.
1) quit hearthstone, this terrible, manipulative, poorly balanced cash grab of a game, together with all its forums full of mind controlled fan boys
2) start your own, perfectly balanced yet more diverse, hard to win yet exceptionally fun (and possibly entirely free to play?) game to lead the misguided masses out of they misguided appreciation of Hearthstone and into the perfect utopia you know can exist.
HS should and is for everyone, not just for the fanboy who is cleverly milked as he willfully chooses to be debased by mindless winfixes.
Yeah I hate it as well, wish they wouldn't do it. Much more fun to see streamers anticipating the release with the same tension as us, instead of already be able to play it while we can't.
And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
My dude chillax! Businesses are manipulating the masses for thousands of years! Basicly were all manipulators from the moment we were born and learnt that we get the milk the moment we cry. It’s human nature, the other half of the coin is that we get to play a pretty fun game in wich we now (thanks to the stream)can get the feeling wich decks will rule the meta the first few weeks. This will lead some people into making mistakes in crafting decks but hey! Life is full of risks
I understand where you're coming from. You might want to understand where I come from: not what is, but what could, what should, what can be better, what is the right thing to do: better balance, raise the floor, more diversity, harder win conditions.....
I do think I understand a little bit where you’re coming from. My advise would be in this discussion but also in life. Strife for goals and happiness. Striving for fairness is a journey that will never end. The closest thing to achieve fairness is a self-sacrificing life style. For now in hearthstone terms. The way to enjoy this game is by playing it competetivly (excuse my english). By trying to win in tournaments you will approach hearthstone in a different way. You block out it’s flaws because you’re only interested in the goal. The road to the goal and eventually achieving it both generate happiness.
I think that’s how hearthstone is meant to be played; either casually playing it or play it as an esport. Again excuse me for my bad grammar.
How HS is meant to be played is an open discussion. For now, it seems, according to Blizzard, HS is played according to the principle of maximization of pack selling. On the other hand the position is hold that HS is a strategy game of skill. Those two don't match. Something got to give.
Outside of HS. You've noticed what profit maximization has done to the financial system in 2008. Praying on the lowest and darkest urges of human existence (get rich as fast as possible; in HS: win as fast as possible) crashed the system. Regulation of opposites remains key. That's why Europe has a more regulated market than in US. Happiness is balance, not scorched tactics.
How HS is to be played is a choice. If the Devs were to be replaced, fresh blood, new perspectives, you would see a complete different competitive scene. Cards are currently designed for a specific group of people which I call the fanboy: demanding, low skill, aggressive, railroaded archetypes, easy win fixes. For long that is given. As I've mentioned elsewhere: HS should be for everyone, not just for that particular easy win fix, mindless loving blood type. Intellectual discrimination as a result.
In society this is comparable to the dominant culture, calling the shots. But culture is heterogenous. I can't discriminate minorities, albeit that is what I shouldn't be doing. TL;DR: life is a choice, not a given.
Your english is not that bad.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
Well, from what I've seen from the streams, Zoolock and Bomb Warrior will domiante the first days. If you want to play a new deck to experiment and/or see some new decks, go play Wild Casual. It always works fine for me. But please, don't netdeck best deck and go crush people's fun.
I don't really care about the meta or blabla There's just something clean and cool about everyone getting access to the new stuff on the same day I don't like early access type stuff for almost anything
And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
My dude chillax! Businesses are manipulating the masses for thousands of years! Basicly were all manipulators from the moment we were born and learnt that we get the milk the moment we cry. It’s human nature, the other half of the coin is that we get to play a pretty fun game in wich we now (thanks to the stream)can get the feeling wich decks will rule the meta the first few weeks. This will lead some people into making mistakes in crafting decks but hey! Life is full of risks
I understand where you're coming from. You might want to understand where I come from: not what is, but what could, what should, what can be better, what is the right thing to do: better balance, raise the floor, more diversity, harder win conditions.....
I do think I understand a little bit where you’re coming from. My advise would be in this discussion but also in life. Strife for goals and happiness. Striving for fairness is a journey that will never end. The closest thing to achieve fairness is a self-sacrificing life style. For now in hearthstone terms. The way to enjoy this game is by playing it competetivly (excuse my english). By trying to win in tournaments you will approach hearthstone in a different way. You block out it’s flaws because you’re only interested in the goal. The road to the goal and eventually achieving it both generate happiness.
I think that’s how hearthstone is meant to be played; either casually playing it or play it as an esport. Again excuse me for my bad grammar.
How HS is meant to be played is an open discussion. For now, it seems, according to Blizzard, HS is played according to the principle of maximization of pack selling. On the other hand the position is hold that HS is a strategy game of skill. Those two don't match. Something got to give.
Outside of HS. You've noticed what profit maximization has done to the financial system in 2008. Praying on the lowest and darkest urges of human existence (get rich as fast as possible; in HS: win as fast as possible) crashed the system. Regulation of opposites remains key. That's why Europe has a more regulated market than in US. Happiness is balance, not scorched tactics.
How HS is to be played is a choice. If the Devs were to be replaced, fresh blood, new perspectives, you would see a complete different competitive scene. Cards are currently designed for a specific group of people which I call the fanboy: demanding, low skill, aggressive, railroaded archetypes, easy win fixes. For long that is given. As I've mentioned elsewhere: HS should be for everyone, not just for that particular easy win fix, mindless loving blood type. Intellectual discrimination as a result.
In society this is comparable to the dominant culture, calling the shots. But culture is heterogenous. I can't discriminate minorities, albeit that is what I shouldn't be doing. TL;DR: life is a choice, not a given.
Your english is not that bad.
I don't think your comparison between Hearthstone and the financial crisis of 2008 quite holds up. In Hearthstone a full collection does not guarantee you an easy cruise to legend, neither does netdecking per se. You still need to play the games. Granted, a full collection gives you more choices but, considering the relative low number of core cards per expansion, just throwing $$$ at the game is not going to give you a huge edge over resourceful and strategic FTP players.
Also, the individual consumer behavior has little impact on the future development of the game. The collective behavior does. To get a little bit back on topic, things like the streamer exclusive access to the new expansion is just one of many marketing tools. It might convince some people to pay some extra for the pre-order, not for others. I doubt that such events will change anyone's decision from buying to not buying, so for Blizz it's a low risk, potentially high reward kind of thing.
To talk about who the game is for and how it is to be played, there are no rights and wrongs. To Blizzard it matters that people play the game at all, and clearly they do want to keep ftp and low spending players on it as much as the whales who spend hundreds of dollar on each expansion. They know that they will never be able to convert a majority of their base into whales, but the longer someone plays the more likely it becomes they will spend at least some money on it. How they spend their time in the game is secondary. Even those who never spend anything on HS are welcomed, because they do increase exposure, introducing the game to new people who might or might not spend.
Even if you were to replace the entire dev team those aspects wouldn't change. They would still have to make enough money to sustain themselves. Obviously having to earn for the Activision shareholders too makes it more complicated, but that's the world we live in, like it or not.
Hearthstone is not supposed to be for everyone. It is just supposed to be for players who enjoy those kind of games. Within Hearthstone players can choose how to spend their time, and there is no right or wrong. The challenge for Blizzard is to deliver a product that is entertaining enough for all types of players, and even if you have issues with how they do it, enough people like it (enough) to keep playing. This has nothing to do with fanboyism. It is easily possible to like certain aspects of the game and dislike others, as long as the sum total of all the little things adds up to keep you playing all is good, and once that changes you quit. Easy as that. Pondering what could be and complaining what should be is not going to change anything, as long as the balance at large remains on the "keep playing" side.
Blizzard has no obligation to deliver the perfect product for everyone in general nor for anyone in particular. It is their game, their choice how to balance, market, monetize. I'm sure they appreciate feedback, but they have no obligation to implement all and everything of it, not to mention that that would be impossible. As long as they have a game that enough people find satisfying and makes enough money to cover their financial expenses, all is fine.
I know this thread is about the streamer pre-release ruining Day 1 exploration and biasing the meta, but I honestly wonder if the new deck helper algorithms are going to cause more groupthink than the streamers/hsreplays of the world in the long run.
For example, every time I've tried to use the new helper to compare my off-meta Hunter decks using Hakkar, Azalina Soulthief, Griftah, etc. to what they'd suggest I just get back the netdeck Midrange Hunter or DR Hunter with my terrible cards thrown in (even when I start with like 10 cards that synergize with what I want to pull off).
So I feel like the new helper may be the bigger threat to a diversified meta game and I'm curious how it's going to act on Day 1 of RoS. Will the helper include every card with equal probability (i.e. uniform prior distribution)? Or have they been tracking stats on all of their internal matches + the streamer ones so it will already be suggesting cards with higher win rates? Or is there some other process they've seeded the helper with for Day 1 like the new Deck Recipes? Depending on the information the helper has on Day 1 and how quickly it updates based on new information I fear we may see less diversity than previous expansions :(
It is beyond stupid to me that they release every single card prior to the launch. It kills every bit of suspense. They have to announce some key legendaries and epics just to hype it up, but every single card? Why? Why do we need to know about pack filler? Let there be SOME surprise like "oh hey what is this thing I just opened" instead of "aw man that's the shitty one I saw online" over and over.
Lol, beyond stupid huh ?
Blizzard/Hearthstone has to let people know what they are paying for. Otherwise, they would be in trouble.
Since when do you have to disclose every single possibility of what they're getting? They are buying an expansion to a game. In WOW, or elderscrolls games, do they tell you every single boss detailing every single ability they'll have and every single new item they are adding and where it can be found? No, they hold things back to build excitement. They can't just keep everything a mystery which is why i said they have to announce key new high value cards, but are you really saying you wouldn't buy it if they didn't tell you every single card? Would you really go up in arms demanding a refund if your pack filler was a 3/3 instead of a 3/4?
Because Hearthstone is losing shares. People are not streaming anymore because the game is becoming bored. So for some dark reason Blizzard though that was better to give early access to streamers instead of design a cool expansion.
I mean, people are still clearly interested in Hearthstone as Kripp had the highest viewed stream on Twitch, beating second place by more than 10k viewers.
Also, a response to the OP, most people seemed to be playing Whizbang decks or decks that had obvious synergy with a quick glance. The decks they were playing will be heavily refined until they're actually good. And the Hearthstone community is not just a few people, watching something is far different than playing it yourself.
It is irrelevant what Kripp does. Hearthstone is loosing a lot of viewed and this is a fact. Because the game is becoming boring. It is always the same and Blizz instead of adding new contents reprint old stuffs. And by the way :). Who cares about Whizbang decks. It is not a card like this that make the game less boring.
I am talking about the general view of the game. In Italy we already have articles that declares Hearthstone dead.
I actually think it makes sense for them to reward streamers who have been loyal when several others have moved on to other games. (And on that tangent, am I the only one who thinks Auto Chess is dreadfully boring to watch?)
As I understand it, this was a special event where the streamers had to be physically present at Blizz HQ, and they were not using their own accounts. it's not like their personal accounts were unlocked for unlimited early access.
So if you don't like having the mystery and experimentation spoiled, don't watch. The decks they were given were far from optimized -- they were probably just recipes we will all get anyway. No one was experimenting. We, the viewers, were merely being given a chance to see some of the interactions.
If they hadn't offered this opportunity to streamers, they probably would have had Blizz employees demoing the decks. The streams and videos would still be out there, and it would still be your choice whether you want to watch or not. If you think they aren't going to do their best to hype the game at this critical time, you're very, VERY out of touch with the way the real world works.
P.S. I suspect that anyone who pluralizes "forum" as "fora" will never be happy with the way anything is done, ever.
Streamers are not loyal to this game, they are loyal to the money. A lot of them seem to actively hate hearthstone and if they ever find a game that gets them as much viewers, they will drop it and never look back.
And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
How HS is meant to be played is an open discussion. For now, it seems, according to Blizzard, HS is played according to the principle of maximization of pack selling. On the other hand the position is hold that HS is a strategy game of skill. Those two don't match. Something got to give.
Outside of HS. You've noticed what profit maximization has done to the financial system in 2008. Praying on the lowest and darkest urges of human existence (get rich as fast as possible; in HS: win as fast as possible) crashed the system. Regulation of opposites remains key. That's why Europe has a more regulated market than in US. Happiness is balance, not scorched tactics.
How HS is to be played is a choice. If the Devs were to be replaced, fresh blood, new perspectives, you would see a complete different competitive scene. Cards are currently designed for a specific group of people which I call the fanboy: demanding, low skill, aggressive, railroaded archetypes, easy win fixes. For long that is given. As I've mentioned elsewhere: HS should be for everyone, not just for that particular easy win fix, mindless loving blood type. Intellectual discrimination as a result.
In society this is comparable to the dominant culture, calling the shots. But culture is heterogenous. I can't discriminate minorities, albeit that is what I shouldn't be doing. TL;DR: life is a choice, not a given.
Your english is not that bad.
To talk about who the game is for and how it is to be played, there are no rights and wrongs. To Blizzard it matters that people play the game at all, and clearly they do want to keep ftp and low spending players on it as much as the whales who spend hundreds of dollar on each expansion. They know that they will never be able to convert a majority of their base into whales, but the longer someone plays the more likely it becomes they will spend at least some money on it. How they spend their time in the game is secondary. Even those who never spend anything on HS are welcomed, because they do increase exposure, introducing the game to new people who might or might not spend.
Even if you were to replace the entire dev team those aspects wouldn't change. They would still have to make enough money to sustain themselves. Obviously having to earn for the Activision shareholders too makes it more complicated, but that's the world we live in, like it or not.
Hearthstone is not supposed to be for everyone. It is just supposed to be for players who enjoy those kind of games. Within Hearthstone players can choose how to spend their time, and there is no right or wrong. The challenge for Blizzard is to deliver a product that is entertaining enough for all types of players, and even if you have issues with how they do it, enough people like it (enough) to keep playing. This has nothing to do with fanboyism. It is easily possible to like certain aspects of the game and dislike others, as long as the sum total of all the little things adds up to keep you playing all is good, and once that changes you quit. Easy as that. Pondering what could be and complaining what should be is not going to change anything, as long as the balance at large remains on the "keep playing" side.
Blizzard has no obligation to deliver the perfect product for everyone in general nor for anyone in particular. It is their game, their choice how to balance, market, monetize. I'm sure they appreciate feedback, but they have no obligation to implement all and everything of it, not to mention that that would be impossible. As long as they have a game that enough people find satisfying and makes enough money to cover their financial expenses, all is fine.
Pretty dart comment here. Let me take them on one by one.
To talk about who the game is for and how it is to be played, there are no rights and wrongs. To Blizzard it matters that people play the game at all, and clearly they do want to keep ftp and low spending players on it as much as the whales who spend hundreds of dollar on each expansion. They know that they will never be able to convert a majority of their base into whales, but the longer someone plays the more likely it becomes they will spend at least some money on it. How they spend their time in the game is secondary. Even those who never spend anything on HS are welcomed, because they do increase exposure, introducing the game to new people who might or might not spend.
It is not about how much money spend big by who. It is about the largest group buying the most packs. Card design is focus on that group. F2P are just a subgroup hopefully morphing into the fanboy later. Unfortunately card design for the largest group buying the most packs has a detrimental effect on the skill floor. The result is for everyone to see and smell.
Even if you were to replace the entire dev team those aspects wouldn't change. They would still have to make enough money to sustain themselves. Obviously having to earn for the Activision shareholders too makes it more complicated, but that's the world we live in, like it or not.
There we disagree firmly. Card design is a choice, not an inevitability. You can choose to raise the skill floor and still make tons of money. This 'that's the world we live in, like it or not.' is just an ideology, a point of view if you will. It is not an argument.
Hearthstone is not supposed to be for everyone. It is just supposed to be for players who enjoy those kind of games. Within Hearthstone players can choose how to spend their time, and there is no right or wrong. The challenge for Blizzard is to deliver a product that is entertaining enough for all types of players, and even if you have issues with how they do it, enough people like it (enough) to keep playing. This has nothing to do with fanboyism. It is easily possible to like certain aspects of the game and dislike others, as long as the sum total of all the little things adds up to keep you playing all is good, and once that changes you quit. Easy as that. Pondering what could be and complaining what should be is not going to change anything, as long as the balance at large remains on the "keep playing" side.
Well once again disagree, but now vehemently. Hearthstone is not suppose to be for everyone? Where do you get that? Where's the declaration of Blizzard making such a statement? ..'entertaining for all types of players ' contradicts 'Hearthstone is not for everyone.' You need to file better arguments. Bandwagon commentators tend to explain reality as a given, not as a social myth that is candidate for change. You argue like North-Korean trying to convince you that his society is on the 'keep playing' side and 'the sum total of all little things....is good.' He certainly will try to convince you that nothing should be changed and everything is fine. You know better (I hope).
Blizzard has no obligation to deliver the perfect product for everyone in general nor for anyone in particular. It is their game, their choice how to balance, market, monetize. I'm sure they appreciate feedback, but they have no obligation to implement all and everything of it, not to mention that that would be impossible. As long as they have a game that enough people find satisfying and makes enough money to cover their financial expenses, all is fine.
Indeed Blizzard has no obligation, but when you see an elderly lady trying to cross the street, you have no obligation to assist her. But you see that and something else stirs in you to step up to the challenge: it is the right thing to do to help her if you can. I know it is a hard thing to understand since your way of reasoning is plain simple realism. No obligation but still you help because it is the right thing to do, not because it's obligatory. Likewise I argue with HS because things can and should be better, not to defend the status quo.
Your way of reasoning is all too familiar. It's Blizzards game, they can do whatever they want. And if people go along with it everything is fine. Yeah right. If a group starts to commit suicide your realism (it is their choice, so everything is fine) won't help.
And in the end it is not about this specific stream but using streamers through mutual benefits, manipulating the masses by spreading low skill floored win conditions, signaling that it is perfectly acceptable to attain winrush through pre-chewed mindlessness. As usual everything with Blizzard is about marketing politics and mass psychology. Not about skill.
And it is working pretty well I might add, looking at the amount of pro-Blizzard bandwagon pundits on fora like these.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
Lol, beyond stupid huh ?
Blizzard/Hearthstone has to let people know what they are paying for. Otherwise, they would be in trouble.
My dude chillax! Businesses are manipulating the masses for thousands of years! Basicly were all manipulators from the moment we were born and learnt that we get the milk the moment we cry. It’s human nature, the other half of the coin is that we get to play a pretty fun game in wich we now (thanks to the stream)can get the feeling wich decks will rule the meta the first few weeks. This will lead some people into making mistakes in crafting decks but hey! Life is full of risks
Experimental/hardcore rogue player.If you have any questions, comments, etc about rogues Contact me!
I understand where you're coming from. You might want to understand where I come from: not what is, but what could, what should, what can be better, what is the right thing to do: better balance, raise the floor, more diversity, harder win conditions.....
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
It seems to me that you have two things to do.
1) quit hearthstone, this terrible, manipulative, poorly balanced cash grab of a game, together with all its forums full of mind controlled fan boys
2) start your own, perfectly balanced yet more diverse, hard to win yet exceptionally fun (and possibly entirely free to play?) game to lead the misguided masses out of they misguided appreciation of Hearthstone and into the perfect utopia you know can exist.
Guys really?! Is that a real problem? I saw some streams and it was cool for me, brainstorming myself when I hit the pack opening, check some potential. I think its good. It enhances me cause wanna be a better deckbuilder of my own collection. Who cares about that some Ppl insta netdeck?! The game is always evolving. The real problem is some of us qq-ing everything about what we dont like. Play something else then. I dont really understand why anybody opens a topic like that. #goodoldtimeseverythingwasbetter meh
I do think I understand a little bit where you’re coming from. My advise would be in this discussion but also in life. Strife for goals and happiness. Striving for fairness is a journey that will never end. The closest thing to achieve fairness is a self-sacrificing life style. For now in hearthstone terms. The way to enjoy this game is by playing it competetivly (excuse my english). By trying to win in tournaments you will approach hearthstone in a different way. You block out it’s flaws because you’re only interested in the goal. The road to the goal and eventually achieving it both generate happiness.
I think that’s how hearthstone is meant to be played; either casually playing it or play it as an esport. Again excuse me for my bad grammar.
Experimental/hardcore rogue player.If you have any questions, comments, etc about rogues Contact me!
HS should and is for everyone, not just for the fanboy who is cleverly milked as he willfully chooses to be debased by mindless winfixes.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
Yeah I hate it as well, wish they wouldn't do it. Much more fun to see streamers anticipating the release with the same tension as us, instead of already be able to play it while we can't.
How HS is meant to be played is an open discussion. For now, it seems, according to Blizzard, HS is played according to the principle of maximization of pack selling. On the other hand the position is hold that HS is a strategy game of skill. Those two don't match. Something got to give.
Outside of HS. You've noticed what profit maximization has done to the financial system in 2008. Praying on the lowest and darkest urges of human existence (get rich as fast as possible; in HS: win as fast as possible) crashed the system. Regulation of opposites remains key. That's why Europe has a more regulated market than in US. Happiness is balance, not scorched tactics.
How HS is to be played is a choice. If the Devs were to be replaced, fresh blood, new perspectives, you would see a complete different competitive scene. Cards are currently designed for a specific group of people which I call the fanboy: demanding, low skill, aggressive, railroaded archetypes, easy win fixes. For long that is given. As I've mentioned elsewhere: HS should be for everyone, not just for that particular easy win fix, mindless loving blood type. Intellectual discrimination as a result.
In society this is comparable to the dominant culture, calling the shots. But culture is heterogenous. I can't discriminate minorities, albeit that is what I shouldn't be doing. TL;DR: life is a choice, not a given.
Your english is not that bad.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
Well, from what I've seen from the streams, Zoolock and Bomb Warrior will domiante the first days. If you want to play a new deck to experiment and/or see some new decks, go play Wild Casual. It always works fine for me. But please, don't netdeck best deck and go crush people's fun.
My fanmade expansion! (Click on pack to open packs with my cards)
I don't really care about the meta or blabla
There's just something clean and cool about everyone getting access to the new stuff on the same day
I don't like early access type stuff for almost anything
I don't think your comparison between Hearthstone and the financial crisis of 2008 quite holds up. In Hearthstone a full collection does not guarantee you an easy cruise to legend, neither does netdecking per se. You still need to play the games. Granted, a full collection gives you more choices but, considering the relative low number of core cards per expansion, just throwing $$$ at the game is not going to give you a huge edge over resourceful and strategic FTP players.
Also, the individual consumer behavior has little impact on the future development of the game. The collective behavior does. To get a little bit back on topic, things like the streamer exclusive access to the new expansion is just one of many marketing tools. It might convince some people to pay some extra for the pre-order, not for others. I doubt that such events will change anyone's decision from buying to not buying, so for Blizz it's a low risk, potentially high reward kind of thing.
To talk about who the game is for and how it is to be played, there are no rights and wrongs. To Blizzard it matters that people play the game at all, and clearly they do want to keep ftp and low spending players on it as much as the whales who spend hundreds of dollar on each expansion. They know that they will never be able to convert a majority of their base into whales, but the longer someone plays the more likely it becomes they will spend at least some money on it. How they spend their time in the game is secondary. Even those who never spend anything on HS are welcomed, because they do increase exposure, introducing the game to new people who might or might not spend.
Even if you were to replace the entire dev team those aspects wouldn't change. They would still have to make enough money to sustain themselves. Obviously having to earn for the Activision shareholders too makes it more complicated, but that's the world we live in, like it or not.
Hearthstone is not supposed to be for everyone. It is just supposed to be for players who enjoy those kind of games. Within Hearthstone players can choose how to spend their time, and there is no right or wrong. The challenge for Blizzard is to deliver a product that is entertaining enough for all types of players, and even if you have issues with how they do it, enough people like it (enough) to keep playing. This has nothing to do with fanboyism. It is easily possible to like certain aspects of the game and dislike others, as long as the sum total of all the little things adds up to keep you playing all is good, and once that changes you quit. Easy as that. Pondering what could be and complaining what should be is not going to change anything, as long as the balance at large remains on the "keep playing" side.
Blizzard has no obligation to deliver the perfect product for everyone in general nor for anyone in particular. It is their game, their choice how to balance, market, monetize. I'm sure they appreciate feedback, but they have no obligation to implement all and everything of it, not to mention that that would be impossible. As long as they have a game that enough people find satisfying and makes enough money to cover their financial expenses, all is fine.
I know this thread is about the streamer pre-release ruining Day 1 exploration and biasing the meta, but I honestly wonder if the new deck helper algorithms are going to cause more groupthink than the streamers/hsreplays of the world in the long run.
For example, every time I've tried to use the new helper to compare my off-meta Hunter decks using Hakkar, Azalina Soulthief, Griftah, etc. to what they'd suggest I just get back the netdeck Midrange Hunter or DR Hunter with my terrible cards thrown in (even when I start with like 10 cards that synergize with what I want to pull off).
So I feel like the new helper may be the bigger threat to a diversified meta game and I'm curious how it's going to act on Day 1 of RoS. Will the helper include every card with equal probability (i.e. uniform prior distribution)? Or have they been tracking stats on all of their internal matches + the streamer ones so it will already be suggesting cards with higher win rates? Or is there some other process they've seeded the helper with for Day 1 like the new Deck Recipes? Depending on the information the helper has on Day 1 and how quickly it updates based on new information I fear we may see less diversity than previous expansions :(
Praise Rang.
Since when do you have to disclose every single possibility of what they're getting? They are buying an expansion to a game. In WOW, or elderscrolls games, do they tell you every single boss detailing every single ability they'll have and every single new item they are adding and where it can be found? No, they hold things back to build excitement. They can't just keep everything a mystery which is why i said they have to announce key new high value cards, but are you really saying you wouldn't buy it if they didn't tell you every single card? Would you really go up in arms demanding a refund if your pack filler was a 3/3 instead of a 3/4?
It is irrelevant what Kripp does. Hearthstone is loosing a lot of viewed and this is a fact. Because the game is becoming boring. It is always the same and Blizz instead of adding new contents reprint old stuffs. And by the way :). Who cares about Whizbang decks. It is not a card like this that make the game less boring.
I am talking about the general view of the game. In Italy we already have articles that declares Hearthstone dead.
https://qdss.it/hearthstone-e-morto/
https://www.esportsmag.it/un-sondaggio-di-blizzard-preoccupa-la-community-hearthstone-e-a-rischio/
https://it.videogamer.com/2018/12/20/hearthstone-e-morto/
It will not be Whizbang and not even Kripp that will save the game.
Blizzard had the opportunity to save the game with this expansion, they failed miserably, you will see.
I actually think it makes sense for them to reward streamers who have been loyal when several others have moved on to other games. (And on that tangent, am I the only one who thinks Auto Chess is dreadfully boring to watch?)
As I understand it, this was a special event where the streamers had to be physically present at Blizz HQ, and they were not using their own accounts. it's not like their personal accounts were unlocked for unlimited early access.
So if you don't like having the mystery and experimentation spoiled, don't watch. The decks they were given were far from optimized -- they were probably just recipes we will all get anyway. No one was experimenting. We, the viewers, were merely being given a chance to see some of the interactions.
If they hadn't offered this opportunity to streamers, they probably would have had Blizz employees demoing the decks. The streams and videos would still be out there, and it would still be your choice whether you want to watch or not. If you think they aren't going to do their best to hype the game at this critical time, you're very, VERY out of touch with the way the real world works.
P.S. I suspect that anyone who pluralizes "forum" as "fora" will never be happy with the way anything is done, ever.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Streamers are not loyal to this game, they are loyal to the money. A lot of them seem to actively hate hearthstone and if they ever find a game that gets them as much viewers, they will drop it and never look back.
Pretty dart comment here. Let me take them on one by one.
It is not about how much money spend big by who. It is about the largest group buying the most packs. Card design is focus on that group. F2P are just a subgroup hopefully morphing into the fanboy later. Unfortunately card design for the largest group buying the most packs has a detrimental effect on the skill floor. The result is for everyone to see and smell.
There we disagree firmly. Card design is a choice, not an inevitability. You can choose to raise the skill floor and still make tons of money. This 'that's the world we live in, like it or not.' is just an ideology, a point of view if you will. It is not an argument.
Well once again disagree, but now vehemently. Hearthstone is not suppose to be for everyone? Where do you get that? Where's the declaration of Blizzard making such a statement? ..'entertaining for all types of players ' contradicts 'Hearthstone is not for everyone.' You need to file better arguments. Bandwagon commentators tend to explain reality as a given, not as a social myth that is candidate for change. You argue like North-Korean trying to convince you that his society is on the 'keep playing' side and 'the sum total of all little things....is good.' He certainly will try to convince you that nothing should be changed and everything is fine. You know better (I hope).
Indeed Blizzard has no obligation, but when you see an elderly lady trying to cross the street, you have no obligation to assist her. But you see that and something else stirs in you to step up to the challenge: it is the right thing to do to help her if you can. I know it is a hard thing to understand since your way of reasoning is plain simple realism. No obligation but still you help because it is the right thing to do, not because it's obligatory. Likewise I argue with HS because things can and should be better, not to defend the status quo.
Your way of reasoning is all too familiar. It's Blizzards game, they can do whatever they want. And if people go along with it everything is fine. Yeah right. If a group starts to commit suicide your realism (it is their choice, so everything is fine) won't help.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.