The monetization in Mercenaries is identical to that in Hearthstone in every possible way.
Not in every. Mercenaries seem to have an advantage of - if you play Mercenary X you get more stuff for this exact Mercenary X. Or you can grind specific missions to level up a certain Mercenary even faster. It makes it much friendly to players who want to focus on a certain team than what Hearthstone offers to guys loyal to 1 or 2 classes.
I don't know how it would be possible to replicate those things in Hearthstone. I will note, however, that grinding a specific class in HS will unlock golden Core cards and portraits for you. That's kind of similar.
You shouldn't be pre-ordering video games anyway. It's bad for the industry.
You can make the argument that pre-ordering a hearthstone expansion is fair to you, the consumer, as you have a solid idea of the content you are paying for, and therefore the value to you.
No one has played mercenaries yet. How many of us thought Duels would be be fun and turned out to be disappointed? Mercenaries might disappoint you in the same way. Blizzard, as a dev, is motivated to care for the product prior to release if it's not ordered in it's hundreds of thousands when it's still vapour. Take the power back as a consumer, try it on release, and if you enjoy then maybe consider buying a few packs, not the other way around.
You shouldn't be pre-ordering video games anyway. It's bad for the industry.
You can make the argument that pre-ordering a hearthstone expansion is fair to you, the consumer, as you have a solid idea of the content you are paying for, and therefore the value to you.
No one has played mercenaries yet. How many of us thought Duels would be be fun and turned out to be disappointed? Mercenaries might disappoint you in the same way. Blizzard, as a dev, is motivated to care for the product prior to release if it's not ordered in it's hundreds of thousands when it's still vapour. Take the power back as a consumer, try it on release, and if you enjoy then maybe consider buying a few packs, not the other way around.
Most of the people hating on Mercenaries aren't even thinking about pre-ordering. I guarantee you that at least 80% of the people calling Mercenaries a trainwreck and saying it's the end of Blizzard are free players who think they will not get enough free stuff out of it.
For the record, Duels is reasonably fun now, which just goes to show that Blizzard does make an effort to correct its mistakes, even in a game mode they did not directly monetize.
As for this particular pre-order, the main reason not to do it isn't about "bad for the industry" (a battle that has already been lost, by the way -- you might as well tell people not to shop at Amazon or Walmart, for all the good it will do). The main reason the Mercenaries pre-order isn't great is that Blizzard has added so little extra value to the bundles. You get exactly as many packs in each pre-order as you would if you waited until after launch to spend the same amount of money. The only difference is a single free portrait in each bundle. That's pretty skimpy from a value perspective.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"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
Most of the people hating on Mercenaries aren't even thinking about pre-ordering. I guarantee you that at least 80% of the people calling Mercenaries a trainwreck and saying it's the end of Blizzard are free players who think they will not get enough free stuff out of it.
What about us, the 20% ? I really don't care about free stuff, it's not my point at all.
Earlier you were saying Mercs monetization is the exact same as hearthstone monetization so it's weird that we complain about one but not the other. Well I don't think it's weird at all. Mercs monetization isn't replacing hearthstone monetization, it's just adding up, so in reality monetization in Hearthstone just got twice as bad, especially since both game modes are linked by the same resource, gold.
At what point is it enough and at what point is it too much ? Battlegrounds monetization was enough, Mercs monetization is too much. How many more monetized game modes are they going to at ? When does it stop being about Hearthstone ? Cause that's the point, you're still launching HEARTHSTONE when you click the button, when I click on Hearthstone in the battlenet client I expect to arrive in the Hearthstone card game, I don't expect to arrive in another client with 3+ different games with a unique monetization when it comes to real money, but shared monetization when it comes to in game money. And when I spend money in hearthstone it's the same, I don't want my expansion pre order money to go to other game modes, I'm paying for hearthstone because I want to play hearthstone, so I reached a point where i'm relunctant to spend ANY more money, cause it's not invested where it should be by the devs. It's just not what hearthstone is about and it's not fair in my opinion that they are using the Hearthstone UI to make more cash grabs unrelated to hearthstone. Just keep grabing more of our cash with more Hearthstone content we would all be fine with that. That's what they did with the mini-sets in between expansions, more cash grab, but it's 100% hearthstone, so there was no outrage.
Cause that's the point, you're still launching HEARTHSTONE when you click the button, when I click on Hearthstone in the battlenet client I expect to arrive in the Hearthstone card game, I don't expect to arrive in another client with 3+ different games with a unique monetization when it comes to real money, but shared monetization when it comes to in game money. And when I spend money in hearthstone it's the same, I don't want my expansion pre order money to go to other game modes, I'm paying for hearthstone because I want to play hearthstone, so I reached a point where i'm relunctant to spend ANY more money, cause it's not invested where it should be by the devs. It's just not what hearthstone is about and it's not fair in my opinion that they are using the Hearthstone UI to make more cash grabs unrelated to hearthstone. Just keep grabing more of our cash with more Hearthstone content we would all be fine with that. That's what they did with the mini-sets in between expansions, more cash grab, but it's 100% hearthstone, so there was no outrage.
1) Launcher within launcher is, at most, inconvenience for any rational person. If I'll need to press 1 more button to get to Hearthstone, so what?
2) Being able to spend (and gain) in-game resources from one game in another is a positive thing. It is just better for players than if those in-game resources weren't shared. It takes away an option to spend stuff from one game(mode) in another. If battleground will be moved to another client tomorrow - no one will gain anything. Many players will lose. Personal example: I enjoy playing battlegrounds occasionally, a few matches per week, no more. Should they move it away to another client I'll lose that XP and quest progress and even the convenience of having only one client installed. I may not even bother installing Battlegrounds client
3) You keep repeating the nonsense that money that you pay for Hearthstone packs go to Hearthstone devs. No, money go not only to Hearthstone devs, money go to WOW devs, unreleased games dev, an old lady cleaning Blizzard offices, Activision's CEO's hookers, etc. It is how capitalism works. People who got your money decide how to spend (formerly) your money. And believe me, spending your pack money on other games(game modes) is not the worst use of money by Activision. It is your choice to stop giving them money but considering how you "left the thread", It is safe to assume that you will keep paying.
Cause that's the point, you're still launching HEARTHSTONE when you click the button, when I click on Hearthstone in the battlenet client I expect to arrive in the Hearthstone card game, I don't expect to arrive in another client with 3+ different games with a unique monetization when it comes to real money, but shared monetization when it comes to in game money. And when I spend money in hearthstone it's the same, I don't want my expansion pre order money to go to other game modes, I'm paying for hearthstone because I want to play hearthstone, so I reached a point where i'm relunctant to spend ANY more money, cause it's not invested where it should be by the devs. It's just not what hearthstone is about and it's not fair in my opinion that they are using the Hearthstone UI to make more cash grabs unrelated to hearthstone. Just keep grabing more of our cash with more Hearthstone content we would all be fine with that. That's what they did with the mini-sets in between expansions, more cash grab, but it's 100% hearthstone, so there was no outrage.
3) You keep repeating the nonsense that money that you pay for Hearthstone packs go to Hearthstone devs. No, money go not only to Hearthstone devs, money go to WOW devs, unreleased games dev, an old lady cleaning Blizzard offices, Activision's CEO's hookers, etc. It is how capitalism works. People who got your money decide how to spend (formerly) your money.
Its true, but its not about where your money goes, its about what conclusion Blizzard makes from sells.
If mercenaries will make a lot of money, they will develop it further. If it will fail financially (which I doubt, but what if) then they will try to improve the monetization, make changes to get money from it and if nothing works, they will abandon it.
The thing that WONT happen is if the playerbase are boycotting mercenaries sales, they will think that they should spend more resources on the main game instead.
Seems quite monetized but not disgustingly so at first glance but too early to call. I only read the three blogs, didn't watch vids. I don't get gatcha but many people seem to hold them in low regard, if this counts as a gatcha.
I like the notion that you get matched by power primarily, not by MMR, so people who don't invest much time or money into this mode won't just be feed for the sharks. Though that does open the window for newbs being prayed on by smurfs, but they will probably patch that by having them start in wood league, maybe that is already the case. OTOH it probably considers power to just be "hero level, maybe upgrades" not hero rarity, and if legends end up being crucial as they often are in regular HS that can be how they fuck you.
If it is not too onerous to progress without paying through the single player component I will probably be fine with it. Again I think it is best to play it by feel, try it out and see if it works for you.
I will say it is weird that they are adding what are mostly separate games to HS, turning HS itself into just another mode within what used to be its own game.
But I disagree with the argument that this means attention will necessarily be shunted away from HS the cardgame. Like by the logic that money made in one game must go to that game would mean companies could never start a new IP, because it would never get funded with all that money going into the development of the games that earned it in proportion to how much they earned (and salaries/profit ofc). That is clearly silly isn't it.
It is only roughly true because you want to invest more into what brings a better return. The more money a game makes the bigger the odds it will see a lot of content. It is why HS has a bunch of new stuff, why WoW is slowing down, why Starcraft went to sleep and why HotS was put to sleep. As long as regular HS keeps racking in the money it will see a lot of content I think.
Yep, anyone who does not like blizzards buggy trash corporate swill is a bad person. The defenders can't defend the terrible products anymore, so now they go ad hominem against the players who point out the truth....
Man they must of replaced the old community managers with some minimum wage mouth breathers, at least shadow could make an argument.
Preach. People seem to not understand those they say are complaining and crying are fans. Fans who are sick of the direction the games been going. This thread maker thinks it costs more money to make this card game than the big games do. I laughed hysterically. Mass hysterically. The resources put into the game aren't what a lot of us want.
What about us, the 20% ? I really don't care about free stuff, it's not my point at all.
Earlier you were saying Mercs monetization is the exact same as hearthstone monetization so it's weird that we complain about one but not the other. Well I don't think it's weird at all. Mercs monetization isn't replacing hearthstone monetization, it's just adding up, so in reality monetization in Hearthstone just got twice as bad, especially since both game modes are linked by the same resource, gold.
At what point is it enough and at what point is it too much ? Battlegrounds monetization was enough, Mercs monetization is too much. How many more monetized game modes are they going to at ? When does it stop being about Hearthstone ? Cause that's the point, you're still launching HEARTHSTONE when you click the button, when I click on Hearthstone in the battlenet client I expect to arrive in the Hearthstone card game, I don't expect to arrive in another client with 3+ different games with a unique monetization when it comes to real money, but shared monetization when it comes to in game money. And when I spend money in hearthstone it's the same, I don't want my expansion pre order money to go to other game modes, I'm paying for hearthstone because I want to play hearthstone, so I reached a point where i'm relunctant to spend ANY more money, cause it's not invested where it should be by the devs. It's just not what hearthstone is about and it's not fair in my opinion that they are using the Hearthstone UI to make more cash grabs unrelated to hearthstone. Just keep grabing more of our cash with more Hearthstone content we would all be fine with that. That's what they did with the mini-sets in between expansions, more cash grab, but it's 100% hearthstone, so there was no outrage.
What you are saying is that Frito-Lay should never make new flavors of Doritos or develop entirely new kinds of chips because you already like regular Doritos and already spend money on regular Doritos and do not want to buy another kind of chip, and it's just not fair because all those different chips appear in the same aisle of the store!
SO DON'T BY THE OTHER CHIPS. Asking the company not to create new things and sell them is preposterous.
If mercenaries will make a lot of money, they will develop it further. If it will fail financially (which I doubt, but what if) then they will try to improve the monetization, make changes to get money from it and if nothing works, they will abandon it.
The thing that WONT happen is if the playerbase are boycotting mercenaries sales, they will think that they should spend more resources on the main game instead.
Hearthstone gets quite a lot of content. 3 expansions. 3 mini-expansions. Free solo content that even gives a pack. Duels were released not so much time ago. Do you want even more? Where is Blizzard's profit in this? How exactly will Blizzard profit from a tournament mode? Will it justify the cost of development (included the loss of not have gamedevs working on something else?)
Remember that duels are quite a failure. How many players purchased packs\crafted cards just for duels? This number is above zero, but I think it gave a very marginal profit. They don't even bother to release new heroes\rotate sets for it. What will Arena upgrade or a new limited mode give? What kind of profit will 2v2 mode give?
If Mercenaries will be a failure, they'll stop developing it further, true but there is no guarantee that they will follow your wishes and do what you want them to do - redirect people doing mercs on regular Hearthstone. They may opt for another in-Hearthstone client project. They may opt to reduce the team and move devs to other projects
If mercenaries will make a lot of money, they will develop it further. If it will fail financially (which I doubt, but what if) then they will try to improve the monetization, make changes to get money from it and if nothing works, they will abandon it.
The thing that WONT happen is if the playerbase are boycotting mercenaries sales, they will think that they should spend more resources on the main game instead.
Hearthstone gets quite a lot of content. 3 expansions. 3 mini-expansions. Free solo content that even gives a pack. Duels were released not so much time ago. Do you want even more? Where is Blizzard's profit in this? How exactly will Blizzard profit from a tournament mode? Will it justify the cost of development (included the loss of not have gamedevs working on something else?)
Remember that duels are quite a failure. How many players purchased packs\crafted cards just for duels? This number is above zero, but I think it gave a very marginal profit. They don't even bother to release new heroes\rotate sets for it. What will Arena upgrade or a new limited mode give? What kind of profit will 2v2 mode give?
If Mercenaries will be a failure, they'll stop developing it further, true but there is no guarantee that they will follow your wishes and do what you want them to do - redirect people doing mercs on regular Hearthstone. They may opt for another in-Hearthstone client project. They may opt to reduce the team and move devs to other projects
I think you misunderstood me, maybe you should read my post again.
What about us, the 20% ? I really don't care about free stuff, it's not my point at all.
Earlier you were saying Mercs monetization is the exact same as hearthstone monetization so it's weird that we complain about one but not the other. Well I don't think it's weird at all. Mercs monetization isn't replacing hearthstone monetization, it's just adding up, so in reality monetization in Hearthstone just got twice as bad, especially since both game modes are linked by the same resource, gold.
At what point is it enough and at what point is it too much ? Battlegrounds monetization was enough, Mercs monetization is too much. How many more monetized game modes are they going to at ? When does it stop being about Hearthstone ? Cause that's the point, you're still launching HEARTHSTONE when you click the button, when I click on Hearthstone in the battlenet client I expect to arrive in the Hearthstone card game, I don't expect to arrive in another client with 3+ different games with a unique monetization when it comes to real money, but shared monetization when it comes to in game money. And when I spend money in hearthstone it's the same, I don't want my expansion pre order money to go to other game modes, I'm paying for hearthstone because I want to play hearthstone, so I reached a point where i'm relunctant to spend ANY more money, cause it's not invested where it should be by the devs. It's just not what hearthstone is about and it's not fair in my opinion that they are using the Hearthstone UI to make more cash grabs unrelated to hearthstone. Just keep grabing more of our cash with more Hearthstone content we would all be fine with that. That's what they did with the mini-sets in between expansions, more cash grab, but it's 100% hearthstone, so there was no outrage.
What you are saying is that Frito-Lay should never make new flavors of Doritos or develop entirely new kinds of chips because you already like regular Doritos and already spend money on regular Doritos and do not want to buy another kind of chip, and it's just not fair because all those different chips appear in the same aisle of the store!
SO DON'T BY THE OTHER CHIPS. Asking the company not to create new things and sell them is preposterous.
Stop twisting my words and making weird comparisons it's getting old.
What I am saying is that Frito lay shouldn't sell a new chips brand at full price as an option inside existing doritos packs already sold at full price because the existing doritos are more popular so they think they'll make more money with the new chips if they are disguised under the existing doritos package, because that is F-ing stupid and bad business. Just make new chips with their own brand and name and monetization.
What I ask the company is if they want to create new games, makes new games in the battlenet client. There is absolutely no rational reason to makes new games in Hearthstone instead, unless it's to extort more money from compulsive and whales players that enjoy Hearthstone a lot and wish it gets better with their money. Battlenet exists for this very reason, it's a platform for unique Blizzard games, Mercs is a unique Blizzard game. Why they chose to add more monetization in Hearthstone is strictly related to money, which yes is fine because it's business, but it is obvious it is going to hurt the card game hearthstone more than help it, exactly like battlegrounds did.
There is also absolutely no reason to separate packs and monetization from hearthstone and mercs, if they are going with the shared gold resource, it makes no sense at all, unless, again, it's for extorting cheap money without effort from huge Hearthstone fans, that won't ever be rewarded for it because the money is getting more and more diluted between different games inside hearthstone.
Anyway, it seems both the devs and a huge portion of the community already abandonned the idea that hearthstone is a game in and of itself, there's no arguing against that, what can you do.
Let me ask you this. How would you feel if WoW and Overwatch came directly into the Hearthstone client ? The games and the monetizations that come with them. Would that make sense to you ? Would you feel ok spending money in hearthstone at that point ? How many games and ways to spend money inside hearthstone client does it take for you to say enough ? I guess you will answer my the usual "b-b-but its the same with battlenet client, it's just one more click now" then how about a game client inside a game client inside a game client ? Again, how long until this is enough ? How many click does it take to access hearthstone after you've clicked on Hearthstone before this is enough ? Why not just stick to 1 client for all blizzard games and stop shady shitty stuff that will punish both Blizzard and the community for basically no reason ?
Battlegrounds and Mercenaries need to get the hell out of Hearthstone client.
3) You keep repeating the nonsense that money that you pay for Hearthstone packs go to Hearthstone devs. No, money go not only to Hearthstone devs, money go to WOW devs, unreleased games dev, an old lady cleaning Blizzard offices, Activision's CEO's hookers, etc.
The more money spent on Hearthstone, the more incentive they have to develop more stuff for hearthstone. So yes, money that I pay for hearthstone packs goes to hearthstone devs. Maybe no in a direct enough way that your brain can comprehend, but it does happen.
The more games available within the hearthstone client, the less money will be used to develop each individual games.
We used to have 1 great game in Hearthstone. We now have 3 shit games. Probably more to come.
We used to have 1 great game in Hearthstone. We now have 3 shit games. Probably more to come.
Was something deleted from Hearthstone in recent years or what? When and how it became shitty? Please don't start "meta is crap", it is always crap for someone
Let me ask you this. How would you feel if WoW and Overwatch came directly into the Hearthstone client ? The games and the monetizations that come with them. Would that make sense to you ? Would you feel ok spending money in hearthstone at that point ? How many games and ways to spend money inside hearthstone client does it takes for you to say enough ?
This would bloat the client and make updates gigantic (and frequent) but my hdd and fast internet can handle this. it is a minor inconvenience at most. Other than that it would change nothing for me as long as I can pay the same price to play Hearthstone. Why should I be not OK? Name one real negative effect from having games I don't play in Hearthstone client instead of battle.net launcher? Nonsense like "you pay for other games" doesn't count. When I buy a pack that I can use to play Hearthstone I pay to play Hearthstone.
We used to have 1 great game in Hearthstone. We now have 3 shit games. Probably more to come.
Was something deleted from Hearthstone in recent years or what? When and how it became shitty?
When battlegrounds launched and the community's hype and money and Hearthstone's dev resources were divided between two games. (in before someone tells me out of nowhere that Hearthstone staff tripled since Battlegrounds and Mercs were planned, it didn't, so don't) Nothing was deleted. Everything was diluted. That's when. Things just got worse with mercs.
Since when is adding more stuff a positive thing by default ?
Please don't start "meta is crap", it is always crap for someone
I don't even know what you mean or how it's related to this discussion at all + I like current meta, at least more than your average player
Not in every. Mercenaries seem to have an advantage of - if you play Mercenary X you get more stuff for this exact Mercenary X. Or you can grind specific missions to level up a certain Mercenary even faster. It makes it much friendly to players who want to focus on a certain team than what Hearthstone offers to guys loyal to 1 or 2 classes.
I don't know how it would be possible to replicate those things in Hearthstone. I will note, however, that grinding a specific class in HS will unlock golden Core cards and portraits for you. That's kind of similar.
"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
You shouldn't be pre-ordering video games anyway. It's bad for the industry.
You can make the argument that pre-ordering a hearthstone expansion is fair to you, the consumer, as you have a solid idea of the content you are paying for, and therefore the value to you.
No one has played mercenaries yet. How many of us thought Duels would be be fun and turned out to be disappointed? Mercenaries might disappoint you in the same way. Blizzard, as a dev, is motivated to care for the product prior to release if it's not ordered in it's hundreds of thousands when it's still vapour. Take the power back as a consumer, try it on release, and if you enjoy then maybe consider buying a few packs, not the other way around.
Most of the people hating on Mercenaries aren't even thinking about pre-ordering. I guarantee you that at least 80% of the people calling Mercenaries a trainwreck and saying it's the end of Blizzard are free players who think they will not get enough free stuff out of it.
For the record, Duels is reasonably fun now, which just goes to show that Blizzard does make an effort to correct its mistakes, even in a game mode they did not directly monetize.
As for this particular pre-order, the main reason not to do it isn't about "bad for the industry" (a battle that has already been lost, by the way -- you might as well tell people not to shop at Amazon or Walmart, for all the good it will do). The main reason the Mercenaries pre-order isn't great is that Blizzard has added so little extra value to the bundles. You get exactly as many packs in each pre-order as you would if you waited until after launch to spend the same amount of money. The only difference is a single free portrait in each bundle. That's pretty skimpy from a value perspective.
"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
What about us, the 20% ? I really don't care about free stuff, it's not my point at all.
Earlier you were saying Mercs monetization is the exact same as hearthstone monetization so it's weird that we complain about one but not the other. Well I don't think it's weird at all. Mercs monetization isn't replacing hearthstone monetization, it's just adding up, so in reality monetization in Hearthstone just got twice as bad, especially since both game modes are linked by the same resource, gold.
At what point is it enough and at what point is it too much ? Battlegrounds monetization was enough, Mercs monetization is too much. How many more monetized game modes are they going to at ? When does it stop being about Hearthstone ? Cause that's the point, you're still launching HEARTHSTONE when you click the button, when I click on Hearthstone in the battlenet client I expect to arrive in the Hearthstone card game, I don't expect to arrive in another client with 3+ different games with a unique monetization when it comes to real money, but shared monetization when it comes to in game money. And when I spend money in hearthstone it's the same, I don't want my expansion pre order money to go to other game modes, I'm paying for hearthstone because I want to play hearthstone, so I reached a point where i'm relunctant to spend ANY more money, cause it's not invested where it should be by the devs. It's just not what hearthstone is about and it's not fair in my opinion that they are using the Hearthstone UI to make more cash grabs unrelated to hearthstone. Just keep grabing more of our cash with more Hearthstone content we would all be fine with that. That's what they did with the mini-sets in between expansions, more cash grab, but it's 100% hearthstone, so there was no outrage.
1) Launcher within launcher is, at most, inconvenience for any rational person. If I'll need to press 1 more button to get to Hearthstone, so what?
2) Being able to spend (and gain) in-game resources from one game in another is a positive thing. It is just better for players than if those in-game resources weren't shared. It takes away an option to spend stuff from one game(mode) in another. If battleground will be moved to another client tomorrow - no one will gain anything. Many players will lose. Personal example: I enjoy playing battlegrounds occasionally, a few matches per week, no more. Should they move it away to another client I'll lose that XP and quest progress and even the convenience of having only one client installed. I may not even bother installing Battlegrounds client
3) You keep repeating the nonsense that money that you pay for Hearthstone packs go to Hearthstone devs. No, money go not only to Hearthstone devs, money go to WOW devs, unreleased games dev, an old lady cleaning Blizzard offices, Activision's CEO's hookers, etc. It is how capitalism works. People who got your money decide how to spend (formerly) your money. And believe me, spending your pack money on other games(game modes) is not the worst use of money by Activision. It is your choice to stop giving them money but considering how you "left the thread", It is safe to assume that you will keep paying.
Its true, but its not about where your money goes, its about what conclusion Blizzard makes from sells.
If mercenaries will make a lot of money, they will develop it further. If it will fail financially (which I doubt, but what if) then they will try to improve the monetization, make changes to get money from it and if nothing works, they will abandon it.
The thing that WONT happen is if the playerbase are boycotting mercenaries sales, they will think that they should spend more resources on the main game instead.
Seems quite monetized but not disgustingly so at first glance but too early to call. I only read the three blogs, didn't watch vids. I don't get gatcha but many people seem to hold them in low regard, if this counts as a gatcha.
I like the notion that you get matched by power primarily, not by MMR, so people who don't invest much time or money into this mode won't just be feed for the sharks. Though that does open the window for newbs being prayed on by smurfs, but they will probably patch that by having them start in wood league, maybe that is already the case. OTOH it probably considers power to just be "hero level, maybe upgrades" not hero rarity, and if legends end up being crucial as they often are in regular HS that can be how they fuck you.
If it is not too onerous to progress without paying through the single player component I will probably be fine with it. Again I think it is best to play it by feel, try it out and see if it works for you.
I will say it is weird that they are adding what are mostly separate games to HS, turning HS itself into just another mode within what used to be its own game.
But I disagree with the argument that this means attention will necessarily be shunted away from HS the cardgame. Like by the logic that money made in one game must go to that game would mean companies could never start a new IP, because it would never get funded with all that money going into the development of the games that earned it in proportion to how much they earned (and salaries/profit ofc). That is clearly silly isn't it.
It is only roughly true because you want to invest more into what brings a better return. The more money a game makes the bigger the odds it will see a lot of content. It is why HS has a bunch of new stuff, why WoW is slowing down, why Starcraft went to sleep and why HotS was put to sleep. As long as regular HS keeps racking in the money it will see a lot of content I think.
Preach. People seem to not understand those they say are complaining and crying are fans. Fans who are sick of the direction the games been going. This thread maker thinks it costs more money to make this card game than the big games do. I laughed hysterically. Mass hysterically. The resources put into the game aren't what a lot of us want.
What you are saying is that Frito-Lay should never make new flavors of Doritos or develop entirely new kinds of chips because you already like regular Doritos and already spend money on regular Doritos and do not want to buy another kind of chip, and it's just not fair because all those different chips appear in the same aisle of the store!
SO DON'T BY THE OTHER CHIPS. Asking the company not to create new things and sell them is preposterous.
"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
A mindreader have we
And i don’t even play Paladins
Isn't Mercenaries being in the Hearthstone client conceptually equal to Hearthstone being in the Battle.net client? Why is it a problem?
And i don’t even play Paladins
Hearthstone gets quite a lot of content. 3 expansions. 3 mini-expansions. Free solo content that even gives a pack. Duels were released not so much time ago. Do you want even more? Where is Blizzard's profit in this? How exactly will Blizzard profit from a tournament mode? Will it justify the cost of development (included the loss of not have gamedevs working on something else?)
Remember that duels are quite a failure. How many players purchased packs\crafted cards just for duels? This number is above zero, but I think it gave a very marginal profit. They don't even bother to release new heroes\rotate sets for it. What will Arena upgrade or a new limited mode give? What kind of profit will 2v2 mode give?
If Mercenaries will be a failure, they'll stop developing it further, true but there is no guarantee that they will follow your wishes and do what you want them to do - redirect people doing mercs on regular Hearthstone. They may opt for another in-Hearthstone client project. They may opt to reduce the team and move devs to other projects
I think you misunderstood me, maybe you should read my post again.
Stop twisting my words and making weird comparisons it's getting old.
What I am saying is that Frito lay shouldn't sell a new chips brand at full price as an option inside existing doritos packs already sold at full price because the existing doritos are more popular so they think they'll make more money with the new chips if they are disguised under the existing doritos package, because that is F-ing stupid and bad business. Just make new chips with their own brand and name and monetization.
What I ask the company is if they want to create new games, makes new games in the battlenet client. There is absolutely no rational reason to makes new games in Hearthstone instead, unless it's to extort more money from compulsive and whales players that enjoy Hearthstone a lot and wish it gets better with their money. Battlenet exists for this very reason, it's a platform for unique Blizzard games, Mercs is a unique Blizzard game. Why they chose to add more monetization in Hearthstone is strictly related to money, which yes is fine because it's business, but it is obvious it is going to hurt the card game hearthstone more than help it, exactly like battlegrounds did.
There is also absolutely no reason to separate packs and monetization from hearthstone and mercs, if they are going with the shared gold resource, it makes no sense at all, unless, again, it's for extorting cheap money without effort from huge Hearthstone fans, that won't ever be rewarded for it because the money is getting more and more diluted between different games inside hearthstone.
Anyway, it seems both the devs and a huge portion of the community already abandonned the idea that hearthstone is a game in and of itself, there's no arguing against that, what can you do.
Let me ask you this. How would you feel if WoW and Overwatch came directly into the Hearthstone client ? The games and the monetizations that come with them. Would that make sense to you ? Would you feel ok spending money in hearthstone at that point ? How many games and ways to spend money inside hearthstone client does it take for you to say enough ? I guess you will answer my the usual "b-b-but its the same with battlenet client, it's just one more click now" then how about a game client inside a game client inside a game client ? Again, how long until this is enough ? How many click does it take to access hearthstone after you've clicked on Hearthstone before this is enough ? Why not just stick to 1 client for all blizzard games and stop shady shitty stuff that will punish both Blizzard and the community for basically no reason ?
Battlegrounds and Mercenaries need to get the hell out of Hearthstone client.
The more money spent on Hearthstone, the more incentive they have to develop more stuff for hearthstone. So yes, money that I pay for hearthstone packs goes to hearthstone devs. Maybe no in a direct enough way that your brain can comprehend, but it does happen.
The more games available within the hearthstone client, the less money will be used to develop each individual games.
We used to have 1 great game in Hearthstone. We now have 3 shit games. Probably more to come.
I have a feeling that this post might just age like milk once the mode releases.
Was something deleted from Hearthstone in recent years or what? When and how it became shitty? Please don't start "meta is crap", it is always crap for someone
This would bloat the client and make updates gigantic (and frequent) but my hdd and fast internet can handle this. it is a minor inconvenience at most. Other than that it would change nothing for me as long as I can pay the same price to play Hearthstone. Why should I be not OK? Name one real negative effect from having games I don't play in Hearthstone client instead of battle.net launcher? Nonsense like "you pay for other games" doesn't count. When I buy a pack that I can use to play Hearthstone I pay to play Hearthstone.
When battlegrounds launched and the community's hype and money and Hearthstone's dev resources were divided between two games. (in before someone tells me out of nowhere that Hearthstone staff tripled since Battlegrounds and Mercs were planned, it didn't, so don't) Nothing was deleted. Everything was diluted. That's when. Things just got worse with mercs.
Since when is adding more stuff a positive thing by default ?
I don't even know what you mean or how it's related to this discussion at all + I like current meta, at least more than your average player