As expensive as it is to unlock everything in Battlefront 2 , i´m pretty sure that to get everything in Hearthstone you would have to spend an equal or even greater amount of money and time. I suggest we start a boycott and simply stop buying packs with real money until Blizzard changes their predatory practices in what is supposed to be a game for teens-kids. Join me if you feel the same.
A casual F2p such as me earns about 80k gold per expansion. That includes missing dailies now and then. These 80 packs still get me everything I need to build a competive deck and experiment with new cards. Hearthstone is still F2p friendly enough in my opinion.
Haven't spent any money on the game since Karazhan and even then it was just because it was an adventure. Blizzard will have to do a serious overhaul if they expect players to spend serious money!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Experienced Deckbuilder, Legend Player, Wild Expert, TCG Veteran and Contributing Author toWildHS & Vicious Syndicate. Any and all support is greatly appreciated as it helps me make further quality content. 🐺 ➣Twitter ➣Decks ➣Patreon
The people of Reddit are being total babies about the pricing in the game. Yes it expensive compared to other video games, but one thing people keep forgetting IT’S A CARD GAME the price is nowhere near as close as it is in magic or yugio or even fricking Pokémon to be competitive. I’m able to play competitively on this game and I’ve only spent around $100 that is nowhere near the amount people spend on other card games.
The reason why swbf2 was such a big deal wasn’t necessary the loot boxes it was that you had to pay $60 for a game with a ftp model
It's not about being able to play competitive is about stopping or at least mitigating practices that encourage gabmbling in children's games such as lootboxes.
The "gambling" aspect of HS is there because it's a digital ccg. It's meant to be there and it's a couple part of the genre. Removing that aspect of HS makes it less exciting. You can remove the gambling aspect of games like Battlefront 2 and it won't hurt the game.
It's free to play. In a couple months you can have even the most expensive competitive deck. You just can't get every card.
What you are arguing they do is abandon the F2P model and instead pay real money for a specific set of cards. Then every expansion will be more real money.
Now what EA did was put up a rediculous time sink or pay wall for items that were previously free. This was on top of a price tag to buy the game.
You gave a false equilivance, understand what will happen and the options that must still maintain a profitable system for Blizzard.
It's not about being able to play competitive is about stopping or at least mitigating practices that encourage gabmbling in children's games such as lootboxes.
Actually, the competitive part is far more of an issue, even a whiff of pay-to-win is a big design problem that puts off more casual players in favour of spending 'whales'. In the long run it can alienate a mass market player base in preference of a small number of highly-profitable players.
Hearthstone doesn't really have that problem, most people with minimal spend can build highly competitive decks.
Plus in Europe at least BF2 has a PEGI 16 rating so the old/tired 'won't someone think of the children' argument is pretty weak.
I'm editor of the UK's trade magazine for the games industry, so you could argue I'm pro-industry but I still think there's clear lines between BF2 and HS.
Would it hurt them too much if theygave you every card in an expansion for 80 bucks? im not against them making money im against predatory practices that encourage people to spend ludicrous amounts of money in games
It's not about being able to play competitive is about stopping or at least mitigating practices that encourage gabmbling in children's games such as lootboxes.
Actually, the competitive part is far more of an issue, even a whiff of pay-to-win is a big design problem that puts off more casual players in favour of spending 'whales'. In the long run it can alienate a mass market player base in preference of a small number of highly-profitable players.
Hearthstone doesn't really have that problem, most people with minimal spend can build highly competitive decks.
Plus in Europe at least BF2 has a PEGI 16 rating so the old/tired 'won't someone think of the children' argument is pretty weak.
I'm editor of the UK's trade magazine for the games industry, so you could argue I'm pro-industry but I still think there's clear lines between BF2 and HS.
Because age ratings always stop people below the required age from buying that product. Look at Hs's art, dialogues and general style, its clearly meant to be marketed towards children or at least young teens.
As expensive as it is to unlock everything in Battlefront 2 , i´m pretty sure that to get everything in Hearthstone you would have to spend an equal or even greater amount of money and time. I suggest we start a boycott and simply stop buying packs with real money until Blizzard changes their predatory practices in what is supposed to be a game for teens-kids. Join me if you feel the same.
Why do you feel that you should be able to get everything without great effort, time, and/or money?
Being able to play the game vs being able to play competitively vs being able to have everything are all very different things.
It's not about being able to play competitive is about stopping or at least mitigating practices that encourage gabmbling in children's games such as lootboxes.
Actually, the competitive part is far more of an issue, even a whiff of pay-to-win is a big design problem that puts off more casual players in favour of spending 'whales'. In the long run it can alienate a mass market player base in preference of a small number of highly-profitable players.
Hearthstone doesn't really have that problem, most people with minimal spend can build highly competitive decks.
Plus in Europe at least BF2 has a PEGI 16 rating so the old/tired 'won't someone think of the children' argument is pretty weak.
I'm editor of the UK's trade magazine for the games industry, so you could argue I'm pro-industry but I still think there's clear lines between BF2 and HS.
Because age ratings always stop people below the required age from buying that product. Look at Hs's art, dialogues and general style, its clearly meant to be marketed towards children or at least young teens.
I don't see that at all to be honest, it's light and fun in the main, but it's inline with all Blizzard's stuff. And it appeals to me and I'm on my forties.
Yes, games get into younger hands, but parents who let their kids run riot with their credit cards really should know better. Please let's move away from this old-fashioned Eighties-Nineties 'games are for kids' style moralising.
It's not about being able to play competitive is about stopping or at least mitigating practices that encourage gabmbling in children's games such as lootboxes.
Actually, the competitive part is far more of an issue, even a whiff of pay-to-win is a big design problem that puts off more casual players in favour of spending 'whales'. In the long run it can alienate a mass market player base in preference of a small number of highly-profitable players.
Hearthstone doesn't really have that problem, most people with minimal spend can build highly competitive decks.
Plus in Europe at least BF2 has a PEGI 16 rating so the old/tired 'won't someone think of the children' argument is pretty weak.
I'm editor of the UK's trade magazine for the games industry, so you could argue I'm pro-industry but I still think there's clear lines between BF2 and HS.
Because age ratings always stop people below the required age from buying that product. Look at Hs's art, dialogues and general style, its clearly meant to be marketed towards children or at least young teens.
Oh? Pray tell, what exactly is 'adult' art, dialogue, and style supposed to look like then in a f2p game?
As expensive as it is to unlock everything in Battlefront 2 , i´m pretty sure that to get everything in Hearthstone you would have to spend an equal or even greater amount of money and time. I suggest we start a boycott and simply stop buying packs with real money until Blizzard changes their predatory practices in what is supposed to be a game for teens-kids. Join me if you feel the same.
Why do you feel that you should be able to get everything without great effort, time, and/or money?
Being able to play the game vs being able to play competitively vs being able to have everything are all very different things.
when did I say that i wanted to get everything without doing anything? why do people only read the title of a thread before commenting? , the discussion has advanced!
the bad thing about Battlefront 2 was, you payed a full retail price 60$ or 80$ (early access i think) and yet you had to pay more to unlock overpowered things (with no downside like in battlefield games), of course you could grind to unlock them, but BF2 is not "free to play" and yet they made it "pay to win" with non-cosmetic loot boxes , Hearthstone is free to play and a Trading card game wich is "pay to win" to some degree, the Trading card game part changes the dinamic of the "loot boxes" as card packs. Of course if you are of those players whom dust their "bad cards" to craft meta decks and when the meta changes, you dischenchant your old meta decks and craft the new shiny deck, you loose 3/4 of value and so on. with every expansion heartshtone is becoming more expensive to the meta players mentioned before and new comers
Would it hurt them too much if theygave you every card in an expansion for 80 bucks? im not against them making money im against predatory practices that encourage people to spend ludicrous amounts of money in games
Yes, it would ruin the complete ccg factor of the game. As a f2p you have enough options to earn gold and get the cards you want. In the worst case you can make up to 51.100 gold per year (100 + 40 * 365), That are 511 packs + 52 packs from tavern brawl + X packs from promotions.
Most of the players, enjoy playing to get more cards and the excitement of pack opening, and this would take it completely away. It would not hurt blizzard, but destroy the whole game.
And have you ever seen a working ccg, where you can buy complete sets for just 80 bucks? (except for ebay)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to discuss my predictions or suggestions with me personaly?
Contact me via battletag: Athanor#1658 [EU]
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
As expensive as it is to unlock everything in Battlefront 2 , i´m pretty sure that to get everything in Hearthstone you would have to spend an equal or even greater amount of money and time. I suggest we start a boycott and simply stop buying packs with real money until Blizzard changes their predatory practices in what is supposed to be a game for teens-kids. Join me if you feel the same.
A casual F2p such as me earns about 80k gold per expansion. That includes missing dailies now and then. These 80 packs still get me everything I need to build a competive deck and experiment with new cards. Hearthstone is still F2p friendly enough in my opinion.
Haven't spent any money on the game since Karazhan and even then it was just because it was an adventure. Blizzard will have to do a serious overhaul if they expect players to spend serious money!
Yeah, i also want a supercar. Damn those predatory luxury car makers.
I own a city car, bought with savings, that can carry me wherever i want, as long as there is a road. Or nearly so.
But yeah, i'll boycott and stop using my good car at all, because i want a supercar for the same money. Or less.
The people of Reddit are being total babies about the pricing in the game. Yes it expensive compared to other video games, but one thing people keep forgetting IT’S A CARD GAME the price is nowhere near as close as it is in magic or yugio or even fricking Pokémon to be competitive. I’m able to play competitively on this game and I’ve only spent around $100 that is nowhere near the amount people spend on other card games.
The reason why swbf2 was such a big deal wasn’t necessary the loot boxes it was that you had to pay $60 for a game with a ftp model
It's not about being able to play competitive is about stopping or at least mitigating practices that encourage gabmbling in children's games such as lootboxes.
try to get everything in gta 5 online xD
The "gambling" aspect of HS is there because it's a digital ccg. It's meant to be there and it's a couple part of the genre. Removing that aspect of HS makes it less exciting. You can remove the gambling aspect of games like Battlefront 2 and it won't hurt the game.
No. They need to make money to make content. Don’t like it? Go FTP or don’t play it. Easy. Everyone else can decide for themselves.
Quote fail, see below.
It's free to play. In a couple months you can have even the most expensive competitive deck. You just can't get every card.
What you are arguing they do is abandon the F2P model and instead pay real money for a specific set of cards. Then every expansion will be more real money.
Now what EA did was put up a rediculous time sink or pay wall for items that were previously free. This was on top of a price tag to buy the game.
You gave a false equilivance, understand what will happen and the options that must still maintain a profitable system for Blizzard.
Actually, the competitive part is far more of an issue, even a whiff of pay-to-win is a big design problem that puts off more casual players in favour of spending 'whales'. In the long run it can alienate a mass market player base in preference of a small number of highly-profitable players.
Hearthstone doesn't really have that problem, most people with minimal spend can build highly competitive decks.
Plus in Europe at least BF2 has a PEGI 16 rating so the old/tired 'won't someone think of the children' argument is pretty weak.
I'm editor of the UK's trade magazine for the games industry, so you could argue I'm pro-industry but I still think there's clear lines between BF2 and HS.
Would it hurt them too much if theygave you every card in an expansion for 80 bucks? im not against them making money im against predatory practices that encourage people to spend ludicrous amounts of money in games
the bad thing about Battlefront 2 was, you payed a full retail price 60$ or 80$ (early access i think) and yet you had to pay more to unlock overpowered things (with no downside like in battlefield games), of course you could grind to unlock them, but BF2 is not "free to play" and yet they made it "pay to win" with non-cosmetic loot boxes , Hearthstone is free to play and a Trading card game wich is "pay to win" to some degree, the Trading card game part changes the dinamic of the "loot boxes" as card packs. Of course if you are of those players whom dust their "bad cards" to craft meta decks and when the meta changes, you dischenchant your old meta decks and craft the new shiny deck, you loose 3/4 of value and so on. with every expansion heartshtone is becoming more expensive to the meta players mentioned before and new comers
Want to discuss my predictions or suggestions with me personaly?
Contact me via battletag: Athanor#1658 [EU]