• 6

    posted a message on The experience of playing HS sometimes....
    Quote from Anomaly98 >>

    Lovely soliloquy...but nobody cares.

    This post belongs in the salt thread.

     

     your post should not even exist,

    a guy points out problems with the game and wants to share his experience and you want to shut him down. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 14

    posted a message on Option to ban a class

    Do it in wild and priests will have 11 hour waits. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Why matchups FEEL rigged

    lol, anyone with a brain who is not shilling knows its rigged

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on We are likely to see a renerf to Raza in Renopriest in the near future!

    Further evidence that blizzard has no  clue what they are doing. i said at the time they unnerfed him that it was a stupid move. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 3

    posted a message on people who defend blizzard greed
    Quote from Shadowrisen >>

    @3nnu1

    Ok man, I was trying to have a serious conversation, but that's the second time in a row you've taken something I'm very serious about and completely misstated what I said and put words in my mouth.  There is no comparison between Hearthstone and a heroin habit, and anyone who thinks there is has never been addicted to something worse than their iPhone.

    I'm sorry you can't just read what I said and assume I said what I meant, but since you're having your own argument on both sides now, I can't really contribute.

     you keep bringing up heroin, I thought that you thought it was relevant to the discussion. 

     

    padge, your posts are not worth responding to. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on people who defend blizzard greed
    Quote from Shadowrisen >>

    So, as a heroin addict, it always amuses me when the term addiction rolls into these discussions.

    Inevitably, the analogy is made to gambling addiction, since Hearthstone is modeled after a physical card game, and we often think of poker or blackjack as the avatars of gambling as a pass time.  It's important to remember the difference between gambling addiction or any other lifestyle addiction and physical addiction to a chemical substance like a narcotic.  While BOTH types of addiction cause the classic dopamine hits in the brains of their sufferers, the "soft addictions" or "psychological addictions" to lifestyles almost exclusively are limited to psychological side effects such as anxiety and stress effects.

    Meanwhile, the physical addictions carry an extra set of side effects that go beyond the lack of enjoyment experienced and/or expected by a pattern of lifestyle behavior.  Those of us who try to break physical addictions are served up a list of horrible physical symptoms that, with surprising regularity, can be life threatening.

    I don't draw this distinction to turn around and say, "therefore soft addictions aren't real addictions".  That's not my point.  However, it is INCREDIBLY difficult for psychologists to manage to attach any meaningful criteria that differentiates an "addict" to a game like Hearthstone from a person who simply enjoys the game a lot.  Both groups of people experience dopamine increases when playing the game.  Both groups of people are targeted by the methods the OP speaks of, as well as basically any advertising or other effort to encourage people to play the game.  Some experts have hung their hat on the negative psychological symptoms to identify an addict, but how negative does the symptom have to be?  If you forget to do a week's worth of weekly quests and you commit suicide as a result, most of us would probably call that an addiction.  But of course, it's rarely if ever that extreme an example.

     

    As a person who has experienced the ups and downs of hard addiction, I am somewhat amused by the OP's question:  "does the business model HAVE TO BE based on addiction?"  I think, once you appreciate the fine line between addict and enthusiast, the answer is actually "yes".

    I don't see how it's possible to run a marketing program that doesn't leave oneself open to accusations of "exploiting" addictive behavior, while at the same time being a successful advertising effort.

     

    Just a thought from a person who has lived it.

     So the argument is that hearthstone is not bad because it is not as addictive or as expensive as heroin?  I guess the counter argument is that at least heroin isn't usually marketed to 10 year olds. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on people who defend blizzard greed
    Quote from Shadowrisen >>
    Quote from 3nnu1 >>
    Quote from Shadowrisen >>

    On the subject of $500 being a stupid amount of money to spend on a game.

    I spend $730 on chocolate milk per year (a $2 bottle per day).

    In my problem years, I spent approximately $100,000 a year on heroin.  That was while maintaining a law practice.

     

    Given those two data points, no, a game I enjoy and spend a great deal of time playing is not something on which I'm afraid to spend less than $2 a day.  But, we've already established on a previous thread that the poster who did the whole, "I thought lawyers were smart" thing is a troll thru and thru.  Btw, most lawyers are grade-A morons.  Only someone who has no concept of what it takes to be a divorce or DUI attorney would think it takes brains to just generically be a lawyer.

    No one is ever going to successfully argue how another person should spend disposable income, however.  Particularly when the amount in question is so ridiculously small.  And again, if $500 is a large yearly expense for you, I'm not talking shit to you.  I pity you.  I hope life changes for the better soon.  That's absolutely no sarcasm or puffery; I mean it.

     Even though we disagree on everything, your arguments are wonderful.  Hearthstone is reasonably priced because it compares favorably to a heroin addiction. I almost spit out my coffee on that one, cheers. 

     

    As for the runeterra gameplay. I was a pretty good competitive magic player in a former lifetime. I find the ability to interact with my opponents plays and make more decisions that affect the outcome of the game to be a good thing. Though I know some will disagree with me. It can be pretty crushing to have your combo disrupted by a freeze or counterspell (deny in runeterra). But I enjoy trying to bait out the counters and playing counters of my own. I am around 10 days in and already knocking on the door to gold playing homebrews. 

     I'm sorry I didn't get my point across by including the heroin metric.  It certainly had nothing to do with comparing the cost to a computer game.  But, if you haven't lived it, I guess that's what it looked like I was trying to do.

    My point was simply, there are lots of small things that will add up to over $500 in a year (e.g. milk), and, as a totally separate issue, I have experienced trying to keep up with a real addiction regardless of how destructive it is to my life.  $100k per year is a catastrophic expense (at least for me), and yet I somehow managed to string the money together for years.  The point is not that "Hearthstone compares favorably" with heroin.  But, my fault.  Bad writing.

    I suppose that also brings up the tendencies of folks to talk about "taking advantage of addicts" with freemium monetization methods.  That's the sort of thing that gets me spitting out coffee.

     so you don't think gambling is addictive?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Well guys, I think this is it...
    Quote from memo333 >>

    Blizz-tard will NOT change the new reward system.

    He is cool about  it.

    All the changes are to "improve" old things as rewards exp this and that but NOT about taking out tavern pass.

    Imagine that you play candycrush and you lost all your lives. You must ask for lives from your friends so you cant wait like 6 hours to try again. Now imagine that someday they charge you for getting THOSE lifes from your friends, whiche BEFORE WERE FREE as a game mechanic. thats total bs.

    candy crush is free. and U DECIDE if you buy special powerups to keep going up the trail. thats FINE. but if u are going now to charge to do SOMETHING I SHOULD DO TO PLAY THE GAME AND HAVE A FAIR GAMEPLAY...dont jerk me off.....wtf?!

    I think this fk**** bas***** planned this long ago. LETS GIVE THIS ***** a free game..so they get addicted....then when they are really high and drugged we will take that free drug away so the withdraw makes them to pay us now...to get the SAME RESULTS!

    its that the case. fk u bliz. u are just another siniester greedy video game company, where u only care abourself. this is dictatorship. the town/people doenst matter..just the guys above in power.

    While I dont get the old system back and improved or change this really **** greedy cashgrab I will NOT play your game OR BUY ANYTHING AT ALL!  ooooooooh..that HURTS BLIZ....BURN! NO MORE MONEY FOR YOU PAL! thats ALL U WANT!..OUR MONEY...but guess what b**** you will not get it from me anymore.

    My loyalty to you is WAY WAY below my expectations. AND TONS OF PLAYERS WILL DO THE SAME...so..prepare your savings because ur game is going DOWN the toilet. good luck.




     you know blizzard bought the makers of candy crush right,?  the rewards tracks in the two games are scarily similar. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 3

    posted a message on people who defend blizzard greed
    Quote from Shadowrisen >>

    On the subject of $500 being a stupid amount of money to spend on a game.

    I spend $730 on chocolate milk per year (a $2 bottle per day).

    In my problem years, I spent approximately $100,000 a year on heroin.  That was while maintaining a law practice.

     

    Given those two data points, no, a game I enjoy and spend a great deal of time playing is not something on which I'm afraid to spend less than $2 a day.  But, we've already established on a previous thread that the poster who did the whole, "I thought lawyers were smart" thing is a troll thru and thru.  Btw, most lawyers are grade-A morons.  Only someone who has no concept of what it takes to be a divorce or DUI attorney would think it takes brains to just generically be a lawyer.

    No one is ever going to successfully argue how another person should spend disposable income, however.  Particularly when the amount in question is so ridiculously small.  And again, if $500 is a large yearly expense for you, I'm not talking shit to you.  I pity you.  I hope life changes for the better soon.  That's absolutely no sarcasm or puffery; I mean it.

     Even though we disagree on everything, your arguments are wonderful.  Hearthstone is reasonably priced because it compares favorably to a heroin addiction. I almost spit out my coffee on that one, cheers. 

     

    As for the runeterra gameplay. I was a pretty good competitive magic player in a former lifetime. I find the ability to interact with my opponents plays and make more decisions that affect the outcome of the game to be a good thing. Though I know some will disagree with me. It can be pretty crushing to have your combo disrupted by a freeze or counterspell (deny in runeterra). But I enjoy trying to bait out the counters and playing counters of my own. I am around 10 days in and already knocking on the door to gold playing homebrews. 

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on people who defend blizzard greed
    Quote from Shadowrisen >>

    Since everyone ignored it last time, I'll just repost something that seems a tiny bit relevant to the discussion.

    I'm not speaking from napkin math.  I'm not building a spreadsheet.  I can look at my bank account and see every 4 months like clockwork since 2014, the expenditure to maintain a full collection in Hearthstone.  The fact that we have a new class and thus more legendaries IS relevant.  The fact that we don't have adventures and instead have a full extra expansion from packs IS relevant.

    Neither of these two facts add more to the overall expense than did duplicate protection reduce it.  It costs less money in 2020 to maintain a full collection than it did in 2015 or 2016.  There is no estimate involved in this statement.  This is pure lived experience.

    I'm sorry if this fact goes against your narrative.  That doesn't make it any less a fact.

    And if you're going to come back with "maybe you were just incredibly unlucky before duplicate protections", sure, that's a possibility.  But it would have to have happened for every single set for which it was possible to receive premature duplicates.  Yes, that's a possibility, but it's a very remote one.  Again, I'm not engaging in napkin math.  It simply has been the case that regardless of the Demon Hunter class and new sets, the overall trend is towards having to spend LESS money to maintain a full collection.

     

    None of that reaches the question of whether the game is still too expensive.  It simply is not the case that it is more expensive today than in the past.

     how much do you spend annually to maintain your complete collection?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.