Hot take - Blizzard is actually not that bad

  • meisterz39's Avatar 925 1200 Posts Joined 06/03/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    There's been a lot of hate toward Blizzard in these past couple of weeks, which seems to have come to a head during the spamming of the recent Duels tournament with #StopBlizzardGreed. Some of the anger is very reasonable - there have been a lot of bugs in Hearthstone around these newly released systems, and Blizzard deserves to be blamed for releasing buggy products and has a responsibility to resolve any unfairness that has come from them (they've already promised to do so with respect to the recent quest bugs). But they've also made a ton of great changes to the game that no one seems to want to give them credit for.

    So real quick, where is the hate coming from? Mostly it seems like it's coming from two places: the cost of Hearthstone generally, and the negative reaction to the new Progression system. Both stem from what I believe are bad-faith arguments:

    • Hearthstone is often compared to AAA titles, with people complaining that buying into an expansion costs way more than a typical $60 game.
      • This is a ridiculous comparison - AAA titles don't get regularly patched, they don't generally feature weekly evens (i.e. tavern brawl) or seasonal events (e.g. the Felfire Festival). Developing these patches and the content for these events costs Blizzard money, so the base price is going to be higher.
      • CCGs and AAA titles are generally not even the same type of game. It makes much more sense to compare Hearthstone to other CCGs, and while it's not the cheapest CCG on the market, it's not the most expensive either (e.g. in MTG Arena you can easily spend $200 just building a single deck.
      • You don't have to buy a full set of expansion cards to play the game, so comparing a $60 sticker price for a AAA title to $130 for pre-release bundles is disingenuous.
    • People were furious when the amount of gold they'd be getting went down, and have complained about lacking a sense of progression because the new system slows as you get higher up in levels
      • The overall rewards between new and old progression system never favored the old system - it's simply that many of the new rewards were in the form of packs and cards, which angry players valued less than gold. Blizzard responded to this by replacing the late-level packs with gold, and now it's very easy to have a F2P experience where you complete daily and weekly quests and get strictly more out of the game on all reward dimensions.
      • The "lack of progress" complaints must be coming from people who have never played an RPG, because all of those games feature slower levels as you progress, and no one gets mad about it. It's true that there will be some weeks in the new system where the weekly rewards you earn are lower than what you would have earned in the old system, but you early more on a weekly basis early and late in the system, so that lull only lasts for about 10 or so levels in the middle.

    It's easy to focus on the cost of the game right after an expansion, or to be mad about a system right when it releases, but those arguments are short-sighted. Blizzard has done a lot of good stuff with Hearthstone this year:

    • Back in November 2019 they changed a bunch of daily quests to make them easier to complete (e.g. "Win 2 games as [Class A] or [Class B]" became "Play 3 games as [Class A] or [Class B] or [Class C]"). The old quests penalized you for the bad luck of getting meta losers in your quests, while the new quests are trivial to complete.
    • In phase 1 of Year of the Phoenix, they added duplicate protection for all rarities, making it way cheaper to collect all the common and rare cards. This makes it much easier for F2P players to create a wide array of budget decks.
    • The new ranked system has better rewards than the old ranked system, added a ton of ranked floors, and dramatically decreases the amount of grinding you need to do. This frees players up to play low-tier or off-meta decks without risking major ladder progress
    • They've added several F2P-friendly formats (Battlegrounds, Duels), and will be adding another new mode before the end of the Year of the Phoenix
    • The new progression system switched away from rewarding gold for wins to rewarding XP for playing, which further incentivizes people to play low-tier or off-meta decks if that's what they want to do because losing a game doesn't mean getting nothing out of the game.

    The net result of these changes is that players have more opportunities to be rewarded for playing Hearthstone the way they find most fun. Despite the bugs, and the fact that Hearthstone is not the cheapest CCG on the market, I think it's plainly the case that the long view of what Blizzard has been doing with Hearthstone has been very positive.

    9
  • RavenSunHS's Avatar Refreshment Vendor 865 1487 Posts Joined 03/27/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    Thing is, the concept of xp track is VERY good, virtuous for both players and stakeholders.

    However, the current implementation of it is barely decent. Definitely not as good as it could and should be.

    The community is crying out of hysteria, and that is of no help, but Blizz is not delivering correctly.

    Also, it's taking too long for them for a proper reaction.

    8
  • Lemushki's Avatar Squirtle 975 773 Posts Joined 03/22/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    I really agree with you. I just do not think the format the track is presented right now is perfect.

    Take a look at Pokemon TCG Online (Not the amount of free resources it gives, wich is more, but they also get more expansions) but how you get something. Even 5 gold (translating to hearthstone numbers for just playing) all the time.

    I made the numbers in a comment for a hearthstone mathematician video, but the important part is.

    You have Login rewards, Daily Quests wich you can select out of 3, Rewards for wining everyday (up to 11 wins, then is just a little "gold" per win), a 21 day, reward track concept (wich nets you more "xp" if you are in a streak, the higher it is). Tournaments that give you nice rewards for wining (you have to spen tournament tickets to enter too) and a Theme deck format (hi there whizbang!)

     

    Basically I think that, without changing any numbers on the free resources you get, if every reward was given faster and in a smaller amount, people would be much happier with it.

     

    Personally I do not dislike the new system at all. Had some complaints about the last levels having packs but well. I feel that aproach would be better for most people in general, and much less people would hate it.

    Lemushki - The one and only since 2006

    4
  • grayghost39's Avatar 240 34 Posts Joined 03/26/2020
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    I agree with a lot of your points! I think a lot of the reaction is emotional, which isn't to say that I don't respect what people are feeling, but it is more nuanced for a few reasons: 

    • People feel lied to. How many times did they say you would get equal to or more rewards? They had to have known that wasn't true, so why push it so hard? 
    • If Blizzard had released this while offering slightly more rewards overall, people wouldn't have looked more closely at the monetization model that they don't like. Runeterra existing makes this reaction more pronounced, because they can look across to another game which does it differently (and cheaper). 
    • To your point, people have created a false equivalency between the value of a GaaS (which Hearthstone is, more or less) vs a single player AAA title. I recently bought Ghost of Tsushima, which is an amazing game, but it will eventually end. Even if they make some kind of DLC expansion, the gameplay is largely set; it won't ever be as variable as something like Hearthstone (nor should it be, they are entirely different games). 

    But you have included a lot of good that they have done for the game to make it better and cheaper, which might be forgotten when in a rage. I think the progress towards leveling is what I take issue with. I agree with your point that this is similar to how it works in many RPG systems, but I don't know that I want progression to be like an RPG. Later levels aren't worth that much more than earlier levels (200 gold vs 100) so why does it take so much longer? It also changed the play experience from the old system, where you felt you could earn something everyday, to the current system, where you earn a bit Monday/Tuesday and little else the rest of the week. If I were them, I would double the levels, half the XP needed to gain each, and spread the rewards out across the track. Packs should always be paired with at least a little gold. It is more of a psychological thing though. 

    I feel like they have to respond to this in some way, but at this point, I don't think most people who are angry are going to be satisfied. They aren't just going to remove packs and go LoR overnight. I think at best, they increase the amount of XP people earn (and reverse the terrible decision to make it based on time only). Maybe they also lower the pity timer on legendaries, but it is going to be tweaks in the short term, not an overhaul. 

    5
  • dapperdog's Avatar Dragon Scholar 1670 4229 Posts Joined 07/29/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    While I agree with many things you stated here, I will state that from what I have seen in the reddit threads and from forums like this one, the hate is coming from the following;

    - Hearthstone is expensive. This perhaps should surprise no one, least of all anyone who'd ever played a trading card game. But I'm having trouble naming any other virtual card game thats flagrantly more expensive to have fun in than hearthstone. We don't really need to go into specifics. All that is required is to simply ask the question: Can you recommend this game to any of your friends in good faith. And the short answer would likely (or almost certainly be) no. And that's largely because every one of us understands how expensive, and how much commitment it takes to get to where we are today.

    - In conjunction to the above, the new progression system did nothing less than bring greater focus on the price of the game. The tavern pass (which up until then was the name given to the BG pass) now rebranded without any notice, and as such it was not included into the 80 bucks preorder. So on top of a preorder, which pretty much gave the buyer all the exclusive cosmetics previously, there's now an added 20 bucks needed to absolutely have it all. So, if you don't want to miss out on all the exclusive items, it now costs a mind blogging 100 bucks. And to top it all off, you're not likely to even get half of all the legendaries.

    Your argument that you don't need to get all the cards to play the game is correct. But to put things in perspective. I opened 60 packs in darkmoon and got 4 legendaries, none of which were the old gods. Can't experiment much when you're missing out on the centerpiece of this expansion. Can't even experiment much actually, since I got both pally legendaries and I don't have some of the core cards needed to play pally at any decent tier. So Im pretty stuck with the same decks I had in the previous expansion with a few tweaks. And this is not the first time I find myself in such a position.

    - Midexpansion is a thing now. So with all the stated above, this one makes it even worse. Its hard not to point at sheer avarice when preordering doesn't get you much, and you're now praying there would be a 'promotional' 20 bucks sale from blizz just to keep up.

    - But perhaps the greatest reasons for all the hate was simply blizz was seen apparently breaking their promise when they said they weren't taking away the amount of gold we can get from the old system, in the new system. A blatant lie, as even poor mathematicians like me can spot that we were pretty much shafted around 1000 - 2000 gold.

    Yes, the card packs and cards should be taken into account when totaling the rewards. Doesn't change a thing, since the promise was explicit. Whether it was intentional or reasonable for blizz to have one of their guys make such a promise is not the issue. Fact is that everyone was kept optimistic. And they were let down like a father breaking a promise to his 10 yr old kid. Not exactly sterling public relations work.

    And it took like a 2 weeks before blizz addressed this issue at all. The changes were good, coming really close to breaking even, but its a case where its just too little too late.

     

    Bottom line is, I don't think this battlepass debacle is the end of the world, but unless they quickly address all the bugs, fix some of their own quest requirements (play 50 corrupt cards might as well be a bug, or a middle-finger design choice), relook into hearthstone's general costs, and for gods sake improve their own communication with the community, hearthstone will forever be tainted by its negatives, as opposed to its positives.

    14
  • FinalOlive's Avatar 140 38 Posts Joined 11/19/2020
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    There is nothing to argue. You objectively get less gold than the old system. They said multiple times by at least two different devs (Iksar and Celaston) that you will earn at least the same amount of gold with extra rewards. And that was a blatant lie.

    Bilzzard are terrible. It's mind boggling why anybody would defend a multi billion company for screwing over their user base. You literally get nothing in return for defending them. And no matter what type of player you are you get less gold to spend. Being a contrarian is not worth it.

    The community outrage is not in ''bad faith'' nor is it unreasonable. The old system was bad, yet they somehow made a worse one while insulting our intelligence in the process.

    It's easily fixable but the only logical reasons I can think of for not making it better is :

    A/That was intended from the first place to make HS more expensive and they are just waiting for the thing to die

    B/ It actually wasn't intended but those devs did the wrong numbers and they aren't willing to admit their mistake. Both of the devs I mentioned were defending the battle pass in the first couple of days but stopped talking about it all together a week ago. So either they are really incompetent or just told by higher ups to not comment on the matter.

    Either way it's a bad look no matter how you analyze the situation.

    6
  • Thraxus's Avatar 1060 334 Posts Joined 05/08/2020
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From meisterz39

    So real quick, where is the hate coming from? Mostly it seems like it's coming from two places: the cost of Hearthstone generally, and the negative reaction to the new Progression system. Both stem from what I believe are bad-faith arguments:

    • Hearthstone is often compared to AAA titles, with people complaining that buying into an expansion costs way more than a typical $60 game.
      • This is a ridiculous comparison - AAA titles don't get regularly patched, they don't generally feature weekly evens (i.e. tavern brawl) or seasonal events (e.g. the Felfire Festival). Developing these patches and the content for these events costs Blizzard money, so the base price is going to be higher.
      • CCGs and AAA titles are generally not even the same type of game. It makes much more sense to compare Hearthstone to other CCGs, and while it's not the cheapest CCG on the market, it's not the most expensive either (e.g. in MTG Arena you can easily spend $200 just building a single deck.
      • You don't have to buy a full set of expansion cards to play the game, so comparing a $60 sticker price for a AAA title to $130 for pre-release bundles is disingenuous.

    Just a couple of thoughts:

    • I think you overestimate the cost of weekly events / patches in HS; I mean brawls are recycled permanently (how many new do we receive per year? not many) and events are mostly a special quest or double gold or something (which is little work); I would argue that the effort here is not huge
    • Your claim on MTGA is wrong imo, if you are completionist yes but all other players no; I am almost F2P and have several meta decks with enough wild cards lying around for 2-3 others; HS is the most expensive mainstream CCG by far imo
    • A new expansion comes not even close in cost to a newly developed AAA game but they charge twice the price; based on effort a new expansion would have to be much cheaper than a new AAA title (a new AAA game costs about $60-80 million); I bet a HS expansion is a fraction of this
    • There are enough Freemium games out there with regular updates which do not charge as excessively as HS

    That said most of the current outrage stems not from Blizzard charging too much, but from them making false and misleading statements; players are rightfully pissed off; people are feeling ripped-off and that is entirely their fault

    I do not expect Blizzard to be cheap or give a multitude of freebies but I expect them to honor their promises and statements

    English is not my native language, so please excuse occasional mistakes

    11
  • Iplaywhite's Avatar Academy Sleuth 405 143 Posts Joined 06/10/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    I take umbrage with your first bullet point and subsequent follow ups.

    The comparison to AAA games is very apt in my opinion and the idea that many games do not have sustained patches or events is strange. I can name many games off the top of my head that I've played that have had years of patches after being played, sometimes even if I bought the game on discount. (Fifa, Witcher series, Mass Effect Series, Halo Series, DLC's are equivalent or exceed the season events in many instances). Heck Persona even put out a new entire game with Royale. Total cost between 60-100 depending on how many things you buy

    I know that many FPS games have similar content.

    To suggest that it only be compared to other CCGs is the disingenuous aspect here imo.

    The quality of life improvements are things that should have been implemented since the beginning of the game, let alone 5-6 years after launch....about that "stream of content and events". Do you remember how it felt to open 4 of the same legendary? I do, and that happened for 4-5 years. I encourage you to look up on youtube psychological, gambling, and addictive tricks that game companies are utilizing to encourage you to spend your $.

    The game is fun and I enjoy it, but I can no longer in good conscience give them money.

    "Soon we must all make the choice between what is right and what is easy"

    2
  • Alfi's Avatar Devoted Academic 1725 1303 Posts Joined 05/29/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    Take Path of Exile - a hack'n'slash RPG. It have 3 expansions each year and is completely free, paid only by selling cosmetics. 

    And it works, because people who love the game drop a dollar or two (or more)

    -=alfi=-

    3
  • meisterz39's Avatar 925 1200 Posts Joined 06/03/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From FinalOlive

    Bilzzard are terrible. It's mind boggling why anybody would defend a multi billion company for screwing over their user base. You literally get nothing in return for defending them. And no matter what type of player you are you get less gold to spend. Being a contrarian is not worth it.

    I don't know that I'd call describing Blizzard as "not that bad" as really defending them. More than anything, I'm trying to remind people that, amid all the negativity right now (some of which is certainly justified), Blizzard has done a lot to improve the game over the last year and to make for a better F2P players. There are lots of ways they could still make the game better or more player-friendly, but the level of vitriol against them is not warranted.

    And the adjustments to the progression rewards have absolutely made it so that people who complete their daily and weekly quests will now get nearly the same amount of gold as the previous system (this is before accounting for XP from playing the game and achievements). It's easy to forget that leveling up gets easier after level 50 - that's going to result in more gold for the hardcore players.

    This is not me being a contrarian. I just honestly believe people spend too much time focused on the short-term negatives, and flip out and assume the worst intentions, when in reality Blizzard is trying to stay competitive in a denser CCG marketplace, and making a lot of long-term improvements to the game to do so.

    4
  • clawz161's Avatar The Undying 825 826 Posts Joined 07/16/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    You ignore the reason everyone's faith in actibliz has hit rock bottom. There have been several controversies this year and last from them, which all boil down to the concept of actibliz not caring about their community in favor of their own wallet. And when they release the battlepass it was the final straw on the camel's back. They lied constantly about how they won't be taking players gold how you'll be able to get more than before. Which we know now was a lie. Everything has culminated in this. 

     

    Now let's break down what you actually bring up.

     

    "AAA titles don't get regularly patched"

    This argument has been made a lot of times to cover for shitty business practices in the "current year". People said this all the time when battlefront was receiving their fair share of backlash over a similar situation. It is not a point of pride that you update your game. It's understandable. It's something that shouldn't be noticed. You shouldn't need to lord that over the players like it's something that they don't deserve.

     

    "CCGs and AAA titles are generally not even the same type of game."

    Ah yes the good old trading card argument that's been made a thousand times. Except there is no upwards mobility with hearthstone. Packs and cards don't have REAL VALUE. If i unpack a hearthstone pack and get a legendary from a tier one deck in the meta all year, it has the same value as a meme legendary no one would ever play ever. This is not the same in other card games. Even artifact one had a upward mobility system. When the game released people were saying certain heroes were pay to win and the only way to win, and they would sell for $20 on the steam market. Know what people did then? They opened a lot of packs and got those heroes and sold them for more packs. You can't do that in hearthstone, and the devs will never allow you to do that, they like the closed loop system. When you pay $80 now for a AAA game you are expecting quality, you're expecting a good experience. When you pay $80 for hearthstone what do you get? According to many people's threads i've seen 5 legendries. That's it. And most of them unplayable meme legendaries and not old gods.

    "You don't have to buy a full set of expansion cards to play the game, so comparing a $60 sticker price for a AAA title to $130 for pre-release bundles is disingenuous."

    This would be true except for the ridiculous amount of powercreep hearthstone has. Every expansion cards get more busted and in order to play you need those cards. Sure you can play river crocolisk and bloodfen raptor mage every expansion and that counts as being able to "play" the game. But it's more like when you were 10 and you ask big brother if you can play video games with him and he hands you an unplugged controller. Yes you can play that way, but not really.

    "The overall rewards between new and old progression system never favored the old system - it's simply that many of the new rewards were in the form of packs and cards, which angry players valued less than gold. Blizzard responded to this by replacing the late-level packs with gold, and now it's very easy to have a F2P experience where you complete daily and weekly quests and get strictly more out of the game on all reward dimensions."

     

    Blizzard fixed the rewards for late stage into the battlepass, where almost no one is at because of a hell of a grind it is. They did this so A. They wouldn't need to give players anything to compensate for the change and B. to try to sate the rabid dog of a community by throwing it some chicken bones. The change was nothing. There is still useless packs for rewards in the early features of the system that is still there. Solem talks about this in his latest video https://youtu.be/wQLFDXb9hU0?t=315 the reward is basically useless.

     

    "The "lack of progress" complaints must be coming from people who have never played an RPG, because all of those games feature slower levels as you progress, and no one gets mad about it. It's true that there will be some weeks in the new system where the weekly rewards you earn are lower than what you would have earned in the old system, but you early more on a weekly basis early and late in the system, so that lull only lasts for about 10 or so levels in the middle."

    See this? This is a steeljaw snapper, found in tanaris. They're around lvl 38-45. When i played vanilla wow i ginded on these instead of doing quests from lvl 35-50. Because 1 i enjoyed grinding instead of questing, the loot drops were good selling for decent value incuding pearls which i could pier to pier to players for more value and skinning for the same reason. It wasn't a very common grinding spot because people knew of better ones, but for me it was perfect. Do you know the difference between me grinding turtles for 15 levels in WoW and the new battlepass is? The rewards. I got hundreds of gold off these turtles in exchange for my time. In hearthstone i get very little. Even if i do all my quests(when it doesn't give me the do arena quest of the finish top 2 in BGs quest). This isn't about grinding it's about greed. You shouldn't need to grind constantly in a system that promises rewards daily. Grinding shouldn't even need to be applicable since it's fringe strategy that only psychos like me enjoy doing instead of the normal system.

     

    "Back in November 2019 they changed a bunch of daily quests to make them easier to complete (e.g. "Win 2 games as [Class A] or [Class B]" became "Play 3 games as [Class A] or [Class B] or [Class C]")"

    This goes to show how much the difference is since they also changed the rewards to be higher and now we just receive experience now into the pass system that does not give rewards from that experience.

     

    "In phase 1 of Year of the Phoenix, they added duplicate protection for all rarities, making it way cheaper to collect all the common and rare cards."

    This was a good change. But it doesn't matter to most f2p players that only focus on one or two classes and choose to disenchant other class cards they get because they need dust to craft things.

     

    "The new ranked system has better rewards than the old ranked system, added a ton of ranked floors, and dramatically decreases the amount of grinding you need to do. This frees players up to play low-tier or off-meta decks without risking major ladder progress"

     

    Considering the only way to get experience now is to play ladder then yeah i guess you have to play meme decks or testing decks on ladder now.

     

    "They've added several F2P-friendly formats (Battlegrounds, Duels), and will be adding another new mode before the end of the Year of the Phoenix"

     

    You can call BGs a "f2p-friendly format" since most of the changes you get from paying are high marginal.(even though having extra chances to get one of the current busted heroes per game is better than not having it) But i wouldn't say duels is. Just like in arena it's important to win early and when you don't have all the wild cards you'll need and you're against someone that does it's always an uphill battle for you. And incentivizing crafting those for that game mode is terrible optics.

     

     

    In closing i agree that SOMEONE at actibliz in the past was trying to make HS a better game, i agree with you on the new ranking system(even though it makes it more grindy it sprinkles decent rewards throughout), the free decks to new and returning players which you didn't mention, the "noob ladder"(which is basically demon hunter ladder), and changing quests to give more gold and be less of a pain to complete. But these changes are just about reverted as of late. Since they all feed into a broken system that promises everything and delivers nothing.

    Living like that.

    6
  • Riffraff's Avatar 755 361 Posts Joined 04/30/2020
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    Lots of well articulated comments, and a civil discussion - exactly why this site/community is great. I love reading forum threads like this.

    I am a paying player, but it was not always that way. I love this game - it is nearly the only game I have time for any more.

    When I think about the new content and the new progression/rewards system the thing that keeps getting driven home is: "does the new system feel better? Do I feel like I am having a better experience?" And the short answer is unfortunately "probably not". It certainly doesn't feel better, which I think is what is upsetting so much of the player base - the final numbers (gold/dust/packs/legendary cards etc.) may not have settled yet, but I think the system feels greedier, grindier and not palpably more rewarding at this point.

    I am not about to quit playing because I enjoy the gameplay, the animations, the WoW characters and quasi-lore, but because the system doesn't palpably feel better yet I have my concerns.

    The duplicate protection changes they made earlier this year were awesome (and long overdue). Scholomance Academy is the first expansion (other than the old style adventures) where I have 100% of the epics, and am threatening to get all the legendaries. That feels great for a collection oriented person like me. I unpacked 5 Sul'thraze back in the day, and that by contrast felt awful (as an example, there were others like that - looking at you 4x Furnacefire Colossus).

    I ultimately want a system that rewards people daily and feels better than what we had yesterday. I want the game to succeed and be a going concern for years to come.

    10
  • FinalOlive's Avatar 140 38 Posts Joined 11/19/2020
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    No you are just wrong and massively misinformed. 1350 gold, does NOT fix anything. The minimum gold loss from the old system is 2000 gold.

    -8
  • Suchti0352's Avatar Hero of Warcraft 765 751 Posts Joined 03/27/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From FinalOlive

    No you are just wrong and massively misinformed. 1350 gold, does NOT fix anything. The minimum gold loss from the old system is 2000 gold.

    Oh, it does change a lot. If you compare it now to the old system you gain 600 less gold, but gain 7 extra packs, an extra legendary and 2 tavern tickets for the same ammount of playtime. Plus events are still a thing. Also wonder why you would want to calculate the minimum gold gain instead of the average.

    source because I'm to lazy to explain all the math here (starting at 6:00:00, result at 7:28:00)

    4
  • clawz161's Avatar The Undying 825 826 Posts Joined 07/16/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From Suchti0352
    Quote From FinalOlive

    No you are just wrong and massively misinformed. 1350 gold, does NOT fix anything. The minimum gold loss from the old system is 2000 gold.

    Oh, it does change a lot. If you compare it now to the old system you gain 600 less gold, but gain 7 extra packs, an extra legendary and 2 tavern tickets for the same ammount of playtime. Plus events are still a thing. Also wonder why you would want to calculate the minimum gold gain instead of the average.

    source because I'm to lazy to explain all the math here (starting at 6:00:00, result at 7:28:00)

    The free legendary and free packs for the expansion is obviously a bonus from the battlepass and not something that they have already been doing and would have still been doing for each expansion without the battlepass....(they gave out free arenas with expansions too, but i'll let you have that one since it wasn't for every expansion.)

    Living like that.

    0
  • Suchti0352's Avatar Hero of Warcraft 765 751 Posts Joined 03/27/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From clawz161
    Quote From Suchti0352
    Quote From FinalOlive

    No you are just wrong and massively misinformed. 1350 gold, does NOT fix anything. The minimum gold loss from the old system is 2000 gold.

    Oh, it does change a lot. If you compare it now to the old system you gain 600 less gold, but gain 7 extra packs, an extra legendary and 2 tavern tickets for the same ammount of playtime. Plus events are still a thing. Also wonder why you would want to calculate the minimum gold gain instead of the average.

    source because I'm to lazy to explain all the math here (starting at 6:00:00, result at 7:28:00)

    The free legendary and free packs for the expansion is obviously a bonus from the battlepass and not something that they have already been doing and would have still been doing for each expansion without the battlepass....(they gave out free arenas with expansions too, but i'll let you have that one since it wasn't for every expansion.)

    I know what you are trying to say, but the result already subtracted the normal free legendary(you get one at level 1 AND 25) and  the 3 Packs we usually get (I just looked it up and we actually got 6 packs for scholomance, but that's still 4 more packs they wouldn't have given out for free)

    1
  • FinalOlive's Avatar 140 38 Posts Joined 11/19/2020
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    Wrong lol. We want gold instead of those. Literally most people who complain about the new system DON'T WANT old packs instead of gold. 100 gold is always a pack, but a pack value is not always a 100 gold.

     

    The free legendary and 3 packs are also bonuses in new expansions that you used to get on expansion launch, so [email protected] adding it to the pass as if it's a new thing to trick naive users like you.

     

    Tavern tickets also aren't something everybody wants. Events always used to be a thing, they keep going downhill if anything. From double gold at it's best and gold dust to I don't even remember what the last event did, that useless arena thing?

     

    If the new system is better than it should award more base gold than the old system. You can literally play 30 mins in 2 days only doing quests and getting 100 gold guaranteed. Now and especially in the later levels you aren't guaranteed anything, and the weekly quests are very time consuming.

    -1
  • AngryShuckie's Avatar 1695 1667 Posts Joined 06/03/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Quote From FinalOlive

    Wrong lol. We want gold instead of those. Literally most people who complain about the new system DON'T WANT old packs instead of gold. 100 gold is always a pack, but a pack value is not always a 100 gold.

     

    The free legendary and 3 packs are also bonuses in new expansions that you used to get on expansion launch, so [email protected] adding it to the pass as if it's a new thing to trick naive users like you.

     

    Tavern tickets also aren't something everybody wants. Events always used to be a thing, they keep going downhill if anything. From double gold at it's best and gold dust to I don't even remember what the last event did, that useless arena thing?

     

    If the new system is better than it should award more base gold than the old system. You can literally play 30 mins in 2 days only doing quests and getting 100 gold guaranteed. Now and especially in the later levels you aren't guaranteed anything, and the weekly quests are very time consuming.

    I will reply to a few points below, but first and foremost, can you please use a more respectful tone when making your arguments? You are not going to convince anyone of anything if you start calling them naive and use absolutes like only your opinion is valid. The best discussions often arise through disagreement, but they only work if both sides respect each other.

    ---------------------------

    Anyway, regarding Tavern Tickets: at absolute worst these amount to a pack of the most recent expansion plus a small amount of dust or gold. And that's what you'll get it you commit 5 minutes to building a deck and just conceding 3 games. If you actually try, you can get a decent amount of extra gold / dust. Now, I'm not saying Arena /Heroic Duels rewards are perfect (I mean, who wants those non-golden commons... seriously?), but the rewards are absolutely what players want, even if they wouldn't normally spend 150 gold on the game modes involved.

    You are also portraying XP like it is worthless unless it pushes you over a level there and then, which is nonsense. Rewards in the progression track are more spaced out than the old trickle of gold, but the XP that gets you half way through a level is just as important as the XP that gets you over the level threshold. There is a clear psychological effect with many players where accumulating, say, 200 gold over time feels better than waiting to get it in 1 lump, but unless you are using that gold as you collect it there isn't an actual difference there. Now, what Blizz should do is just show the XP being added after each game, so you can see what it has earned you.

    Finally, are weekly quests really that time consuming? Because they are often restricted to specific game modes it is fair to say different players will take longer on different ones, but let's use the default "Get 7 wins in ranked" quest as an example. Assuming 50% win rate, that's 14 games, or 2 a day. That's less than the daily quests ask for, so no, they are not really time consuming once you recognise they are spread across the week.

    2
  • clawz161's Avatar The Undying 825 826 Posts Joined 07/16/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago
    Show Spoiler
    Quote From AngryShuckie
    Quote From FinalOlive

    Wrong lol. We want gold instead of those. Literally most people who complain about the new system DON'T WANT old packs instead of gold. 100 gold is always a pack, but a pack value is not always a 100 gold.

     

    The free legendary and 3 packs are also bonuses in new expansions that you used to get on expansion launch, so [email protected] adding it to the pass as if it's a new thing to trick naive users like you.

     

    Tavern tickets also aren't something everybody wants. Events always used to be a thing, they keep going downhill if anything. From double gold at it's best and gold dust to I don't even remember what the last event did, that useless arena thing?

     

    If the new system is better than it should award more base gold than the old system. You can literally play 30 mins in 2 days only doing quests and getting 100 gold guaranteed. Now and especially in the later levels you aren't guaranteed anything, and the weekly quests are very time consuming.

    I will reply to a few points below, but first and foremost, can you please use a more respectful tone when making your arguments? You are not going to convince anyone of anything if you start calling them naive and use absolutes like only your opinion is valid. The best discussions often arise through disagreement, but they only work if both sides respect each other.

    —————————

    Anyway, regarding Tavern Tickets: at absolute worst these amount to a pack of the most recent expansion plus a small amount of dust or gold. And that's what you'll get it you commit 5 minutes to building a deck and just conceding 3 games. If you actually try, you can get a decent amount of extra gold / dust. Now, I'm not saying Arena /Heroic Duels rewards are perfect (I mean, who wants those non-golden commons… seriously?), but the rewards are absolutely what players want, even if they wouldn't normally spend 150 gold on the game modes involved.

    You are also portraying XP like it is worthless unless it pushes you over a level there and then, which is nonsense. Rewards in the progression track are more spaced out than the old trickle of gold, but the XP that gets you half way through a level is just as important as the XP that gets you over the level threshold. There is a clear psychological effect with many players where accumulating, say, 200 gold over time feels better than waiting to get it in 1 lump, but unless you are using that gold as you collect it there isn't an actual difference there. Now, what Blizz should do is just show the XP being added after each game, so you can see what it has earned you.

    Finally, are weekly quests really that time consuming? Because they are often restricted to specific game modes it is fair to say different players will take longer on different ones, but let's use the default "Get 7 wins in ranked" quest as an example. Assuming 50% win rate, that's 14 games, or 2 a day. That's less than the daily quests ask for, so no, they are not really time consuming once you recognise they are spread across the week.

     

    Experience IS worthless unless it pushes you over the level limit though since the level limit is what gives you rewards. Experience for the sake of experience is nothing. And when you get past the level 15 mark is it increasingly hard to raise your level and get those rewards and those rewards are poor. This is what people are talking about. Welcome to the conversation.

    Living like that.

    -2
  • Zelgadis's Avatar Wizard 950 705 Posts Joined 05/29/2019
    Posted 1 year, 8 months ago

    I think the core of the problem is the same as it has always been: the high crafting costs for epic and legendaries. The first ~50 packs you open of an expansion are great value, but once you have all the commons and rares, you're mostly getting dust from packs and you need a lot of dust to be able to craft one legendary. The duplicate protection does help, that was a great move. However, I don't think it's enough to fix the issue.

    Preorders are about $1 per pack (regular price is much worse) and packs contain about 100 dust, so if you want to craft a 10k dust deck (not uncommon for control decks), that's a $100 deck. Of course you don't need to craft every single card; some you will have pulled from packs. But even if you're only missing 2 legendaries and 4 epics, that's almost $50 worth of dust. I think that's a lot of money when I can get full indie games for $10 to $20, or even AAA games from a few years ago.

    I'm not sure yet whether the progression track is better or worse than the old system for me, since I never used to grind for 10 gold per 3 wins anyway. I complete almost all my quests and then occasionally play more when I'm fine-tuning a deck. But I think it is safe to say that, apart from the first few levels, the new system is not significantly better than the old system.

    I think a lot of people were tolerating the old system because they had gotten used to it, not because they actually liked it. So even if the new system is roughly equal in terms of rewards (as Blizzard claims), it's still not going to give them a good impression.

    8
  • Leave a Comment

    You must be signed in to leave a comment. Sign in here.