Maybe it will start thoughtful, but then they'll expect the revenue from ad placements to grow every year and under that pressure the limits of "thoughtful" will be stretched again and again.
I haven't gone back to Hearthstone yet and as time passes it becomes less likely that I will.
I have started on Eldritchvania, which as the name suggests is a metroidvania with Lovecraftian elements. It seems very much inspired by La Mulana, but the lore is easier to follow due to clearer writing and a lore fragments interface that is auto-ordered and has infinite capacity. This is important, because both in this game and La Mulana, many essential puzzle clues come from lore fragments. It's pretty good, especially for a free game. It's not easy though; if the difficulty ramps up more, I'm not sure I'll stick with it until the end.
I'm also doing a round of Deep Rock Galactic: Survivor every now and then. It's still fun, but I am at a point where progression slows down, so I'm not doing one run after another anymore.
Today a Stellaris expansion released and the first reviews on Steam are pretty positive, so I'll likely jump back into that.
Oh, and I forgot to mention that our BG3 co-op is still going strong, approaching the end of act 2 now.
About $1400 in 10 years. Some of it was gifts to other people, but I've also bought a significant number of keys on Humble and Fanatical that are not included. I do have a tendency to buy more games than I have time to play, but at least financially it's not out of control.
Co-op favorites in our group: Zombicide Black Plague (hack your way through undead hordes), The Siege of Runedar (dwarves defending a gold mine; max 4 players unfortunately), Mansions of Madness (solve Lovecraftian horror mysteries).
Flamecraft ("dragon placement") is an accessible and very cute game that can handle 5 players.
7 Wonders (civilization building via card drafting) is great with many players (up to 7) because turns happen simultaneously, so it doesn't slow down much with larger player counts. Similarly, Libertalia (pirates on a plunder tour) can be played with 6 players and is partially simultaneous.
Terraforming Mars is an engine builder, so it might appeal to the Wingspan fans, but it is longer and a bit more complex.
Oh, and I agree with the recommendation of The Crew (either variant). Some people don't enjoy the pressure of mistakes dooming the mission though, so it does depend on the group. I'd recommend giving it a try online via BoardGameArena and buy the box if it fits your group.
I feel sorry for the developers. Redfall flopped, but Hi-Fi Rush made it on to a lot of game of the year lists. And in the case of Redfall, it seems it was another victim of trend chasing (everything must be a multiplayer live service) instead of letting the studio do what it was good at (single player games with a strong story). Also it didn't help that it was released before it was properly finished. I hope the developers find a new workplace that respects their talent more.
It's ultimately about adding value to GamePass, isn't it? I'd subscribe to GamePass if it would give me a full HS collection to play with. I don't think there is much overlap between HS and CoD players, so having both in their portfolio would help them reach a larger audience.
I play since Open Beta have all cards I need, have a few k gold and over 100.000 dust. The game became 100% free to play for me since years.
You must be putting in a lot of hours to get that many resources. That's fine if you're enjoying it, but some people either don't have the time or do not enjoy playing long stretches and for them changes in the economy hit a lot harder.
Negative changes to quests, real money offers and pre order nonsense don`t bother me.
Pre-order exclusives could put F2P ladder players at a disadvantage. Last expansion they selected an unplayable card, but that might not be the case next time.
HS is much more generous than in the early days. Most players seem to have forgotten this or haven't been playing the game long enough.
On the one hand, players get much more free stuff now, the core set is free and duplicate protection helps a ton. On the other hand, there are now 11 classes instead of 9, two legendaries per class per expansion instead of one (*) and a mini set every expansion, plus a larger percentage of cards is actually playable due to better balance, so a lot more cards to acquire. As a result, while you get more game for your buck, staying up-to-date hasn't become cheaper.
(*) If I recall correctly, they started doing this with Un'goro because of the quests, but they never went back to one legendary per class after that. Yeah, I've been around since open beta too.
But it's definitely not so bad that you have to stop playing because of it.
For any of the listed items individually, I'd call quitting an over-reaction. But all of this happened in the time span of a few months and there was very little positive news to counter-balance it (unless you play Battlegrounds, I guess). And I don't see any reason to assume this trend of ever more aggressive monetization is going to stop here.
I had hoped that with the acquisition completed, they would be under less pressure to monetize, but things have only gotten worse since then.
The more I think about it, the more it becomes clear that quitting the game is the right choice for me. For the last two years or so, I've spent 40 euros per expansion: the Tavern Pass plus a bundle with 20 packs and 2 legendaries. I don't play the game enough to make it feel worth putting more money in and I don't want to play more because I'd just get fed up with the meta sooner then.
I could probably continue as F2P for one more expansion cycle, disenchanting my duplicates and cashing in my tavern tickets, but in the long run it would become too expensive to keep playing the way I want to. Maybe I could afford one competitive deck as F2P, but I'd be bored in no time if I could play only one deck. Deck building is my favorite part of the game and that requires a pretty wide collection. So F2P is not a long term option for me.
I'm not sure I even want to finish the current Tavern Pass. I haven't played since Wednesday, when I logged in to do the Tavern Brawl and the daily quests that had piled up since Sunday, only to see the new weekly quests. Once I realized those were not a bug, I logged out without playing a game. Knowing that there is no future for me in this game has killed a lot of my motivation to log in and play.
It all feels planned: first triple the requirements for +20% XP, then bring it down to double (*) but still only give +20% XP. Make it sound like they caved in to community backlash while still significantly worsening the economy for many players.
In itself this wouldn't be enough to make me quit, but it's part of an overall trend to monetize ever more aggressively. Back when it was only cosmetic, I would roll my eyes and move on, but now it's starting to affect how much money it costs to build a decent collection. I'm not interested in playing more and I don't want to pay more for the amount of time that I am playing the game. It seems they're on a course to make the game too expensive for me and if I'll be forced to quit anyway in the not too distant future, I might as well quit now and save myself some frustration.
(*) They haven't announced the new requirements, just said that they will be between the old and the current amounts. I have a gut feeling it will be right in the middle, but that is just a guess at this point. Edit: The new numbers differ per quest, but on average they indeed roughly doubled compared to the old situation, for example 5 wins -> 15 wins -> 10 wins.
There is no way I can complete these in one week. With the old weekly quests I already didn't always manage to complete them before the week ended.
I'm seriously considering whether I should quit the game. I don't like the feeling of being squeezed for money. And there are plenty of other good games to play.
I guess I'll stop playing until they roll it back; ultimately the people responsible for monetization probably care more about seeing the numbers drop than about any other form of protest.
They wanted to reduce the power level of the deck a bit and I think it will do that: one extra turn is all that some combo decks might need. Personally, I don't think decks that do nothing but stall until they find their win condition are fun and interactive. However, it seems Team 5's goal was to lower the win rate a bit, not to force the deck to be redesigned or retired.
I think the fact that its benefit comes relatively late in the game was the main thing holding it back. That might still be the case at 5 mana, but if it was a 1-mana 1/1 with the same battlecry, I think it would see a lot of play.
For me it's an improvement as well, because I don't go out of my way to complete the achievements, which means it often takes a lot longer than one expansion cycle to complete them. However, for the achievement hunters there is now a lot less total dust to collect, so for them it's a negative.
Rarity and gold seem to matter, with gold mattering a whole lot more, even more than in actual Hearthstone's dust value. The total pack value might be some kind of multiplication rather than addition, because a lone golden legendary isn't enough to get a really high score, but in the company of some golden cards of lower rarities the point value skyrockets.
I don't know. I mostly face the non-highlander variant myself, but it's very frustrating to play against, since it's just turn after turn of you putting something on the board and them wiping it off the board. In the old days you could eventually run them out of removal, but that is very difficult with the amount of card draw of today combined with Odyn, Prime Designate as a single-card win condition (thus having fewer draws that are not removal).
While I don't miss the days when a turn 1 Mana Wyrm or a strong Murloc opener would snowball the game, we've now gone to the other extreme, where it's rare for a minion to survive a turn.
Maybe it will start thoughtful, but then they'll expect the revenue from ad placements to grow every year and under that pressure the limits of "thoughtful" will be stretched again and again.
I haven't gone back to Hearthstone yet and as time passes it becomes less likely that I will.
I have started on Eldritchvania, which as the name suggests is a metroidvania with Lovecraftian elements. It seems very much inspired by La Mulana, but the lore is easier to follow due to clearer writing and a lore fragments interface that is auto-ordered and has infinite capacity. This is important, because both in this game and La Mulana, many essential puzzle clues come from lore fragments. It's pretty good, especially for a free game. It's not easy though; if the difficulty ramps up more, I'm not sure I'll stick with it until the end.
I'm also doing a round of Deep Rock Galactic: Survivor every now and then. It's still fun, but I am at a point where progression slows down, so I'm not doing one run after another anymore.
Today a Stellaris expansion released and the first reviews on Steam are pretty positive, so I'll likely jump back into that.
Oh, and I forgot to mention that our BG3 co-op is still going strong, approaching the end of act 2 now.
About $1400 in 10 years. Some of it was gifts to other people, but I've also bought a significant number of keys on Humble and Fanatical that are not included. I do have a tendency to buy more games than I have time to play, but at least financially it's not out of control.
Co-op favorites in our group: Zombicide Black Plague (hack your way through undead hordes), The Siege of Runedar (dwarves defending a gold mine; max 4 players unfortunately), Mansions of Madness (solve Lovecraftian horror mysteries).
Flamecraft ("dragon placement") is an accessible and very cute game that can handle 5 players.
7 Wonders (civilization building via card drafting) is great with many players (up to 7) because turns happen simultaneously, so it doesn't slow down much with larger player counts. Similarly, Libertalia (pirates on a plunder tour) can be played with 6 players and is partially simultaneous.
Terraforming Mars is an engine builder, so it might appeal to the Wingspan fans, but it is longer and a bit more complex.
Oh, and I agree with the recommendation of The Crew (either variant). Some people don't enjoy the pressure of mistakes dooming the mission though, so it does depend on the group. I'd recommend giving it a try online via BoardGameArena and buy the box if it fits your group.
I feel sorry for the developers. Redfall flopped, but Hi-Fi Rush made it on to a lot of game of the year lists. And in the case of Redfall, it seems it was another victim of trend chasing (everything must be a multiplayer live service) instead of letting the studio do what it was good at (single player games with a strong story). Also it didn't help that it was released before it was properly finished. I hope the developers find a new workplace that respects their talent more.
It's ultimately about adding value to GamePass, isn't it? I'd subscribe to GamePass if it would give me a full HS collection to play with. I don't think there is much overlap between HS and CoD players, so having both in their portfolio would help them reach a larger audience.
You must be putting in a lot of hours to get that many resources. That's fine if you're enjoying it, but some people either don't have the time or do not enjoy playing long stretches and for them changes in the economy hit a lot harder.
Pre-order exclusives could put F2P ladder players at a disadvantage. Last expansion they selected an unplayable card, but that might not be the case next time.
On the one hand, players get much more free stuff now, the core set is free and duplicate protection helps a ton. On the other hand, there are now 11 classes instead of 9, two legendaries per class per expansion instead of one (*) and a mini set every expansion, plus a larger percentage of cards is actually playable due to better balance, so a lot more cards to acquire. As a result, while you get more game for your buck, staying up-to-date hasn't become cheaper.
(*) If I recall correctly, they started doing this with Un'goro because of the quests, but they never went back to one legendary per class after that. Yeah, I've been around since open beta too.
For any of the listed items individually, I'd call quitting an over-reaction. But all of this happened in the time span of a few months and there was very little positive news to counter-balance it (unless you play Battlegrounds, I guess). And I don't see any reason to assume this trend of ever more aggressive monetization is going to stop here.
I had hoped that with the acquisition completed, they would be under less pressure to monetize, but things have only gotten worse since then.
The more I think about it, the more it becomes clear that quitting the game is the right choice for me. For the last two years or so, I've spent 40 euros per expansion: the Tavern Pass plus a bundle with 20 packs and 2 legendaries. I don't play the game enough to make it feel worth putting more money in and I don't want to play more because I'd just get fed up with the meta sooner then.
I could probably continue as F2P for one more expansion cycle, disenchanting my duplicates and cashing in my tavern tickets, but in the long run it would become too expensive to keep playing the way I want to. Maybe I could afford one competitive deck as F2P, but I'd be bored in no time if I could play only one deck. Deck building is my favorite part of the game and that requires a pretty wide collection. So F2P is not a long term option for me.
I'm not sure I even want to finish the current Tavern Pass. I haven't played since Wednesday, when I logged in to do the Tavern Brawl and the daily quests that had piled up since Sunday, only to see the new weekly quests. Once I realized those were not a bug, I logged out without playing a game. Knowing that there is no future for me in this game has killed a lot of my motivation to log in and play.
It all feels planned: first triple the requirements for +20% XP, then bring it down to double (*) but still only give +20% XP. Make it sound like they caved in to community backlash while still significantly worsening the economy for many players.
In itself this wouldn't be enough to make me quit, but it's part of an overall trend to monetize ever more aggressively. Back when it was only cosmetic, I would roll my eyes and move on, but now it's starting to affect how much money it costs to build a decent collection. I'm not interested in playing more and I don't want to pay more for the amount of time that I am playing the game. It seems they're on a course to make the game too expensive for me and if I'll be forced to quit anyway in the not too distant future, I might as well quit now and save myself some frustration.
(*) They haven't announced the new requirements, just said that they will be between the old and the current amounts. I have a gut feeling it will be right in the middle, but that is just a guess at this point. Edit: The new numbers differ per quest, but on average they indeed roughly doubled compared to the old situation, for example 5 wins -> 15 wins -> 10 wins.
There is no way I can complete these in one week. With the old weekly quests I already didn't always manage to complete them before the week ended.
I'm seriously considering whether I should quit the game. I don't like the feeling of being squeezed for money. And there are plenty of other good games to play.
I guess I'll stop playing until they roll it back; ultimately the people responsible for monetization probably care more about seeing the numbers drop than about any other form of protest.
New year, new deck:
Unstable Evolution on the Charge side is very nice, since every transformed minion gets to attack immediately.
They wanted to reduce the power level of the deck a bit and I think it will do that: one extra turn is all that some combo decks might need. Personally, I don't think decks that do nothing but stall until they find their win condition are fun and interactive. However, it seems Team 5's goal was to lower the win rate a bit, not to force the deck to be redesigned or retired.
I think the fact that its benefit comes relatively late in the game was the main thing holding it back. That might still be the case at 5 mana, but if it was a 1-mana 1/1 with the same battlecry, I think it would see a lot of play.
Congrats to the winners.
My favorite is Lolo from Eggerland Mystery / Adventures of Lolo:
For me it's an improvement as well, because I don't go out of my way to complete the achievements, which means it often takes a lot longer than one expansion cycle to complete them. However, for the achievement hunters there is now a lot less total dust to collect, so for them it's a negative.
Rarity and gold seem to matter, with gold mattering a whole lot more, even more than in actual Hearthstone's dust value. The total pack value might be some kind of multiplication rather than addition, because a lone golden legendary isn't enough to get a really high score, but in the company of some golden cards of lower rarities the point value skyrockets.
In particular I stopped playing highlander decks, because Helya on turn 4 means your highlander cards are never going to be active.
I don't know. I mostly face the non-highlander variant myself, but it's very frustrating to play against, since it's just turn after turn of you putting something on the board and them wiping it off the board. In the old days you could eventually run them out of removal, but that is very difficult with the amount of card draw of today combined with Odyn, Prime Designate as a single-card win condition (thus having fewer draws that are not removal).
While I don't miss the days when a turn 1 Mana Wyrm or a strong Murloc opener would snowball the game, we've now gone to the other extreme, where it's rare for a minion to survive a turn.