Just in general. I’m on my cell so I’m not going to quote everything.
At the end of the day though OP I am playing for fun. The progression/quests help keep me from straying too far away but I kind of agree with Wardrum that it feels like you’re chasing progression way too much.
Also, I agree with you on MtG:A being better. With the change back to weekly reward structure and the fact I earn 1 pack (plus) per day easily kind of puts HS to shame a bit. I realize you need more copies of cards in MtG over HS but you do enjoy earning packs daily.
To me the quests (freebies) are nice perks but are not important in the end to me. To others it might be and I can respect that but I don’t “need it” so don’t call BS on that being a critical critique of the basic logic of “play what you enjoy not what gets you loots”
If considering how many preferences each player have, and weight it as a % of the community, then it shows that each group only forms a smaller portion of a whole.
There are alot of games that provides better reward/progression system, but they also operate on a different economical/design/genre/etc platform. As such, there are limitations/considerations that are unseen and not discussed in depth.
It is, yes. Maybe not 20 or 30, but at least 10. Anyway 10x or 20x, the point still stands.
Look at Overwatch for example. Play for an hour, get a lootbox, 1$ per hour. And it’s by far not the most generous game out there.
If considering how many preferences each player have, and comparing in as a community, then it shows that each group only forms a smaller portion of a whole.
There are alot of games that provides better reward/progression system, but they also operate on a different economical/design/genre/etc platform. As such, there are limitations/considerations that are unseen and not discussed in depth.
Definitely true, it’s way more complex than it sounds if you think about it in a professional economic sense.
If you look at other games in the same genre though, online TCGs and CCGs, they’re all deep into that reward route (Eternal and MTGA for example).
Just in general. I’m on my cell so I’m not going to quote everything.
At the end of the day though OP I am playing for fun. The progression/quests help keep me from straying too far away but I kind of agree with Wardrum that it feels like you’re chasing progression way too much.
Also, I agree with you on MtG:A being better. With the change back to weekly reward structure and the fact I earn 1 pack (plus) per day easily kind of puts HS to shame a bit. I realize you need more copies of cards in MtG over HS but you do enjoy earning packs daily.
To me the quests (freebies) are nice perks but are not important in the end to me. To others it might be and I can respect that but I don’t “need it” so don’t call BS on that being a critical critique of the basic logic of “play what you enjoy not what gets you loots”
My point is not that the gameplay doesn’t matter and that it doesn’t work without rewards. I’m just saying HS is way below average in this regard specifically, and could make for a way better game if it would improve in this sense.
Your initial argument (and the follow-up I quoted) claimed that better rewards were necessary because doing things for tangible rewards is an essential component of human behavior. I pointed out that the gaming industry managed to get by (and become mainstream!) without appealing to this seemingly essential dimension of human behavior. This, in turn, suggests that Skinner Box type mechanisms aren’t as important to a game’s success as your initial claims make it out to be. Your response was to shift from “this is how humans work” to “avoiding innovation is bad,” an argument which was irrelevant to my initial point.
There’s a reason I quote specific bits rather than replying to the whole thing: if I wanted to respond to the entirety of your thesis, I would’ve done that.
You misread what I said then, cause I never mentioned it as “essential” for a game, or whatever else. The other guy was judging me for liking it.
“It sounds like you aren’t even interested in video games, just addicted to progression hype.”
“instead of needing the flashy reward system of your brain over stimulated every five seconds.”
He was “mocking” me for “being stimulated by rewards”. And I replied saying that liking being rewarded is common human behavior. And so is progression.
Also, we could take this same discussion to a similar situation. Let’s say we get a new AAA game release with really, really dated graphics. Someone mentions the graphics are dated, and that there’s literally no point having them so dated (in a universe where making good graphics would be a matter of choice). That isn’t claiming a game can’t be good without good graphics. Then guy number 1 says “sorry if you only care about graphics”. Then I say liking good graphics is just common human behavior. And in no moment I said graphics are essential for a good game, it’s just a very valid critique on something that can definitely be worked on to ship a better product.
(apologies beforehand as i don’t play both games so my views maybe skew)
Maybe you can let me know what are the significant improvements over HS?
If just based on HS, I do feel HS is (currently) providing enough rewards but the presentation of the rewards feels unrewarding.
Likewise, in other games, they might have made the reward feels great but in comparison the amount obtain could be of lesser value. (assumption)
I am using a friend’s example to discuss above. My friend has accumulated over >20/30/40k++ of gold and dust, yet he simply does not enjoy the ladder experience. However, he prefers the Arena. As such, the reward has become secondary vs gameplay for this group of players.
Thus, as stated previously, the aspect where we form part of a greater community and how Dev needs to cater for enough diversity.
I don’t really like comparing card games with non card games so the Overwatch comparison doesn’t seem as relevant. Would you mind saying what the card games you like the progression system of (like MtGA and Eternal) do that you like so much, so people who haven’t played them can follow the conversation and understand what are the things you’d want implemented more easily?
In the rare instance they were both about equal for me (MtG:A and HS), yes MtG:A’s progression feel would sway me there.
The dominant game between these two for my time though is going to solely come down gameplay and therefore I only view the reward structure as a perk. To me the ladder provides enough incentive, to a degree, if I am enjoying myself (I’ll address your counter below).
As people active on these boards know I MUCH prefer MtG:A since Ravnica released compared to HS and it has declined my spend (and time) in HS. You’re opposite and prefer HS so maybe I would be as annoyed in a flipped role?
To me the ladder is seeing how far I can get with my favorite deck. Whether netdeck, my won brew, or my brew which became, basically, a net deck the ladder to me is a place to see how far I can push my deck when I am enjoying the meta. I want both a high rank and a high WR. Rank isn’t everything to me, I honestly weight more on WR, but I like to see how high I can get with a deck just as a personal challenge.
To make a proper analysis you have to account for the amount of cards, gold, and dust provided via monthly events like the Fire festival. A flagrant omission given it’s still on going.
You also omit the weekly packs from TB.
From the developers perspective it isn’t a game about building a collection by buying packs with gold (they want to make a living) it’s about providing a mixed economy where you plan your monetary purchases (usually pre order or right after exp release) and giving enough incentives to play during the 3rd or 4th month when there’s nothing new and you may stop playing the game completely.
I am unfamiliar with MTGA rewards, but I am more familiar with Artifact. Artifact is what a failed CCG economy looks like.
Our disagreement with you by paying players like Wardrum, Lykotic, and myself doesn’t mean we don’t want more incentives or that we recent you playing for free. Our disagreement is that we like the game so much, therefore we put money into it. So we wonder whether you actually like playing the game, if all that matters to you is loot.
To make a proper analysis you have to account for the amount of cards, gold, and dust provided via monthly events like the Fire festival. A flagrant omission given it’s still on going.
You also omit the weekly packs from TB.
I was talking about rewards post-softcap. I’m not arguing in favor or free stuff, I’m arguing in favor of incentive to play past the daily quests and the easy to clear events.
From the developers perspective it isn’t a game about building a collection by buying packs with gold (they want to make a living) it’s about providing a mixed economy where you plan your monetary purchases (usually pre order or right after exp release) and giving enough incentives to play during the 3rd or 4th month when there’s nothing new and you may stop playing the game completely.
Once again, I’m not talking about business model. I just want a reason to play the game and rewards that incentivise playing, I’m fine with pre-orders.
Our disagreement with you by paying players like Wardrum, Lykotic, and myself doesn’t mean we don’t want more incentives or that we recent you playing for free. Our disagreement is that we like the game so much, therefore we put money into it. So we wonder whether you actually like playing the game, if all that matters to you is loot.
Don’t get me wrong lol, I’ve spent at least 100 bucks in this game.
I’ll try to respond to the other replies in a bit, by the way.
While i do agree with op on some aspects of this post thier are some issues. I like the idea of adding more reward per day or better rewards for quest, i disagree with it being needed because said game does it. I agree with other post about a restrucure of current rewards. Maybe like a log in tracker that like say log in for each day give 50g automatically and like a week a free pack. if a person log in every day for a month maybe a hero skin. i think a way to fix the gold grind would be to do away with the match gold gain limit and maybe bump the total to 20 for win or something like that. Thier are ways to to get gold and such now i know but i think a little tweek to the rewards system could push for a more enjoyable game experiance
Have you ever played a real TCG? What do you think you’ll get for winning against friends 3 times?
On a serious note tho: This game should be about deckbuilding and fun. You’re describing something more akin to work and grind. HS is meant to be played in small bursts like every other TCG out there. I have endless fun challenging friends with decks that we put restrictions and themes on.
You say that with one side of your mouth, and with the other side you keep whining about how you want more rewards. And yet every time anyone asks you what exactly you mean by getting “more rewards”, you remain obstinately vague. Also, in your over-long (this coming from me!) original rant your complaints constantly circle around how it isn’t “worth it” to do Arena, Ranked, etc. Sure sounds like you want more free stuff to me.
But if - as you claim - you aren’t interested in just getting more stuff for cheap then perhaps you could take a moment to organize your thoughts and explain precisely what it is you’re actually talking about here?
Sounds like a stealth I want more gold post from OP.
IMO dailies can make games feel too much like work. Luckily Hs dailies are quick and easy and I can later play or do whatever I want.
There is a good video from a diablo gaming dev on loot. There was a study done that had two group of kids who were both told to color a picture. One group was rewarded with cookies and the other was not. The one that got rewarded would immediately stop once the rewards stopped while the other group might stop and take breaks but would come back to color the picture at their own pace for fun.
![:stuck_out_tongue:](https://dacy5cilkxabf.cloudfront.net/en/hearthstone/images/emoji/twitter/stuck_out_tongue.png?v=6" ":stuck_out_tongue:")