Ofcourse you know there isnt a AAA title CCG game, sorry but read my message again since you did not understand, i dont know how to put it more clearly.
you just highlighted one sentence and pulled it out of context
What’s so hard to believe about it? If you’ve played since the game started, it’s fairly easy to keep up with just using gold.
I’d hate to have to start the game from scratch at the moment. You would realistically have to spend more than $500 to have any hope of being competitive. I feel for new players who are working their way down the ranks without having spent all that cash. As soon as they hit L25 they will be smacked with advanced decks stacked with rares, epics and legendaries from 4 or more expansions. Of course they will lose and most of them will look at the cost to compete and simply give up.
If Blizzard think that Hearthstone can survive forever with this business model they are fooling themselves. One by one the whales will drop out and eventually the game will fail.
Anyone can see that without new customers coming in all the time the product is doomed!
1 Like
Wait, what? Where did you get that number? You only need one solid deck to be competitive, not a full collection.
1 Like
The biggest improvement would be some kind of returnees catch up deal.
The easiest thing would be to keep the yearly one time purchase deals indefinitely open until their cards rotate out.
Second is reducing the cost of Wild content.
Yeah, it does I know ppl who buy and sells MTG cards and not even know how to play the game why do you think ppl are willing to spend big money on power 9 cards it’s not just to play but also to invest.
Just because MtG has a secondary market and some people exclusively partake in said market doesn’t mean that such a concept is necessary for something to be a CCG. If buying and selling individual cards (online or in-store) was made illegal and no one partook in transactions involving the exchange of cards (for other cards, money, etc), people would still be able to collect the cards by buying packs, decks, etc. Thus, MtG would still very much be a Collectible Card Game, just as Hearthstone is.
If you’re going to use extreme cases of players who collect cards but don’t play the game, Hearthstone has those too. People grind accounts by opening packs, using bots, etc until they have a lot of cards, then sell the accounts for money. A small group of people doesn’t define whether or not a game is a CCG.
It’s a challenge to do that. You do certainly want to make the game attractive both to new players and to people who have ‘taken a break’. The biggest obstacle to both types is that the pool of cards they feel they need to have is so daunting that they just don’t even bother trying.
At the same time, you can’t just gift these players with tons of incredibly cheap or free cards. Not only does that crap all over your loyal customers who HAVE continued to play and spend money, but it creates a dynamic where you are actively encouraging people to quit playing the game so they can come back later and get things cheaper.
So it’s kind of a Catch-22. How do you make the game attractive to the Newbies and the Breakers while not devaluing your loyal customers and encouraging deliberate periods of sporadic abandonment?
I think Whizbang is a great example of the kind of thing that can bridge those two opposites. It’s a card that gives a player a LIMITED expansion to their collection in a controlled way by…
- Allowing a player to experiment with the newer content without actually owning it…
- Doesn’t require a large investment in time or resources…
- Doesn’t permanently add the new content to their collections and …
- Allow for some limited scale experimentation and exploration.
I think that’s the only happy medium that will allow Blizzard to appeal to both sides without being too unfair. So we need more stuff that is Whizbang-Like. Stuff that gives players access to content without necessarily giving away the farm either.
I think a good option to consider would be for Blizzard to add “Starter Decks” that change with every new expansion. These would be pre-built decks that all players would have access to which they could not alter or change. They’d be decent decks which contained cards from all the new sets. Players could opt to use them in Casual or Ranked, and so they’d be able to play the game with everyone else while at the same time not have the flexibility and control that a person who owned the cards in their collection would have.
Blizzard also does a nice job of giving away some amount of current content. For example - the pack rewards with the launch of Shadows gave players some packs from the Year of the Raven. That gives players who have been away a while a bit of a leg into the sets.
That’s why I mention the one time offers as a way to do it. I can’t imagine the loyal crowd is going to be upset by a returning player being able to get an older deal like the Winter 30 pack $20 deal, but those deals also provide packs from multiple, latest expansions a returning player is likely lacking in.
Keep reaching, funny how you said they used bots that’s still playing the game even if the owners using bot you still have to run the game. Keep talking all you want the fact is physical card games have non players that sell and trade cards unlike most digital card games. To be fair most card collectors value said collection (display lots of PSA cards) where’s the value in digital cards that has no secondary market?
My entire point was that the existence of non-players in MtG doesn’t mean that the secondary market is a requirement for a game to be a CCG. A vast majority of definitions for what a CCG is don’t even mention the secondary market. Why does the existence of non-players in MtG have any impact on whether the secondary market is a requirement of a CCG?
You can sell your account (as I mentioned above when talking about bot accounts), therefore there IS a secondary market for Hearthstone.
Show me more than 5 hearthstone account going over 2k in the secondary market. I never met any collector not mentioning how much their collection is worth, heck I met ppl who values misprints.
To be fair, you CANNOT do this “legally”, its a black market of sorts as it violates many clauses in the EULA.
Probably best not to discuss things like that on their official forums.
1 Like
Fair enough, I’ll try to avoid that in the future.
And? How does the exact price change the definition of a CCG in any way? Show me a definition of the term “CCG” that requires the collections of certain individuals to be worth thousands of dollars.
You can say the same thing about baseball cards.There is no rule about it being worth money yet you have ppl paying money good money for said collection. Look at 1952 Mickey Mantle. Anything that is collectible is going to see value to another person.The very fact that you have ppl breaking down value in every mtg precon deck from EDH to the new challenger deck.
Yeah. And?..
Again, my point is that the secondary market is not a prerequisite for a game to be defined as a CCG. While often a part of collectible card games, the secondary market is rarely mentioned when looking at definitions for such games, and is rarely (if ever) endorsed or even acknowledged by the companies that create said games. Just because cards have value does not mean that said value is a requirement of a CCG. That’s the point that I’ve been trying to make.
If that was the case why does whizbang have the reserve list? Why doesn’t whizbang print fetch land if secondary market wasn’t a big deal, you need to look up mtg reserve list and tell me that whizbang doesn’t care about secondary market.
Cool idea and all. But unless people stop buying completely, blizzard will never change.
I think there is a very real possibility that Blizzard will be forced to move away from the random pack monetization model we currently have. RIght now, the US government is investigating companies for loot box style monetization, and Blizzard is one of the companies being investigated (no doubt because of Overwatch and Hearthstone).
Of course it would be difficult for them not to do anything without knowledge of the secondary market. What I specifically said was that the secondary market is neither endorsed nor acknowledged by the companies that create CCGs. Wizards (or “whizbang” as you call them) are not legally allowed to recognize the secondary market. Not that this does anything to change the conversation at hand because, as I said earlier, just because cards have value does not mean that said value is a requirement of a CCG. That’s the point that I’ve been trying to make.