Pack Opening - Blizz won't be getting any more money from me

Multiplayer Discussion
1

I’ve never done this before, and am not usually a complainer, but felt the need to state this somewhere that Blizz might read it so they at least have an idea of why they’re losing customers.

I’m a long time Hearthstone player - since the launch month of the game. I’ve been pre-purchasing 60 or 100 packs since Mean Streets of Gadgetzan (and also bought all of the adventures). You do the math. That’s a lot of friggen money spent on a single game. I played it a lot and USUALLY felt like I got my money’s worth.

Over the last 2 expansions, I spent $100 on Saviors of Uldum, and another $60 on Descent of Dragons. In the case of Descent of Dragons, my $65 bought me 60 packs, plus the 10 that came for free, plus the 7,500 gold I had that bought me another 75 packs. That’s a total of 145 packs. Here are my totals (including the free legendary that came with the pre-purchase):

-7 out of 22 legendaries
-18 out of 38 possible class epics (let’s be honest, the only half decent and useful ones).

I went damn near to the ‘pity’ timer twice. By the way, they should call the current 40 pack PITY timer a ‘Go and screw yourself, give me more money’ timer.

While I think Blizz has made some good changes to the game recently, such as the new quests, more free cards, the always good events, etc. there is nothing that can make open for an absolute abysmal pack opening experience where you feel like you got ripped off (twice in a row now).

If I can’t spend $65-$100 3 times a year and be able to play a game without BS walls and hurdles to jump over, then screw it, and count me out. There are plenty of other games that provide a far less frustrating experience. Blizz, until you improve your value for money spent, you can say goodbye to my hard-earned dollars. If the only decks I can make and play are budget decks anyways, I might as well be a F2P player.

~A long time disgruntled and cheated Hearthstone player.

11 Likes
2

I totally agree, it would be much better if the amount of packs provided by both pre-purchase were enough to get every cards of the Xpac. We are talking about more than 400$ a year to still end up missing cards.

So, in my opinion pre-purchase should give all cards. Buying more packs after that should be for those who want to craft and collect golden cards.

1 Like
3

TCG are usually extremely expensive hobby.

but HS isn’t a TCG, you can’t trade, your collection has exactly 0$ value.

You’d think that being on a media that disallows trades the prices would be equivalent to a normal game.

but as long as you guys fork 400-500+$ per year, why would they ever change it?

For them, they have found the golden goose, a very cheap game to make that has extreme profits, exactly like the sea of mobile games out there that require minimal effort (compared to a normal game) but produce 10x+ the profit.

here, they are masquerading behind the “accepted norm” of TCGs while they don’t provide a TCG.

in the end: nothing new: as long as people pay way more than the value of an object, there’s no reason for the provider to cheapen his product. Similar to the whole exhibition fiasko with that banana stuck on a wall (a simple banana with ducktape) going for 120000$ currently.

5 Likes
4

I can understand your frustration for certain. The CCG model in the virtual space feels a lot worse. Overall, and just my opinion, i feel Magic’s Wildcard system because you can earn Wildcards. is a slightly better system than dust but yeah… while I am a big CCG player (even getting back into paper Magic slowly) the system isn’t great in the digital space for certain.

3 Likes
5

7 in 145? That’s your complaint?

Lmao, I got 4 in 110 and I’m not complaining.

2 Likes
6

Here is the counter, just playing Devil’s Advocate:
I can’t make a 1-to-1 comparison using HS but I can with MtG:A (Magic’s version of HS) and while I can’t trade the game is A LOT cheaper in the digital format.

I spend $200/yr in MtG:A (and $240 in HS, but $160 this year). It collects me roughly the same % of a set after free packs which Magic gives out a lot more of (you also need more copies of most cards to it evens out. This reason is why I think making MtG:A the proxy for HS in this regard is fair… I own about the same % of the set.

For $200/yr in MtG:A I literally have a collection that in Paper Magic is probably approaching $1.5K in value right now. In addition I have 12 Mythic cards (Legends) and 42 Rare (Epic) cards I can craft if I want to.

What about trading though? True, I cannot ‘cash out’ my collections but on the flip side I can play MtG:A (and HS) from my house at 10am or 11pm so I view it as trading my ability to convert cards to my ability to play. Add in kids and wife and the fact I don’t need to organize game time and do FNM makes up for the lost value as what is value if it is hard to convert into entertainment?

Just my thoughts on how you can view the digital CCG market as well. It is expensive for video games, 100% agree as a Steam sale buyer but compared to normal CCGs I think it is fair due to the reasons above.

7

i wasn’t targeting “HS” alone.

in general i view the whole CCGs as scams preying on the expected value of TCGs.

200$ per year, for a single game, should net you way more than full collection.

in any normal coputer game, that you can play from morning to night as well, you can expect to give 50-100 per year.

in CCGs you give 200 and you don’t even have the full game.

That’s why i said that as long as people spend, companies will ask. That’s how ALL mobile “whale” games operate. Minimal effort, maximum profits.

again, no joke, 120000$ banana. And people BUY it. So, why wouldn’t the “artist” sell it?

2 Likes
8

That’s a ridiculous idea. That would give everyone all the cards and would single handedly destroy the game and would make legendary rarity meaningless. Sorry OP, but this is an odd thing to complain about. Its a card game and like most card games, you take chances. You gamble. Sometimes you’re lucky, sometimes you’re not.

9

I get you on that but my alternative for Magic is:
a) Don’t play - Magic is probably my favorite game, period
b) Play paper - With the issues of paper (time) and increased up front cost
c) play digital - With issues of a sunk cost for entertainment

For me the “c” option is the best and I have no issue with that trade. I am trading $s (~$200) for A LOT of hours of entertainment.

In fairness, on a side note, I am about at the end of the entertainment exchange with HS.

1 Like
10

yeah, i get that.

in a sense, it’s a vice. And all vices come at a cost.

I was talking more about the principle of the thing.

In effect, they create the illusion of a card game, with the same cost of a card game. But they completely skip on the actual value of a normal card game while keeping the cost (relatively) the same.

For me, that’s a scam. And it’s one of the reasons, as a principle, I’m not spending money on digital card games.

4 Likes
11

Dude the averages and risks are known. You low rolled. If you can’t accept that possibility playing ANY CCG is a horrible idea.

12

Too bad, I feel for ya. I on the other hand, got 12 legendaries on 200ish packs (14 with the 2 free ones from buying bundles). I know it’s a lot of money but I really like this game. In the end, a lot of those legendaries are just bad anyways. Which are the ones you didn’t get that you’d wish to get ?

13

Isn’t 7/140 average? I thought average was 1 legendary in 20 packs.

I can understand card opening frustration but I’ll tell you I’ve done much worse than this in the past. It really does frustrate the hell out of you particularly if you’ve spent money to open pack after pack of junk

14

Is the 7 with or without the bonus goldens. Becaue if it is without you hit the average drop rate of 1 in 20.

15

So you think 400$ a year shouldn’t be enough to be able to play 100% of a VIRTUAL game ? Alright, that’s your opinion. I would understand if they were physical cards, or if you could trade them, but it’s not the case.

16

That’s exactly what I’m saying. If you could just buy all the cards, rarity would mean nothing. Anyone could create a meta deck. Buying cards for rl card games like say, magic, isn’t it like that? You buy packs and hope you get something good. Sorry, but that isn’t a good idea.

2 Likes
17

you’re missing the ginormous difference than in actual card games, you can sell the cards back.

the cards have value.

in a computer game, they don’t. So there’s no reason at all to pay that much.

In fact, hearthstone (and all other digital card games) are much more like digital games rather than card games. And in digital games you sure as hell can buy “the whole game” with a single purchase. It doesn’t make it less enjoyable playing them after you have the full game…

18

The vast majority of cards aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on.

1 Like
19

Not to mention that the secondary market can royally screw a paying player. Paying 100 bucks for a single copy of a card because it is competative is rough. Also you can lose your real cards, have them stolen, damage them, and have to store them. Digital has plenty of advantages over real cards. If you (not you the guy you replied to) can’t accept the tried and true model of CCGs move on. You’ll never get 100% for a flat rate and it is ridiculous to expect that.

1 Like
20

That’s your problem you’ve given them money then expect them to owe you something, your not a customer your a sucker with a gambling problem for things that don’t exist.