Seeing as the power difference between heroes are pretty big from the get-go, every time you rotate in additional layers of randomness on top of it Battlegrounds just goes haywire. (Examples being buddies, quests, dark moon faire.)
At least let us buy the 4 champ choice for gold again like back in the day.
Personally I’ve been wanting to buy a couple of the “season passes”, but I just refuse to since the 4 hero choice is in there. I’ll gladly pay for the cosmetics, but the P2W aspect is something I just won’t support, it’s immoral in a competitive game and you know it.
5 Likes
Blizzard wants cash.
If they thought they could abolish the in-game gold currency without the entire player base quitting they would.
1 Like
it would be nice if they let people have 4 choices again. battlegrounds was very free to play friendly and i understand maybe why they wanted to monetize it more but this was kind of scummy.
The incredibly sad part is, they would still have people defending such a decision as if there is nothing wrong with it. Probably telling people to stop being poor and get a job or something equally out of touch.
1 Like
The 4 hero choice for gold I think was always meant to be a way to take the player gold stockpile out of the in game economy and while BGs was still new (like its first few years) was always meant to be a way to make players used to picking from 4 instead of 2. Then after the Intro time period of BGs was over and they had gotten as much of the player gold stockpiles out as they could by then, it flipped the switch to it being an IRL money perk like it was always intended to be. They were just being generous to us by letting us exchange the gold (that normally was spent on packs they wanted to sell to IRL money instead) for the perks up until that time.
I see similar things happen elsewhere in the world all the time. Credit Cards with intro APRs for the first year and then it goes up to a different APR afterwards. Internet and cable bundle prices that have an advertised price up front for x months but you sign a 1 yr or 2yr contract where you got that intro price for those x months, but it goes up 33% after the end of those months and another 33% after the first year is over. etc. Cell phone bills are like this too. Nothing new, and only a surprise to those that dont read what they agree to. The only difference here is that there never was any contract involved but just the open generosity to let us buy perks with gold to build up the playerbase and its expectation to pick 4.
Just being generous? You mean they flipped the switch to let greed take over instead of actually trying to preserve the competitive spirit of the game? There are so many other things they can jam into that season pass, but the 4 choice should not be part of it. It should either be baseline or non-existent.
I mean they didnt immediately have it as a monetized option which is what it was always meant to be. There has to be an aspect or fundamental tangible thing that is monetized in any game mode they introduce. In the main constructed game, its packs and pre orders and cosmetics. In BGs the only 2 things possible are cosmetics and hero choices. Cosmetics isnt enough to carry the game mode financially for the cost it takes to run and maintain the servers and game maintenance, development and so on. So in order for it to remain a game at all for us to continue to play for free, there has to be something that is easily a justified purchase for most people to make. It isnt greed to want to not run into the red on their investment that is the game. Its just greedy to you because you have become entitled to feeling that you should never pay for anything in the game mode. That feeling isnt justified or logical.
I totally agree with OP, and this is coming from someone who would never buy it because I enjoy the Standard and Wild mode too much.
I have a friend who only plays Battlegrounds, and he’s sitting on a ridiculous amount of gold that he can’t even spend.
I think it’s a cop out tbh, TFT monetized their game as well with purely cosmetic options and bonuses for the main game of League. There are options that do not involve any pay-to-win aspects. It’s pure corporate greed and I don’t understand people actually defending any of it.
Add boards backgrounds, more tavern keepers, more spell effects, alternate card art, music options, more hero portraits, heck give us card packs for the main game etc. etc. But that would actually require some effort on their part. The game is unbalanced and even more unbalanced because of the 2v4 choices. Like I said, I’d be happy to pay for cosmetics. Even seen a few that almost made me buy the passes a bunch of times, but I just won’t support it as long as the P2W option is included in there. Moral reasons…
I just concede until I get something playable. It can take 20 to 30 tries though, because I am repeatedly offered the same garbage over and over again.
The only pathway I can see to get to where you wish them to be, is if players bought cosmetics with IRL money en mass. So much so that they could then justify separating the perks from IRL money only. But since you wont do that then you are are most likely the reason it wont happen. Even if they did all you wished for a year straight with more boards, more skins, more finishers, etc but hadnt unlinked the perks from IRL money yet… you would actually ensure they didnt unlink it if more people took the stance you are right now. The refusal to buy the perks is fine, but analytics are what will drive behavior change, so buy all the cosmetics and finishers and skins etc you like and abstain from the perks. Nothing at all wrong with that practice as it is sending a message as to what you do support from them and what you dont. If you wish the game to remain a viable endeavor for them to continue supporting and creating more content for thats how that can happen at all. Im not defending their choices, but I am more than capable of clearly understanding their possible reasons for making them. There is no morality judgements to be made for business decisions. Fraudulent or criminal practices, then yes there would be and ought to be. but not for normal business practices such as rolling out a game and the need to make it monetizable to be self sufficient.
1 Like
You got proof of this or are are you just spouting Bull donkey?
2 Likes
It seems fairly evident from the fact that the only monetizable option in a game designed like BGs was designed, since there is nothing to collect like in constructed, and nothing but cosmetics only isnt a big selling feature for the type of players this game attracts, its definitely a non zero amount Ill grant that much for cosmetics, but the only other feature or variable the game has is the hero choice perk. So youve got essentially 2 variables and one has always been monetized by irl, and the other not. And since the perks has been the only purchase Ive read on these forums anyone complain about or reveal they regularly do, its fairly evident that this other variable is also an always meant to be monetized feature to sell.
I can look at duck and listen to it quack and feel the feathers and bill, and it isnt a leap of logic to conclude that it is reality, a duck. At least its an understandable conclusion any average objective person would arrive at as well. The perks is that duck Im rationalizing it is.
SO proof? No. Obvious objective points that anyone should be able to come to the same conclusion as I did, yes. You may not agree with my conclusion but you should be able to agree how I arrived at it if you involve any amount of critical thinking.