Would HotS benefit from an all hero bundle?

If HotS had a one time purchase to own all heroes that exist and ever will exist, would you buy it?

How much would you play?

Smite has this system and I’m sure it’s been mentioned quite a bit, and such a pack is useless to longer time players who have all the heroes and extra gold, but it does help newer players get into the game and try all it has to offer.

Would you want it?

How much for it?

Against it? Why?

7 Likes

I don’t think they will ever do something like this.

I personally wouldn’t want it and it would probably be only purchasable by real life currency.

I would think it might be around 300-500 dollars at minimum.

And if they do this and a lot of people start buying in whose to stop them from
“slowing down” hero releases.

i’m not saying blizzard is sleezy but its a good way to make money while having to do less work.

and i believe a lot of people would do that too in Blizzards shoes.

2 Likes

I wouldnt mind a bulk purchase for all heroes with a discount given the amount but in my case i already have most of the heroes maybe 10 ish i might not own yet. Everything else i bought with gold since the beta.
Price wise if id be starting from sratch with new account id say … 60 - 80$ CAD would be my price , not sure how much that is in USD but that would be probably whats i would consider to own all heroes.

Well the Smite system has it as like 30 dollars and they make most of their money through skin purchases (namely through publishing a lot of exclusive skins), I’d imagine a 100 dollar purchase for HotS wouldn’t be too bad.

A one time purchaser of a large purchase is generally more likely to happen than someone spending 10 bucks a pop for 10 heroes after all.

As for the slowing down, well you can’t make skin money if nobody is released to purchase things.

Honestly the only reason I’d think to not have a bulk purchase is because then gold would be spent exclusively on chest rerolls, but that’s hardly a bad thing. (That and the fact that heroes in hots are quite expensive if I recall).

4 Likes

I think it’ll be a good option to have.
It’ll be like buying the game itself (like with OW), but not a must have just an option so you can play without it but then you need to grind.
+1

I honestly would not. In my current situation. Because I have played all the heroes. If I had to get them again I would only go for my favorites. A bundle for them all would not matter unless it was cheaper.

For someone that has not found their favorites yet. I could see how this might be beneficial to the player, and maybe even for Blizz if it was a real money purchase vs. People that grind in-game currency to get all the heroes. My only concern is that but flooding them with so many at once could be overwhelming.

1 Like

Indeed, but the main reason for it to exist is for people who would prefer to have too many choices compared to having too little.

Believe me, it is already being discussed by Senior Management at Activision.

When will the children learn. Blizzard is a trashcan fire since they sold their soul to Activision. If you got the cash they will give you a grand master title. #comingsoon

Depends on the consumer, is he going to spend a lot of the time on this game to justify this purchase or not?

Also we can do a 20% price off if let’s say you buy all heroes at once, followed by also additional calculations that lowers the price if some of these heroes were already owned by the user.

I could see them doing the “2.0” bundles, but purchased with cash.

I don’t expect them to ever do the “All future heroes” included in any kind of bundle, because that cuts off a supply of revenue for them.

5 Likes

So choose (wisely) 1 out of 4 bundles, that could work too.

Depending on the price, I could consider buying a bundle of heroes.

I’m a rather inconsistent/more casual player, might play daily for a month and then not play at all for months. Thus I don’t gain that much gold and don’t own even half of the heroes. Buying them one by one with real money is something I wouldn’t do.

On the topic of losing revenue from a “future heroes” bundle; I might actually buy more skins if I owned the heroes Blizz releases new skins for… Currently I’m spending very little if any money on the game. A bundle like this might actually get people who otherwise wouldn’t spend any money to spend some.
And having bought all future heroes could also incentivize me, or similar players, to keep playing more long term.
If I drop the game for six months I’ll feel like I’m actually missing out on content I’ve paid for, instead of the current: Oh look, another new hero I can’t afford. Oh well, time to play X/Y/Z game instead.

1 Like

The only potential drawback I could see to this idea is that it would allow for even more rampant smurfing, with all the pros and cons associated with that. I like the general idea, especially as it means that there is the potential you could gift a friend with a hero bundle.

1 Like

I don’t really mind if that means people pay to smurf with a specific set of heroes. That would just mean the game makes more money, prompting Blizzard to focus more dev attention (to make even more money, because all the money is still not enough).

At least the smurfs would have other heroes to choose from after they get target banned with the upcoming name reveal change.

I personally don’t think an all-hero content pack would benefit hots.

For one, the model of resource acquisition for the game is designed to be part of the inventive for players to play and ‘get good’ at a hero, both in the unlocking of the collection, but in hitting the min mark for ranked play and the like. The cost of heroes are front-loaded at release to be a deterrent for people to get the hero from the get-go esp as a means to try to stabilize hero picks for team compositions and not get slews of players trying to dump onto the latest release.

Smite’s package was a front-loaded offer out of necessity for money, and I don’t know much more about the pricing/play for smite, but it seems more a direct contrast for a quick appeal and sink compared to HoTS model that almost demands players wait a whole year instead of at the gate.

So the whole-package deal seems counter-intuitive to how HoTS is set up. Maybe the other model would be ‘better’ for getting money in, at least for a short-term spike, but part of why I even bother with HoTS is that it seemed intended for the long haul, and time and again, some people keep choosing to neglect that in favor of the most immediate tin-foil copy/paste to complain about a fairly non-committal game.

Yes, it would. But it’s a pointless discussion because it will never happen as long as Blizzard is a part of Activision-Blizzard, and/or if Blizzard is a public company.

This aint true at all. Its why mobile games are such a success.Its more easy dropping a few bucks then a massive investment for a game you aint sure you will play for that long(this is mostly for new players not ppl who own above 70% of roaster).

After all those mobile games con ppl with"its just a few bucks" over and over.

I think it’s a bad idea. For the price to be appealing to the mass consumer it would need to be maximum $60 or so, but blizzard would be losing a ton of gems by setting the price that low.

I’d make flex packages where you get 40 base pre-selected heroes plus 5 of your choice. Call it VIP pass or whatever and add some exclusive fluff to it for good measure.

2 Likes

Yes, it would - especially if it included future Hero releases. Price the bundle the same as any other AAA title like they did with Overwatch.