Could this game be a reasonabe "E-sport"?

[Dreyo]

If it does, it'll be nice that it doesn't have the pay-to-win model that other similar games do...

Even a total free player would still likely be able to put forth a respectable deck if well played. People who shell out cash may have the jump on any new card releases, but that's only a head start, rather than an insurmountable lead.

[Deleted]

After watching twou gameplasy again and again, I am fairly sure that this game could be a e-sport, it is fun to watch it. The only problem could be too long decision-time SC2 dimishes it by just looking over the map and commenting "it's wise to take this expansion" or "oh look, he builds a hatchery now, lets see where is this drone going" etc.

Actually if you watch a MTG tournament commentary they manage pretty well with filling out the time in between turns, which can take more then 5-10 min each and a judge is rarely called upon if they feel like the other person is dragging out the time intentionally.

If you have a skilled shoutcaster that actually know high level play and game analysis he could probably go on all day about how each card played will impact the field, how a players chances on drawing the cards he needs and possible "outs" if a player is in a tight spot, why he might have included some cards in his build compared to others that distinguish his deck from other peoples in the meta play. He could talk about the players background info if it's on high level play, maybe some statistics on win ratio with the specific deck he is using against other decks he have previously meet in the tournament.

You might not even have time to talk about most of this during the match simply because of how high paced this game looks, i mean the fireside duels we have seen so far the shoutcaster tries to do this at the beginning, but the sheer speed allows him little time to even talk about the starting hand of the one player we see, just imagine if he had to comment on both players at the same time.

Contrary to what other people might think if you have a high phased game and a hyped shoutcaster you can have the same OMG moments in a cardgames like any other E-sport game when something amazing happens, we had a little of it with the Jaraxxus play, but could have been much more exiting had it been a more practiced shoutcaster.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4t0pzLnSWw0

[blackblade]

If it does, it'll be nice that it doesn't have the pay-to-win model that other similar games do...

Even a total free player would still likely be able to put forth a respectable deck if well played. People who shell out cash may have the jump on any new card releases, but that's only a head start, rather than an insurmountable lead.

Moreso because you can mill unwanted cards to get desired cards. People who pay just get there faster.

[Seref]

It is not fast enough to hold interest for viewers. Like it or not, its about getting people who dont play the game watch it and be intrested.
It could have massive tournaments online by fans - thats about it. Some streams with shoutcasts..sure. But that could be done to any game.

SC2 is popular because its simple for new viewers. Man builds army, kills other army. LoL has huge playerbase to begin with so the viewers come from there too.

Uhm... What? Have you been smoking bath salts?

"SC2 is simple", "Hearthstone isn't fast enough." TCG's are TOO fast, games are usually over in 1-5 rounds, Hearthstone not being fast is a GOOD thing. And SC2 is in no way "simple", I've played it and even I wouldn't know wtf is going on if I was to spectate a pro game (it's been years since I paid any attention to the SC2 meta or played it, aka beta)

And wtf does LoL have to do with Hearthstone or SC2? Different genres, different company. That'd be the same as saying CoD and LoL are both eSports..

[Deleted]

I can imagine some small tournaments especially in the beginning but nothing major.
My reasoning is that card games in general attract less players and many e-sports fans will propably look down on it as a "minigame".
The only card game that has streamed tounaments that comes to my mind is MTG and its fans might find Hearthstone too simple or just too "warcrafty".
I also don't think Blizzard wants it to become an e-sports.
The shoutcast was interesting but mostly for introducing and explaining the game. I am not sure if I would still watch it when I know everything about the game.

If a fanbase can be found we might see several streams and tournaments but I don't expect too much.

[xskarma]

I also don't think Blizzard wants it to become an e-sports.

Oh they do. They've made comments several times now that they'd look at all the feedback coming out during this period and the beta to see where they would turn their attention. Thing is they're only a 15 man team, so they need to make much more deliberate and harsh decisions on where to spend their time. If the support from the community for turning it into an e-sport isn't good enough, but they're more interested in for instance (no idea if this is still the same team or a different one, just an example) getting the game to Android platform then you can bet your ass that the team puts their effort towards that.

[Plasma22]

I'm not sure if it will hit E-Sport status right away as I doubt the base card set will be enough to keep the competition fresh. I think we are now speculating that there are between 20-25 cards for each class... But, then again, with 9 'types' of decks to play maybe it will be enough.

Personally, I'd like to see Forge take off as the ESPORT.

[Deleted]

I'm not sure if it will hit E-Sport status right away as I doubt the base card set will be enough to keep the competition fresh. I think we are now speculating that there are between 20-25 cards for each class... But, then again, with 9 'types' of decks to play maybe it will be enough.

Personally, I'd like to see Forge take off as the ESPORT.

Well the "draft" in MTG is part of high end tournament play, but i doubt you can use it as the center of e-sport since the players facing off have no interaction when building the deck unlike MTG where they can influence what cards the other players get.

[xskarma]

Well the "draft" in MTG is part of high end tournament play, but i doubt you can use it as the center of e-sport since the players facing off have no interaction when building the deck unlike MTG where they can influence what cards the other players get.

I think the RNG of the Forge might be too big for any serious competition. 1 guy gets a perfect deck, the other gets a really poor one, and there's very little you can do to improve on your situation through play, if all the players are of even quality play wise. I agree it only would work if you could influence the other player's choices, like in a true draft.

[Deleted]

Well the "draft" in MTG is part of high end tournament play, but i doubt you can use it as the center of e-sport since the players facing off have no interaction when building the deck unlike MTG where they can influence what cards the other players get.

While the draft-format is a widely spread way of playing MTG, when I played it a couple of years ago, T2 was the most common format, in which both players build their decks completely independend from each other.

[Deleted]

Could it be an E-sport? it probaly could, but it need 2 main factore to more then just a "game" to a "E-sport" .
First of all you need a balanced game, there can not be 1 hero, and 30 cards who is outright better then anything else. There need to be more play styles, if you want to focus on direct damge on the enemy hero or use mobs cards.
2: There need to be a prise, Some of "Dat money" in order for people to really care, there need to be tornements with monet prises.
look at LoL -> many different heroes = play styles, and riot games trowing milions and milions to make it an esport. While also if you look at starcraft also have some good prises there.

But really, depens on how you see it, for well you can also just say " people play it = an sport. it is over the internet = e-sport"
I do not personal feel like it will be a real E-Sport, no way blizzard will trow money at it. and then who will? Why would This, a wow spinoff card game become MLG worthy and not so many other card games. It may be good, hopefully the best, but i daoubt it

[iggie]

E-sport? No, it won't be. It won't be more than a blip on the radar in the grand scheme of things.

[vaestmannaeyjar]

While those games didn't immediately start out as e-sports, all three (SC1 included) started out as quite difficult games to play.

The way I see it, unless Hearthstone somehow gets 10x the number of cards with complexity on the level of Magic The Gathering, it doesn't meet the esoteric requirement.

From what I see, Hearthstone is more of a casual player TCG rather than an esoteric high difficulty game like chess.

Chess is easy. Chess against a skilled opponent is difficult. What matters isn't really the intrinsic difficulty of playing the game but how the game ramps up with player ability.
Playing a minion and attacking with it isn't difficult. Judging if a minion trade iw worth it, remembering what cards your opponent played and the % of chances he has to hold another copy in his hand etc is another matter. Building a performing deck is pretty easy (just copy it off the web) but playing it well against a variety of other decks is another story.

There is only one prereq for it to be viable as an e-sport: that good players are able to win consistently, meaningthe random factor of what card you draw can be mitigated by deck building and smart play.

[Deleted]

Uhm... What? Have you been smoking bath salts?

"SC2 is simple", "Hearthstone isn't fast enough." TCG's are TOO fast, games are usually over in 1-5 rounds, Hearthstone not being fast is a GOOD thing. And SC2 is in no way "simple", I've played it and even I wouldn't know wtf is going on if I was to spectate a pro game (it's been years since I paid any attention to the SC2 meta or played it, aka beta)

And wtf does LoL have to do with Hearthstone or SC2? Different genres, different company. That'd be the same as saying CoD and LoL are both eSports..

SC2 is "Simple" enough. I've never played it and I enjoy watching it even more than some conventional sports like footbal and basketball.

[Deleted]

I don't see why not. As people have said though it might not captivate people for all that long but i can't see why there couldn't be high end tournaments. Do we know if there is a proper ladder system in the game? ie starcraft II's ladder?

[xskarma]

Do we know if there is a proper ladder system in the game? ie starcraft II's ladder?

There's been very little info about how the ladder system in HS is going to work. We've only heard there's going to be a weekly reset ladder system with various ranks you can achieve. What ranks, and how those ranks are decided hasn't been revealed.

I don't know how the SC2 ladder works tbh, could you give us an idea about it so we can judge if it's a good system for HS or not?

[Deleted]

There's been very little info about how the ladder system in HS is going to work. We've only heard there's going to be a weekly reset ladder system with various ranks you can achieve. What ranks, and how those ranks are decided hasn't been revealed.

I don't know how the SC2 ladder works tbh, could you give us an idea about it so we can judge if it's a good system for HS or not?

It's an intricate system that is based on ranking points that you earn based on the opponent you are fighting.

If you beat an opponent that is ranked slightly higher then you, you will be awarded more points, if he is below you, you will earn less. If you lose to an opponent that is ranked lower then you, you will lose a larger amount of points then had the opponent been higher. When you try to enter a new rank (bronze to silver, silver to gold etc.) you will need a certain amount of points but also a certain amount of win % before you will rank up.

And yes so far it has been suggested that this is the kind of system they plan on using in Hearthstone to balance out who you play.

[xskarma]

It's an intricate system that is based on ranking points that you earn based on the opponent you are fighting.

If you beat an opponent that is ranked slightly higher then you, you will be awarded more points, if he is below you, you will earn less. If you lose to an opponent that is ranked lower then you, you will lose a larger amount of points then had the opponent been higher. When you try to enter a new rank (bronze to silver, silver to gold etc.) you will need a certain amount of points but also a certain amount of win % before you will rank up.

And yes so far it has been suggested that this is the kind of system they plan on using in Hearthstone to balance out who you play.

Ah okay, I thought there was something outside of these basic rules that I didn't know. Seems like a decent way to do it. With enough players it should provide everyone with decent competition, and keep things fun.

[Deleted]

Ah okay, I thought there was something outside of these basic rules that I didn't know. Seems like a decent way to do it. With enough players it should provide everyone with decent competition, and keep things fun.

There have been some speculation that there will be a difference between the matchmaking system and the medal rank system.

We know the rank system that allows you to earn new packs will reset each week, but that wouldn't necessarily mean that the matchmaking system would reset as well.

Someone also compared it to Arena where you will keep getting ranked with opponents of equal skill each week, but the weekly conquest cap would reset. And as you said there is very little knowledge of how the medal ranking system will work, maybe just from a certain amount of wins or a % of wins.

I hope they release some dev's behind the scenes talk, that will go slightly more in depths with these things at some point

[xskarma]

Well I'm pretty sure I remember that Blizz commented that the system would reset each week. They said something like that you'd get matched to equal opponents every week, which would help if you switched to a less played (and developed) deck compared to the week before. Just not sure where I got that from, and I can't find it in the obvious places.

If you don't reset the matchmaking system in some way people would get matched against people with much better decks and you'd end up having to sit through a bunch of uneven matches every time you switch decks. Then again I can also see matchmaking resets doing the same thing, if things are reset to 0 every time, so I'm not sure how you'd create a system that handles both situations well, and provides a decent challenge for every player, at all times.

I mean HS is not like SC2 in that the basics of the game are not equal. In SC2 you have the same basic set for every player when they begin. In HS you begin with different decks, and no 1 player is the same as the next. I have no idea how the HS matchmaking system will account for that. There almost has to be a point at which changing decks completely screws up any fairness in the matchmaking. And I hope Blizz has some sort of idea for that, cause I'd like to be able to switch decks and heroes during the week.