View Poll Results: Did this announcement meet expectations?

Voters
648. You may not vote on this poll
  • Met expectations, pleased

    80 12.35%
  • Met expectations, disappointed

    30 4.63%
  • Surprised, pleased

    387 59.72%
  • Surprised, disappointed

    151 23.30%
Page 19 of 20 FirstFirst ...
9
17
18
19
20
LastLast
  1. #361
    I'm really excited. The game art&style looks awesome (just like any other Blizzard game), makes we want to not wait for the beta, hehe. Definitely looking forward it!

  2. #362
    Quote Originally Posted by Dekadez View Post
    Take an introductory course in Marketing son. You don't announce little things on big expositions that get extensive global media coverage.
    You don't? Really? Because Blizzard did. And they even told us ahead of time that it would be a little thing.
    No matter how they frame it, they created a buzz which is a job well done.
    And? There's nothing Blizzard can do that wouldn't create a buzz among their fanbase. Many gaming sites hang on their every word.
    If you don't think they anticipated this and wanted to achieve this, then you're simply delusional and dense.
    Of course they anticipated there would be scores of people that completely ignored what they actually said and built up unrealistic expectations based on absolutely nothing. It has been happening for years!
    I'm not going to bother. This forum has an eerie, almost sexual infatuation with everything Blizzard says or does. They are a pristine exemplary company that does no company stuffs. They are not in the business of making money, but in the business of making virtual love to us. Their press statements are personal messages into our soul, by no means marketing tricks to get the attention of the public and press and to get the word of mouth going. They are our rock, our savior, they are the epitome of the social corporation that is 100% customer driven. They can do no wrong.
    GENERALIZATION OVERLOAD! THE FORUMS CANNOT TAKE ANYMORE, CAPTAIN!

    You can paint the entire forum with a broad brush all you like, but you're the one who is blatantly ignoring what Blizzard actually said.
    I mourn the loss of a man of true vision and talent. You were my idol, Mr. Giger.
    You gave faces to my dreams and nightmares and sparked my imagination throughout my entire life. You will be missed.

    Hans Rudolf Giger
    2/5/1940 - 5/12/2014

  3. #363
    Possibly not the best path to your issue, since you can still (I believe, anyway) trade in complete sets of virtual cards for physical MTG cards. Though you end up paying shipping and such.
    Well, you're restricted to which sets you can redeem. Each set has a date where once that date has passed, it's no longer available. That date seems to be set for a year after a set is released, though there's a 'guaranteed date' which corresponds with when the set is no longer being actively printed. You can't just hop onto MTGO and start buying up a bunch of cards from 2002 and then get them redeemed for a copy of those cards IRL. On top of that, you can only redeem full sets, not singles or decks.

    The same kind of stuff happens with physical content. You lose things. They get damaged by water/fire/mold/whatever. They suffer wear and tear from use. You (or your friends) move on to a new game and you can't get anyone to play with you any more. It's just different problems, it's not that virtual goods are inherently less "real". They're as real as money. When I get paid, direct deposit goes straight into my bank account without me touching any cash. I can then use that money to buy lunch with my debit card, which is using virtual payment for real-life goods; the exchange only exists as data.

    The line between virtual and real has been blurred for decades, already. It doesn't make sense to try and artificially distinguish between them any more, when so much of what we already treat as "real" is explicitly virtual.
    Whether or not something gets worn, damaged, lost, or stolen depends completely on the owners of the cards. Most serious players won't play with any cards without sleeves, they have cards that are very valuable they don't just leave lying around at home waiting to be accidentally damaged or lost. Most players keep their valuable cards in a binder so they stay nice, and only handle them between creating a deck, trading, or opening a pack. Even then, they're only handling them long enough to put them in a binder or a sleeve.

    In my 15 years of playing magic, I've never accidentally destroyed a card. I've never had any of my cards stolen. I've never played with my cards in a way that causes wear or damage. Mostly because I value them in a certain way regardless of how anyone else values them..

    That's what I'm talking about here, really. Value. In real life a card has a value instilled in it based on its effect in the game, its rarity in print, the condition of the card, and its distribution over a given time frame. Many of the most valuable cards in this game are not available on MTGO, and even if they were, they are out of print IRL, so you wouldn't be able to get a set containing them redeemed IRL. In MTGO you only need one copy of a card to use it any number of times in any number of decks. In real life, you you have to obtain a copy of a card as many times as you want to use it in on or more decks. You can have a maximum of 4 of any card in a deck, so basically you're paying 4x as much for a play set of a card IRL as you would on MTGO.

    Good cards, especially ones that remain relevant long after their set rotates, remain valuable IRL. A perfect example is Arcbound Ravager, from the Darksteel card set released in 2004. It was available both in real life and on MTGO when it came out, and during it's legality the price was $20-40 per copy because of how good it was and how rare.

    Now, nearly 10 years later, the price is still fluctuating between $20-40 for a paper copy of the card, even on sites like Ebay. However, the price for said card on MTGO tops out at $14. When the MTGO servers go down and Wotc stops producing the game, Arcbound Ravager will be worth $0 on MTGO, and still be worth $20-40 in real life. $20-40 isn't even the extreme value of most cards. A Black Lotus from any of the first three printed sets will go for anywhere from $1,000-10,000 depending on condition and grade. The highest graded Black Lotus is valued at $100,000. There are other cards that are worth several thousands of dollars IRL, and most of them are not available on MTGO and will never be made available on MTGO.

    When MTGO goes offline for good, I'll still be able to dust off all my old paper MTG cards and play with them. I won't be able to that with anything I have on MTGO.

    In most other cases, I'd gladly agree with you that it's difficult to distinguish between 'real' and 'virtual' goods and services. But in the case of MTG, it's one of those exceptions that exists both on the internet and IRL, in (mostly) equal proportions. The value of paper cards will always be there as long as people are interested in the game, while the value of virtual cards will only be there so long as you have an internet connect, computer, and Wotc continues to support MTGO. If all you care about is the short term value of MTG, then the online version of the game is great and gives you access to a pretty amazing game. But if you care about the long term value of MTG, then yes, you have to distinguish between the paper and digital versions of the game as part of a value judgement.

    I couldn't justify spending a ton of money of a card game, real or virtual, but Hearthstone lets you earn boosters by playing, so you don't need to. All paying does is speed up the process and let you avoid playing the game.

    And if a game is fun, I should WANT to play it. If it's just a treadmill grind to maybe unlock future fun, why am I bothering, again?
    In the case of MTG, you have different 'formats' players play in. Each format has it's own set of rules and a list of cards that are 'legal' for play. The most popular format is called 'type 2' or 'standard.' Within that format, you have subsets such as: constructed, drafted, sealed, ect. Standard play includes cards from the two most recently printed blocks and the most recently printed core set. Each block contains one larger base set and two smaller expansion sets. At any one time, standard consists of at least the five most recent sets of cards and at most the most recent 7.

    A new core set comes out every year, and new block sets come out ever 4 months. An active player who participates in standard events might spend anywhere from $200-500 a month on the game. This money goes to purchase cards and enter into tournaments, and doesn't account for things such as travel expenses and meals while out playing. When you consider how much it costs to play Wow ($15 a month) and how much access to the game you get for that price, it's the most cost effective form of entertainment out there (that isn't free).

    In MTG, if you want to play in one single event, you're often paying $15 just to do so. A Friday Night Magic constructed or draft tournament usually costs $15 to enter, it lasts for maybe 4-6 hours, and it's a one time deal. If you are playing constructed format, you have to have a deck of cards to play with before you can enter the tournament, so you have to buy the cards you want to put into your deck, which is additional money. A competitive standard legal constructed deck can cost anywhere from $100-400 depending on how competitive you want to be. Even if you go on the less expensive side and build a $100 deck once a month, participate in 4 tournaments every month @ $15 each (every Friday night), you're spending $200 a month.

    Consider the fact that many players have multiple decks to play with in standard, participate in multiple events each week (sometimes multiple events in a single day), and you can see how the cost of the game climbs rather quickly. Still, at the end of the day you have something to show for playing MTG IRL. You can sell off the cards you have that will rotate soon and recoup some of the money you spent, hopefully putting that money towards the next set that comes out.

    When it comes to MTGO, you might not spend as much on individual cards, but you will spend as much (if not more) to participate in events, especially when they aren't bound by an IRL schedule (most IRL events take place on a Friday or over the weekend, the rest of the time you're probably not paying to play magic). With MTGO, you can participate in an event anytime you want to, day or night. If you have the time, you can play 20 back to back events at the cost of $15 each, over the course of a 2-3 day period ($300).

    So yeah, I'm glad that Hearthstone will be free. That way I can try it and if I like it, I don't have to spend a dime to continue playing it over the course of a long period of time. In the end, I won't be sad when the game goes offline or stops being developed. I won't have lost anything of value.
    Last edited by Eroginous; 2013-03-24 at 12:59 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jevlin
    Why? Because fuck you, that's why.

    Every time you have a question that begins with "Why?" that is about what other people prefer to do with their own goddamn time, come back here, and reread the first row of this post. That will ALWAYS be the answer to your question. Have a nice day.

  4. #364
    Scarab Lord Kaneiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Iowa, United States
    Posts
    4,374
    I'm not going to bother. This forum has an eerie, almost sexual infatuation with everything Blizzard says or does. They are a pristine exemplary company that does no company stuffs. They are not in the business of making money, but in the business of making virtual love to us. Their press statements are personal messages into our soul, by no means marketing tricks to get the attention of the public and press and to get the word of mouth going. They are our rock, our savior, they are the epitome of the social corporation that is 100% customer driven. They can do no wrong.
    I find this extremely funny, given that I feel the exact, 100% opposite. This forum has an incredible amount of vitriol aimed towards Blizzard.
    Hey, remember when I dropped my keys and you thought the phone was ringing?

  5. #365
    I think that this game is a new kind of a product by itself. Depending on it's success, we will see other IP's following it, as devs and future devs will see an opportunity to earn some bucks.

    The best thing of this prodcut is how "cheap" it was to produce vs future possible income. Ratio is epic.

  6. #366
    The Patient
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    201
    I am big fan of trading card games and never had the opportunity to play the wow tcg so I think this could be a great way to get my hands on it. The trailer is cool. Especially the dwarf! but how can a dwarf not be awesome ;-) How ever, the ui does not look very appealing to me.

  7. #367
    The Patient Cuppy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Finland (North from Darnassus)
    Posts
    308
    The only thing I'm worried... Oh man. I really fear that this becomes just another Mobile TCG. Mobage currently has quite a lot of card games google play store and while atleast some of them are quite nice, most of those games are basically pay to win. Sure you can have "special cards" from events but initially if you want to compete... Well you really have to pay some serious cash.
    Meh, I guess all I hope that it won't be another pay to win card game. They say that rare cards can drop from some random stuff... But uh, well they also said that there is a chance of failbag containing goodies.. (My 56th bag gave me a potion of the mountains). I'm too afraid to even try :|
    Quote Originally Posted by Pie Eater View Post
    Have you read the planned frost mage "nerfs" ?!? It's like nerfing a hangman's rope by coloring it blue.
    Mr. Smith about the cost of Triple-spec
    3k gold right off the bat, about 5 silver a week later.

  8. #368
    Mechagnome
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by Cuppy View Post
    The only thing I'm worried... Oh man. I really fear that this becomes just another Mobile TCG. Mobage currently has quite a lot of card games google play store and while atleast some of them are quite nice, most of those games are basically pay to win. Sure you can have "special cards" from events but initially if you want to compete... Well you really have to pay some serious cash.
    Meh, I guess all I hope that it won't be another pay to win card game. They say that rare cards can drop from some random stuff... But uh, well they also said that there is a chance of failbag containing goodies.. (My 56th bag gave me a potion of the mountains). I'm too afraid to even try :|
    Well seeing as you can break down cards and "build" new cards in this game you are going to be able to get the cards you want eventually. Besides without the ability to trade cards with other players you won't actually see cards that cost "more" then others, this is where you get those ridicules prizes in other card games where it's P2W and you can't play competitive tournaments without buying those 10 rare cards that cost 25$ each, every time there is a new best deck of the week.

    Don't forget when playing other people in this game you get paired against others with an equal amount of win/lose ratio to balance things out, if you don't have the cards to play at max potential because of lack of cards you still get paired against people you can beat, which totally eliminate the P2W aspect.

  9. #369
    My initial thought is that I'm very, very, very, very surprised that Blizzard is developing a free+non-pay-to-win game.
    Quote Originally Posted by Clempson View Post
    This thread is making me giggle in places I never knew I can giggle.

  10. #370
    Having played it at PAX East; I think there's potential but it seems like it would be a difficult sort of game to make last for any substantial length. When I was about a decade younger I flew around playing in high end TCG tournaments for Magic and Pokemon. Those games get to be complex because they tend to last long enough for lots of cards to hit the table and interact with one another.

    I don't get that vibe from Hearthstone. The game I played ended in 6 or 7 turns -- and one of them I wasted by casting Holy Smite on myself because I didn't yet understand how to properly play a card from the touch-pad to my enemy yet (I don't own an ipad and the game interface wasn't being super helpful on showing me how to use the card I had picked).

    I sort of question the value or depth of a card game that ends so quickly. I'll reserve my final judgment until I get to play with a deck I've crafted myself against other people who know what they're doing. But I was told up front that this was meant to be an easily approachable / casual game. And my initial thoughts coming from a hardcore TCG background aren't very enthusiastic.

    Edit: The biggest offender in my eyes was the complete lack of a resource system. I understand this makes the game easy to grasp but resource management adds a ton of depth to these sorts of games. Removing actual resource cards really rubs me the wrong way; as it's a pretty careful science in a number of my favorite card games figuring out precisely how many resource cards are needed for the deck to work optimally.
    Last edited by PuppetShowJustice; 2013-04-07 at 10:35 PM.

    3DS Friendcode: 0705 - 3279 - 0173
    Add me for Pokemon / Bravely Default
    Trainer Name: Bazlyn

  11. #371
    I am Murloc! Firebert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Dat Ingurlund, brrrrrap
    Posts
    5,337
    Quote Originally Posted by PuppetShowJustice View Post
    Edit: The biggest offender in my eyes was the complete lack of a resource system. I understand this makes the game easy to grasp but resource management adds a ton of depth to these sorts of games.
    Mana gems are your resource and they can be destroyed or created by some cards.

    Sure, it's not as deep as Yu-gi-oh or Magic but it's still there.
    37 + (3*7) + (3*7)
    W/L/Death count: Wolf: 0/1/1 | Mafia: 0/5/5 | TPR: 0/3/3
    SK: 0/1/1 | VT: 1.5/3.5/5 | Cult: 1/0/1
    Legendary Overlooked, Glyphmaster Gunhaver

  12. #372
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebert View Post
    Mana gems are your resource and they can be destroyed or created by some cards.

    Sure, it's not as deep as Yu-gi-oh or Magic but it's still there.
    Personally I think the heroes/decks where you actually have this kind of interaction will probably be the more interesting ones in general. We've not seen enough cards yet, but any deck that just blindly follows a fixed mana curve and no further complicating factors in their deck are going to be boring to me. So far the Warlock and Druid deck have interactions or complications, and the Rogue deck has the combo thing going on that makes things interesting. I've not looked into the other decks too much to say I've seen anything else.

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-08 at 01:43 AM ----------

    Looking at the cards available again: Shaman have the Overload mechanic that interacts with mana to keep things interesting, Warriors seem to be focused on a lot of minion altering abilities (sort of commander like) and Hunters seem to have this secret/trap thing going on that might make for more complicated play.

    Mage, Priest, Paladin are largely undefined at the moment due to lack of cards. Not seen anything to indicate anything interesting though.
    Last edited by xskarma; 2013-04-07 at 11:43 PM.
    Your Soul Shall Suffer! ||| Forum rules ||| New England Patriots

  13. #373
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebert View Post
    Mana gems are your resource and they can be destroyed or created by some cards.

    Sure, it's not as deep as Yu-gi-oh or Magic but it's still there.
    Yu-gi-ohs resource system is incredibly simple. You literally just use monster cards as resources - even mana gems is more complex than Yugiohs system.

    In fact, it was because it was so simple that Yugioh was so successful alongside resource-based tcgs like magic.

    Not saying that its a simple game, because it has become quite complex with all the different types of summons and the ambiguity of turn orders and card priority but yeah it definitely has a very simple resource system.

  14. #374
    I was surprised and I think it looks fun. I've only ever gotten caught up in one sort of game that's even remotely similar to this, which was Plants vs Zombies. The graphics look cute and from what we know so far it looks pretty fun.

  15. #375
    Stood in the Fire Queen Ultima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Ireland, home of the Potato, Whisky, Drunks and Drunk Fighting Tournaments
    Posts
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by Luciferiuz View Post

    Not saying that its a simple game, because it has become quite complex with all the different types of summons and the ambiguity of turn orders and card priority but yeah it definitely has a very simple resource system.
    Yeah, it really becomes complex when you're on the schoolyard battling with chums when suddenly you realise you're fighting a monster that's erasing the whole of time and space (except of course for Seto FREAKING Kaiba). Sorry, had to, the GF is trying to get me into the GX series.

    Anyway, some parts of it surprised me (as a bad amateur Magic player and YGO player back-in-the-day). The automatic Managem creation per turn is interesting, was expecting they'd go for more of a Land style, but if Warlocks (and possibly others) get cards that destroy gems as their resource, then it sorta makes sense. Honestly, I don't think we know enough about the game to make any calls right now, but from what we saw weeks ago, it's quite interesting. Definitly gonna get the GF into it (and she isn't even into Warcraft) at least. I'm interested to see how they'll work Paladins in, obviously Paladins are going to have some sort of shielding ability, but could that possibly be given to the Priest too (or instead?). So many questions. And if they add DKs and Monks a while down the line, all the better (because I honestly think that DKs have some of the best visuals and would be awesome for a game like this.

  16. #376
    Moderator Pendulous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Treno
    Posts
    12,688
    Quote Originally Posted by Queen Ultima View Post

    The automatic Managem creation per turn is interesting, was expecting they'd go for more of a Land style, but if Warlocks (and possibly others) get cards that destroy gems as their resource, then it sorta makes sense.


    If warlocks are destroying their own gems for spells, they better be pretty powerful spells for their cost.

    General Off-topic/Fun Stuff/Diablo 3/Sports & Fitness mod(rules)------KUPO --------Sig by Elyssia------- Say hello to a world of marigolds

  17. #377
    Stood in the Fire Queen Ultima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Ireland, home of the Potato, Whisky, Drunks and Drunk Fighting Tournaments
    Posts
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendulous View Post
    If warlocks are destroying their own gems for spells, they better be pretty powerful spells for their cost.
    The only card I could find that currently has a crystal-destruction cost.

    Felguard: 3 attack, 5 HP, cost 3 managem, battlecry (when summoned) destroy a mana crystal. Doesn't seem too bad. Remember, that you gain a crystal during your upkeep stage, up to a maximum of 10 at any one time, so at most you're just setting yourself back a turn in resource-amount. It's not as punishing as land-destruction in MtG (and even that wasn't all that punishing).

  18. #378
    Moderator Pendulous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Treno
    Posts
    12,688
    Quote Originally Posted by Queen Ultima View Post
    The only card I could find that currently has a crystal-destruction cost.

    Felguard: 3 attack, 5 HP, cost 3 managem, battlecry (when summoned) destroy a mana crystal. Doesn't seem too bad. Remember, that you gain a crystal during your upkeep stage, up to a maximum of 10 at any one time, so at most you're just setting yourself back a turn in resource-amount. It's not as punishing as land-destruction in MtG (and even that wasn't all that punishing).
    Oh wait, no, that Battlecry lets them destroy anyone's mana gem. Wow, that's terribly overpowered for its cost. I don't know how it's gonna be, but in MTG mana ramp was really important, and losing mana is about the worse thing that can happen.

    General Off-topic/Fun Stuff/Diablo 3/Sports & Fitness mod(rules)------KUPO --------Sig by Elyssia------- Say hello to a world of marigolds

  19. #379
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendulous View Post
    Oh wait, no, that Battlecry lets them destroy anyone's mana gem. Wow, that's terribly overpowered for its cost. I don't know how it's gonna be, but in MTG mana ramp was really important, and losing mana is about the worse thing that can happen.
    No, not anyone's, just your own. I seriously dislike cards like this, and it's the 1 reason I'm apprehensive about the Warlock deck. There's a tight line to walk between self sacraficial things to be overpowered and underpowered and I'm not sure the warlock deck will balanced from the get-go. Seems to me a lot of these cards will be traps for unwary players where the cost is way too much for the power you get.
    Your Soul Shall Suffer! ||| Forum rules ||| New England Patriots

  20. #380
    Moderator Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    21,579
    Quote Originally Posted by xskarma View Post
    No, not anyone's, just your own. I seriously dislike cards like this, and it's the 1 reason I'm apprehensive about the Warlock deck. There's a tight line to walk between self sacraficial things to be overpowered and underpowered and I'm not sure the warlock deck will balanced from the get-go. Seems to me a lot of these cards will be traps for unwary players where the cost is way too much for the power you get.
    If it's anything like MTG in gameplay (and bear in mind; I quit MTG in like 1995, so don't bring up deck concepts that came later), it'll play out as a self-burn deck, where you're doing damage to yourself but, if you're doing it right, doing more damage to the opponent.

    It's a concept that, if you screw up, will hose you, but it's powerful, if played well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •