Pay to win Hearthstone

[bmjclark]

Card games are generally pay to win. Be happy this one isn't like MTG or any other physical card games where you actually have to pay to get started at all and pay real money for every single pack rather than getting a few just for playing

[Eroginous]

Why would you compare HS to Diablo and Diablo to WoW in the first place? Very different games. Emphasis on very.

It's BenBos. He rarely makes sense and says a lot of questionable things.

You're surprised?

I wouldn't say it's pay to win, but what I will say is that a new player is going to have a hard time when so many people have legendaries.

It's not even really the legendary minions that give new/lesser skilled players problems. It's the abundance of advanced cards that players have access to by simply paying for packs, when other players might not have any money at all.

Player who spends money = shortest path possible to success.

Player who spends no money = might as well go on a real life search for Mordor to throw his credit card in, because honestly that would be more enjoyable.

The earning gold without playing?
You mean the mobile Auction House?

Can't exactly start playing the Auction House until you either have objects to sell or gold to buy and re-sell objects on the AH.
You get the gold and/or objects through in-game means to start with.

Can you actually use the mobile AH without subscribing to WoW? Not so sure about that.

The major difference here is that buying items from the Wow AH offers no direct benefit to your character's progression. Any gear that you would buy is easily replaced just by doing entry level group activities, and none of the consumables or enhancements really offer a big enough bonus to justify buying them until you're doing end game progression.

Everything else is pretty much vanity or random gold sinks. A new player could completely avoid the Wow AH their entire gaming experience and not really suffer for it, so long as they played multiple characters and were self sufficient with professions. It wouldn't set them back very much at all.

HS on the other hand, you're going to have a rough time for the first couple months worth of dailies each day, and I'm convinced that's the point at which most people would break down and buy packs or quit. It takes a special kind of dedication to continue playing HS through the misery without buying packs.

Until you learn that legendaries are best used sparingly in a deck (and you're in a BETTER position if your opponent uses ones that are entirely unsuited to his deck) and you shouldn't be using hard removal on that big scary Sunwalker... yeah.

Of the four decks I've built, I've only used the class specific legendary minions in each one (Cenarius, Antonidas, Jaraxxus, and Al'Akir). I don't see the point in using any of the neutral ones because they really aren't that good.

Card games are generally pay to win. Be happy this one isn't like MTG or any other physical card games where you actually have to pay to get started at all and pay real money for every single pack rather than getting a few just for playing

Except that in other card games your cards have value outside the game as well, instead of just inside the game. When you buy MTG cards you're generally getting resale/trade value for the money you spend. Spend $4 on a 15 card booster of MTG, crack a $15-50 dollar rare, you just walked away with tons of opportunity you didn't have before. Not to mention older cards retain their value really well as long as they are still viable within the formats they are still playable.

Tarmogoyf hasn't been standard legal for 5 or 6 years and it actually multiplied 8-10x in value since it was legal. Even a recent reprinting in Modern Masters summer set didn't do much to depreciate the value.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from...ogoyf&_sacat=0

[Deleted]

Of the four decks I've built, I've only used the class specific legendary minions in each one (Cenarius, Antonidas, Jaraxxus, and Al'Akir). I don't see the point in using any of the neutral ones because they really aren't that good.

Not exactly, there are several neutral legendary cards which are unconditionally fantastic, Ragnaros, Cairne, Sylvanas etc.

[Temp name]

Not exactly, there are several neutral legendary cards which are unconditionally fantastic, Ragnaros, Cairne, Sylvanas etc.

Yeah, but he thinks any neutral minion is a waste of space in a deck.

[Worgar]

I like hearthstone, my only problem is that when you try out the arena some times the rng gods just dont like you.

[Nikkaszal]

Not exactly, there are several neutral legendary cards which are unconditionally fantastic, Ragnaros, Cairne, Sylvanas etc.

I really wouldn't bother. You'll get nowhere.

[moremana]

My friend never spent a dime, and might be going to Blizzcon to compete... So no, it isn't

Just because someone gets lucky doesn't mean it isn't pay to win. If you can purchase anything with real money (I said real money, not gold) that gives you an advantage its pay to win, no matter which angle you look at it.

Hearthstone is Blizzards ptw cash cow.

[Nikkaszal]

Just because someone gets lucky doesn't mean it isn't pay to win. If you can purchase anything with real money (I said real money, not gold) that gives you an advantage its pay to win, no matter which angle you look at it.

Hearthstone is Blizzards ptw cash cow.

So what you're saying is, unlocking new champions in LoL by buying them instead of saving up in-game currency makes LoL a pay-to-win game?

Because last I checked, you could have the most "OP" champ in the game and still feed like crazy and throw all your games if you're a godsdamn terrible player.

Exactly the same thing here - you can buy all the packs you want. Hell, you can throw enough money at the game that you eventually just have every card through sheer luck of packs. You know what happens if you still suck and have no idea how to build a deck (or even play one you saw online)?

YOU LOSE. A LOT.

You know why new/shit people are always complaining about the game they're losing at Rank 20 against people with lots of legendaries? Because those people are also terrible and lose so much they can't rank up.

[Fus Ro Yay]

hearthstone reminds me of ranking up in starcraft 2
at the beginning(up to plat) you meet all kinds of cheese, rush and flat down bad players
but at the higher levels, you get to the "good" games where you clearly see the difference in skill between two players.

[Deleted]

Of course it's pay to win. You pay money you can instantly have any deck you want. There's really no way to sugarcoat it.

Having said that, the other question would be is the game viable if you don't pay any money, and I'd have to say that it is, at least for me personally. But then I find fun in working within the limits of the cards I have, if I were a more competitive person I would probably find it slightly annoying that I have to wait a few weeks to gather enough dust or luck into a few cards that are missing for objectively more powerful decks than the ones I'm running.

[Eroginous]

I really wouldn't bother. You'll get nowhere.

What do you mean bro? I was agreeing with you...

[Yriel]

OP try watching Trump's Youtoob free to play road to Legendary Rank. He is on this 3rd Class right now after having reached Legendary free2play two times successfully. With that said, LEgendaries don't necessary make you win alone, for Example I have every Card I want except one due to dailies since Beta and I did not reach beyond Rank 8.

Still it will get harder and harder. I wonder how long he will be able to do this. Right now you are not only missing the rares/legendaries but all of the naxx cards, with every (paid) expansion it will get more paytowin imo.

[Nikkaszal]

What do you mean bro? I was agreeing with you...

Neutral cards (the guy I quoted).

He was talking about neutral cards to the one person in the universe who actively shies away from using them.

- - - Updated - - -

Still it will get harder and harder. I wonder how long he will be able to do this. Right now you are not only missing the rares/legendaries but all of the naxx cards, with every (paid) expansion it will get more paytowin imo.

Funny... I don't recall having to pay a cent for Naxx.

[Deleted]

Funny... I don't recall having to pay a cent for Naxx.

Start a new account today, let's see how fast you'll have it for free then...

[Nikkaszal]

Start a new account today, let's see how fast you'll have it for free then...

Oh we're back to this are we?

The part where you're expecting everything in the game to be available immediately instead of working towards it like everyone else did?

[Deleted]

The part where you're expecting everything in the game to be available immediately instead of working towards it like everyone else did?

I never said I expect any such thing.
But if I want to skip that work and win quicker I can pay. Hence, pay to win.

[Faesroll]

I never said I expect any such thing.
But if I want to skip that work and win quicker I can pay. Hence, pay to win.

Some other guy once posted that it's more like "Pay for convenience". I think that's the best term to describe it. Pay to win would mean an unfair advantage you can only achieve by paying money, which it simply isn't. Everything you can get with money you can get for free as well. Just takes a lot longer.

[Ravex]

Except that in other card games your cards have value outside the game as well, instead of just inside the game. When you buy MTG cards you're generally getting resale/trade value for the money you spend. Spend $4 on a 15 card booster of MTG, crack a $15-50 dollar rare, you just walked away with tons of opportunity you didn't have before. Not to mention older cards retain their value really well as long as they are still viable within the formats they are still playable.

Please don't try to bring up paperback points to a digital card game discussion.

- - - Updated - - -

Still it will get harder and harder. I wonder how long he will be able to do this. Right now you are not only missing the rares/legendaries but all of the naxx cards, with every (paid) expansion it will get more paytowin imo.

Yea mean the longer a card game is out the more behind you are? JINKIES!!!

[Deleted]

Some other guy once posted that it's more like "Pay for convenience".

Yes, you're paying for convenience of winning more quickly and more often.

Or, to shorten it up a bit, paying to win.

[Ravex]

Yes, you're paying for convenience of winning more quickly and more often.

Or, to shorten it up a bit, paying to win.

Paying to win is gaining an advantage over someone who doesn't pay that they can NEVER get.

With time f2p players can have anything someone who dropped $5000 for.

I think you need to understand some terms before you try to argue an invalid "point".