Hearthstone costs too much money & the fun has fled this once amazing game.

Play Mode Discussion
I have played Hearthstone every day since the beta came out in 2014. I have spent roughly $800 on this game since it came out and buried thousands of hours.

I usually average level 4-6 depending on the month when all is said and done.

Some how though with the Kobolds expansion my winning percentage dropped almost immiediately by 20%.

The last two months with even more hours of time put into playing, I did not even break level 10. I got to 10 and just could not even break it.

I of course got frustrated and thought with the Witchwood expansion coming it may get better, but in the week I've put in there has not been much improvement.

Honestly...there is just too many !@#$%^- cards at this point. Now that I am not winning as much it has made me think back and contimplate the cost of this game, and I am starting to wonder if it is even worth it anymore.

Side note....I've spent more on Hearthstone that in 10 years of playing World of Warcraft. It is sickening to even think about.
Well, we’re about to see if Hearthstone will get better or worse with Ben Brode gone. If Team 5 doesn’t start doing Starcraft 2 style patches, we’ll be able to point to corporate for the state of the game. They have a rare opportunity to right the ship. Will they adapt?
04/21/2018 02:20 PMPosted by Bluefin
Well, we’re about to see if Hearthstone will get better or worse with Ben Brode gone. If Team 5 doesn’t start doing Starcraft 2 style patches, we’ll be able to point to corporate for the state of the game. They have a rare opportunity to right the ship. Will they adapt?


Yeah, Ben Brode, even though he's the guy that brought us Patches still was very passionate about making Hearthstone a fun and enjoyable experience, he's the one that brought us Jarraxus, one of the funnest and original 'death knight' cards out and he always had a fun time out playing out with the community and seemed pretty good natured. I hope him good success out as he was kinda the face of Hearthstone and i'm looking forward to what he does with his new work.

That said... Im kinda concerned out as contrary Brode against all further events, the crazy crazy guy, was concerned about Shudderwock going live and they basically went "Hahah.. oh wait it's looping, sure we should ship it live?" and they went "Nah, don't want to change dates" and just shipped it in it's 15 minute intervals just discovered after like 10-30 minutes of playtesting and theorycrafts right on the spot. When the Crazy enthusiastic guy is warning you your interactions might be going too far out i think you ought to take a second glance out.

Kinda concerned about Mdonais if he became a lead, he's the guy who told "They told me i can't print this card, so i did" about Jade idol and then also the same guy who went on with Naga to say "Well if i nerf/revert this deck, should i nerf every other wild deck as well when it's not the TOP tier 1 deck?" as well for wild is kinda concerning. Seems like Power creep is his mantra for acceptable game development and doesn't seem to care about player feedback at all. He basically turned both formats into cheating with just the stats tripled in wild. t6 4/4 + 12/12 tyrantus for 16 worth of stats for 6 mana? Why not change wild to have 29/29[3 giants] to 45/45[5 giants] worth of stats out for 5 mana just as long as you draw them? Cards that instantly win the game are balanced because sometimes you don't draw them, TM regardless of skill, interaction, or vanilla curve or public outcry kinda worries me. It wasn't a small buff, say to a 5 mana 6/5, or to say set costs of cards over 5 mana to 5, no, it just flat out turns every 8/8 giant into a wisp for a superbuff.

Look, if that's the kind of changes they want for their game, it's their bussiness, Brode pushed a fun crazy game to hang out with friends, streamers want a skill testing compeitive game out for the tournaments. Mdonais seems to like... competitive cardboard eating as a sport?
$800!

hahahahhahahahahahahhah!!!!!!!
800 dollars is kind of a ridiculous amount to have spent on this game. You should at least be able to get enough dust for a new deck every month for free, and if you dust your wild cards you can overhaul your collection pretty quick after each expansion without spending anything. There's usually at least one dominant deck that doesn't take a ton of dust to create too. It would appear that odd paladin is that deck right now.

It's not like 800 bucks is a crazy amount of money to spend on a hobby over the course of 4 years, but you're the definition of a pay to win player and you're complaining about not being on top of the ladder and not being able to compete with the top decks. Blizzard can't make it easier for you to win without alienating 95% of their players because 95% of their players are unwilling to spend that much money on this game. There's plenty of guys who have spent 0 on this game and are hitting legend because they craft a good deck or two every month and play it. That's how constructed is always going to be. There's going to be a few dominant decks and you need to craft them and then tech them to the meta if you want to compete. The only way around this inevitability is to play arena or tavern brawl.

I do agree with you that Blizzard has gone over the top with creating broken mechanics for constructed, but I think that's the only way they can keep the game fresh at this point. Hearthstone is a really simple game, and the only real way for them to keep experienced players interested and maintain a skill edge for experienced players is to create mechanics that are really complicated. That means decks like cubelock, while oppressive in the hands of better players, need to exist to bring complicated decisions to the game and allow good players to continue to have high win rates.

I think the reality of the situation is that you are over estimating your skill at this game if you are paying for all the expansions and view rank 10 as below your skill level. When your goal is to climb the ladder, and you're buying the materials to craft the best decks, you need to just craft the best decks and get good with them. The fact that you are sinking money into the game and are unable to achieve a high rank actually illustrates that Blizzard is doing a good job of keeping the game from being a true pay to win game. That's one of the most important jobs they have, because that way they can continue to get new players involved in the game. They can't do that if you need to pay a 200 dollar a year subscription fee.
Well, I'm not here arguing about the cost of packs, but one thing i think could fix this, is to make it bit easier to get new cards instead of getting the same ones and dusting them. Or maybe increase the dust you get. I'd suggest you to enjoy the game instead of trying to win it.
HS - as with all CCGs - has a very simple pricing model that addresses your issues.

Spend. Less. Money.

If you ever find yourself thinking, "Hey - I don't want to pay this much..." then you've got a throttle you can pull that will immediately lower your costs as much (or as little) as you think the game is worth paying. So if you are finding yourself dissatisfied ... then you only have yourself to blame for it.
04/21/2018 05:01 PMPosted by TheRiddler
HS - as with all CCGs - has a very simple pricing model that addresses your issues.

Spend. Less. Money.

If you ever find yourself thinking, "Hey - I don't want to pay this much..." then you've got a throttle you can pull that will immediately lower your costs as much (or as little) as you think the game is worth paying. So if you are finding yourself dissatisfied ... then you only have yourself to blame for it.


No, we can blame the company that produces the product! Also, in regards to your white knighting: "How long can this go on?"
No, we can blame the company that produces the product!


Until such time as Blizzard Stormtroopers kick down the door and forces players under pain of death to spend money on Hearthstone, then any attempt a player makes to blame how much they spend on "the company" is a sad attempt to avoid responsibility.

"Waaaaah. I went to the store and saw a product and then bought the product when I didn't have to and now I have less money. I blame the Company that produces the product!"

The mentality required to believe in such insipid tripe is beyond me, and yet if the news today is any indicator then the world has no shortage of cretins who will glom onto any lamebrain excuse they can to avoid responsiblity and to blame their problems on anything but their own bad choices. Glad I'm not such a spineless jellyfish.
Riddler's juvenile contempt for people voicing criticism of corporate practices (which, factually, have designs primarily on income) is hilarious. He's one of the reasons companies like Blizzard and EA and others decide to corrupt games with garbage monetization.

Unfortunately, the OP is another one of the reasons, being too willing to dump money into a digital product. That said, there is still merit in the critical points being made about HS's design decisions, and Riddler's simplistic summary of the situation is just one side of a useless coin. It's 90% ideology and 10% reality.

People are able to make their own choices, and should be accountable for them. In the same light, businesses also make choices and should be accountable for them. In the case of HS and Blizzard, their choices have led to a product that increasingly requires monetary investment to be able to get anywhere significant, largely due to power cards, increasing RNG in card designs, and no method of trade (dust is not an appropriate stand-in for free exchange of cards between players, such as MTG has had its entire existence). These are common criticisms.

The gist is that a game that started off fairly open and accessible has not remained that way, so I can see why it would be frustrating for some players to feel like they've been lead into a crap outcome. It's like starting a subscription with a service that slowly gets worse over time, but in a way that requieres you increase your payments to get the same satisfaction (i.e. balance) that was available from the start. Generally what happens in a fair world-- and yes, we are a civilization capable of fairness-- is that a product gets better, businesses optimize, and consumers are happy upon reflection of their interactions with the company.

I'm just glad I didn't spend any money on their digital RNG purchases, so I have nothing to regret and no strong bias as a result of my own decisions.
04/23/2018 09:56 AMPosted by EsperXII
I'm just glad I didn't spend any money on their digital RNG purchases, so I have nothing to regret and no strong bias as a result of my own decisions.

Just going to comment on this. While there are many ills of the F2P model this is one aspect I do like.

I have no problem dropping $ on HS I do enjoy it. In addition since I do enjoy HS (and really all card games) it has rmeoved some purchasing habits from me and also contributed to me not spending other $s on XBox Live Gold, Madden, and maybe 1-2 new titles (I'll buy them Steam Sale 50%+ off now).

So, while I do spend money on HS above what is probably 'smart' the game only really costs me an additional $100 or so off my normal gaming patterns and for that I am fine.

Now to the point I guess with that backdrop you don't want to pay for Hearthstone and that is absolutely your right and I have nothing against that. I didn't feel like paying for LoL, PoE, or HotS (basically) so other people 'carried me' financially in supporting those titles. I really like that about the F2P model even though the F2P model obviously has some downside and dark things about it as well.
04/21/2018 02:44 PMPosted by EscapedNoob
04/21/2018 02:20 PMPosted by Bluefin
Well, we’re about to see if Hearthstone will get better or worse with Ben Brode gone. If Team 5 doesn’t start doing Starcraft 2 style patches, we’ll be able to point to corporate for the state of the game. They have a rare opportunity to right the ship. Will they adapt?


Yeah, Ben Brode, even though he's the guy that brought us Patches still was very passionate about making Hearthstone a fun and enjoyable experience, he's the one that brought us Jarraxus, one of the funnest and original 'death knight' cards out and he always had a fun time out playing out with the community and seemed pretty good natured. I hope him good success out as he was kinda the face of Hearthstone and i'm looking forward to what he does with his new work.

That said... Im kinda concerned out as contrary Brode against all further events, the crazy crazy guy, was concerned about Shudderwock going live and they basically went "Hahah.. oh wait it's looping, sure we should ship it live?" and they went "Nah, don't want to change dates" and just shipped it in it's 15 minute intervals just discovered after like 10-30 minutes of playtesting and theorycrafts right on the spot. When the Crazy enthusiastic guy is warning you your interactions might be going too far out i think you ought to take a second glance out.

Kinda concerned about Mdonais if he became a lead, he's the guy who told "They told me i can't print this card, so i did" about Jade idol and then also the same guy who went on with Naga to say "Well if i nerf/revert this deck, should i nerf every other wild deck as well when it's not the TOP tier 1 deck?" as well for wild is kinda concerning. Seems like Power creep is his mantra for acceptable game development and doesn't seem to care about player feedback at all. He basically turned both formats into cheating with just the stats tripled in wild. t6 4/4 + 12/12 tyrantus for 16 worth of stats for 6 mana? Why not change wild to have 29/29[3 giants] to 45/45[5 giants] worth of stats out for 5 mana just as long as you draw them? Cards that instantly win the game are balanced because sometimes you don't draw them, TM regardless of skill, interaction, or vanilla curve or public outcry kinda worries me. It wasn't a small buff, say to a 5 mana 6/5, or to say set costs of cards over 5 mana to 5, no, it just flat out turns every 8/8 giant into a wisp for a superbuff.

Look, if that's the kind of changes they want for their game, it's their bussiness, Brode pushed a fun crazy game to hang out with friends, streamers want a skill testing compeitive game out for the tournaments. Mdonais seems to like... competitive cardboard eating as a sport?


That's not a bright future you picture. It will go this way I do fear,i am actually quiet certain that it will go this way but don't ask my why,its just a feeling and I have seen it with many other games before. After the honey moon (hs beta+first year) comes the milking and after the milking has slowed down they go crazy with the game to try extract anything that is left in it. Its a patern that isn't new.

Powercreep is the cheapest way to design. You don't have to carefully balance the cards around already existing cards while still make them attractive. You just powercreep and everyone who wants to be competitive will need the new cards.

Considering the above I will keep my investment in this game minimal,though I will keep playing and occasionally paying for as long as its still fun to me.
Side note:

I don't think a lot of people have an accurate concept of monetary value and how things can "add up".

I was going to research "How much a person spends on __________ a year"

The movies, cigarettes, alcohol, gasoline, haircuts, fast food, music and so on...

I think you'll find 200 a year on a hobby is low.

Sure, ONE game? Virtual cards? "I could buy X amount of playstation FULL GAMES with 200 bucks, this guy is nuts!!!

OK, I looked this up. Average smoker spends $2,000 a year on cigarettes one pack per day.

I don't smoke.

Anything under 2,000 spent on HS is justifiable lol... (not really ofc)

800 in 4 years IS really hard to fathom coming from the Super Nintendo generation.
Side note:

800 in 4 years IS really hard to fathom coming from the Super Nintendo generation.


800 in 1460 days is less than 0.60 a day. So I guess about two cardpacks a week. It doesen't sound like a terrible vice :)
Funny, I started during KOFT and have only preordered once and still have a 60% winrate on ladder.
People are able to make their own choices, and should be accountable for them. In the same light, businesses also make choices and should be accountable for them.


So far, so good. Nothing wrong here.

In the case of HS and Blizzard, their choices have led to a product that increasingly requires monetary investment to be able to get anywhere significant


And here is where "wrong" thunders into the comment like a herd of antelope over the plains. Any player can obtain over 75% of every card set that is released with simple, casual, free gameplay. F2P is more than sufficient for a player to Hearthstone for enjoyment in Casual, or to play competitively in Ranked.

The specious opinion that "increasing monetary investment" is in any way required for a player to be "able to get anywhere significant" is fundamentally incorrect.

The gist is that a game that started off fairly open and accessible has not remained that way


All CCGs start off as "more open and accessible". A CCG becoming less open and accessible over time is almost entirely due to the increased size of the library ... which is a factor that all CCGs experience. Card games that don't experience this issue are things like LCGs ... which are a completely different genre.

Back in the day, a new player could buy a bunch of Alpha packs and get all the cards that MtG had to offer. That was so much more 'open and accessible' than 2 years later when new players had to get Alpha, Beta, Arabian Knights, Antiquities, Legends, The Dark, Fallen Empires, Ice Age, Chronicles... etc...

So your complaint has almost nothing to do with "cost" and everything to do with "I started playing in the beta back when everything was new and man do I miss those days..."

Generally what happens in a fair world-- and yes, we are a civilization capable of fairness-- is that a product gets better, businesses optimize, and consumers are happy upon reflection of their interactions with the company.


Goes both ways. A civilization that is capable of fairness must also acknowledge that in many ways, consumers are selfish, greedy, lazy, silly little whiners. Fairness also must admit that it isn't logical, possible, or even feasible for every product to always get better, more optimized, make every customer "more happy", or any other such subjective standard. Particularly so for products that are purely a recreational luxury.
$800, it must be nice to have that kind of disposable income.

#NoSympy

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum