Is Hearthstone dying?

Play Mode Discussion
02/19/2019 08:09 PMPosted by DrKorn
Its a pity watching the current state of the game and what it has turned to... Yet its so freaking easy to turn the tables...

- Make the game 3-10X cheaper.Admit P2W mechanics and try to minimise its effect. Introduce other means for generating income i.e. diamond cards, new heroes etc.
- Make the game 10X more friendly to newcomers by offering 10X more rewards than it currently does.
- Up the free gold/dust per expansion release to a relevant number... And NO by no means 1000 free gold and 1000 free dust giveaways during each expansion can not be considered anywhere near relevant.
-Balance and deck-diversity are the game's core problems since day 1...
Reiterate and reiterate and reiterate till you finally identify a feasible long-term solution without the need to cycling cards in and out of the meta.
-Remove the madness of 3 expansions per year. Its not feasible to ask players to master 135 new cards every 4 months let alone to design "correctly" so many cards...
-Create a sustainable Championship cycle with TOP NOTCH rewards that will incentivize even casual players to ladder up each month!
-Lastly but not least start listening to the community and stop treating your customers just like fat wallets...


So, your idea for an easy fix is to turn a stale game into a less expensive stale game?
02/19/2019 08:45 PMPosted by WarrenBleezy
02/19/2019 08:09 PMPosted by DrKorn
Its a pity watching the current state of the game and what it has turned to... Yet its so freaking easy to turn the tables...

- Make the game 3-10X cheaper.Admit P2W mechanics and try to minimise its effect. Introduce other means for generating income i.e. diamond cards, new heroes etc.
- Make the game 10X more friendly to newcomers by offering 10X more rewards than it currently does.
- Up the free gold/dust per expansion release to a relevant number... And NO by no means 1000 free gold and 1000 free dust giveaways during each expansion can not be considered anywhere near relevant.
-Balance and deck-diversity are the game's core problems since day 1...
Reiterate and reiterate and reiterate till you finally identify a feasible long-term solution without the need to cycling cards in and out of the meta.
-Remove the madness of 3 expansions per year. Its not feasible to ask players to master 135 new cards every 4 months let alone to design "correctly" so many cards...
-Create a sustainable Championship cycle with TOP NOTCH rewards that will incentivize even casual players to ladder up each month!
-Lastly but not least start listening to the community and stop treating your customers just like fat wallets...


So, your idea for an easy fix is to turn a stale game into a less expensive stale game?


The less interesting a game is the less people it attracts. The game is stale because people got sick of the state of it... People got sick of it because of bad decision making on nearly every aspect of the game from the designing team or "unlucky" enforced decisions by the management if you so will...

From the poor and ill handled support forums to the most polarised meta ever witnessed. From team's 5 slow reaction for the 2018 nerfs to sluggish servers and repetitive dcs...
The game becomes more and more complicated with each expansion yet it feels Blizzard allocates less and less resources to it...
The problem in card designing is not quantitative but qualitative and its been like that for quite some time now...

As for my previous post it mainly highlighted the need to maintain newcomers to the game. This is something at which Blizzard with its enforced money grab mechanism, has been completely unsuccessful even though the audience for HS increased substantially over the past 2 years...
More players will help in attaining larger deck diversity which in turn will make the games less repetitive and hence the game more interesting...
HS got some real competition - and yes fanboys, even a game that is less successful overall like MTGA can be a competitor.
I really don't want the game to fail but it was about time they started worrying about us customers more because this means more events, more fresh ideas and more balancing to insure not just the competitive crowd being happy.
02/19/2019 09:49 PMPosted by DrKorn
02/19/2019 08:45 PMPosted by WarrenBleezy
...

So, your idea for an easy fix is to turn a stale game into a less expensive stale game?


The less interesting a game is the less people it attracts. The game is stale because people got sick of the state of it... People got sick of it because of bad decision making on nearly every aspect of the game from the designing team or "unlucky" enforced decisions by the management if you so will...

From the poor and ill handled support forums to the most polarised meta ever witnessed. From team's 5 slow reaction for the 2018 nerfs to sluggish servers and repetitive dcs...
The game becomes more and more complicated with each expansion yet it feels Blizzard allocates less and less resources to it...
The problem in card designing is not quantitative but qualitative and its been like that for quite some time now...

As for my previous post it mainly highlighted the need to maintain newcomers to the game. This is something at which Blizzard with its enforced money grab mechanism, has been completely unsuccessful even though the audience for HS increased substantially over the past 2 years...
More players will help in attaining larger deck diversity which in turn will make the games less repetitive and hence the game more interesting...


Lol... why would more players increase deck diversity... that makes no sense at all.
Card design of last two expansions was terrible.
02/20/2019 08:40 AMPosted by Pilnystudent
Card design of last two expansions was terrible.


Nah.
Their powerlevels were adequate, and their flavor obviously cannot compare to KoFT.
They were a step in the right direction.
Concerning everything else though:
Bad, short-sighted decisions everywhere.
02/20/2019 08:40 AMPosted by Pilnystudent
Card design of last two expansions was terrible.

Disagree highly on RR which I thought was well designed overall but Boomsday was a tad ./meh and I thought that going in so this isn't retrospective... Boomsday felt very "meh" compared to most expansions design wise.
02/19/2019 10:17 PMPosted by WarrenBleezy
02/19/2019 09:49 PMPosted by DrKorn
...

The less interesting a game is the less people it attracts. The game is stale because people got sick of the state of it... People got sick of it because of bad decision making on nearly every aspect of the game from the designing team or "unlucky" enforced decisions by the management if you so will...

From the poor and ill handled support forums to the most polarised meta ever witnessed. From team's 5 slow reaction for the 2018 nerfs to sluggish servers and repetitive dcs...
The game becomes more and more complicated with each expansion yet it feels Blizzard allocates less and less resources to it...
The problem in card designing is not quantitative but qualitative and its been like that for quite some time now...

As for my previous post it mainly highlighted the need to maintain newcomers to the game. This is something at which Blizzard with its enforced money grab mechanism, has been completely unsuccessful even though the audience for HS increased substantially over the past 2 years...
More players will help in attaining larger deck diversity which in turn will make the games less repetitive and hence the game more interesting...


Lol... why would more players increase deck diversity... that makes no sense at all.


Lets see...
On the one hand we have group 1 formed by 10M players trying to decode all the possible card combinations in HS and come up with the best meta defining deck lists.
On the other hand we have group 2 formed by 100M players...
For the second group to NOT come up with more diverse deck lists it would have to be the case that the meta is completely solved (= attained theoretical equilibrium) by the first group and everyone is following it...
02/23/2019 08:08 PMPosted by DrKorn
Lets see...
On the one hand we have group 1 formed by 10M players trying to decode all the possible card combinations in HS and come up with the best meta defining deck lists.
On the other hand we have group 2 formed by 100M players...
For the second group to NOT come up with more diverse deck lists it would have to be the case that the meta is completely solved (= attained theoretical equilibrium) by the first group and everyone is following it...


That's such a weird way of thinking about card games. Why are you phrasing this "For the second group to NOT come up with more diverse deck lists" in a way that implies that adding players means people trying to come up with more diverse deck lists and not focus on solving the meta faster refining decks faster which is the driving force behind any collective group?

Any game that has a pvp element tends to form a much more distinct meta when it's very popular. Staleness and popularity have a proportional relationship.
The fact that there are so many OTK decks just robs every ounce of fun from this game. One would think that the devs would be on top of people spending their days trying to find ways to make the game as unfair as possible and change it once things got out of control. But no, making the game as unfair as possible seems to be the feature, not the flaw. After losing my 10th straight game to uninteractive OTK decks, I would say I am pretty much through with this game. I will stick around to see whats new, but I have to face facts at some point. It's been like this for years and OTK has taken over and no one is doing s*** about it. Simply put, I hate this game. Have fun with Trollstone folks.
02/23/2019 10:34 PMPosted by SlashSarcasm
02/23/2019 08:08 PMPosted by DrKorn
Lets see...
On the one hand we have group 1 formed by 10M players trying to decode all the possible card combinations in HS and come up with the best meta defining deck lists.
On the other hand we have group 2 formed by 100M players...
For the second group to NOT come up with more diverse deck lists it would have to be the case that the meta is completely solved (= attained theoretical equilibrium) by the first group and everyone is following it...


That's such a weird way of thinking about card games. Why are you phrasing this "For the second group to NOT come up with more diverse deck lists" in a way that implies that adding players means people trying to come up with more diverse deck lists and not focus on solving the meta faster refining decks faster which is the driving force behind any collective group?

Any game that has a pvp element tends to form a much more distinct meta when it's very popular. Staleness and popularity have a proportional relationship.

If meta is solved then yes i can see that staleness and popularity go hand in hand... I doubt though we ever came close to equilibrium on any given iteration of the meta. I might be wrong though...

You were right, it is not necessary to have a more diverse meta prior to attaining equilibrium(depending on which equilibrium stage we are at)... I assumed that the meta was never fully developed in HS hence more players would help in investigating all the branches of the equilibrium tree, therefore we would end up with more decklists than the ones we get at the end of the first months after an expansion is released...
I guess i dont put a lot of faith in our player pool lol...
The game is dead. Never before have they so neglected so many classes for so long. Completely destroying shaman to the point where the class may as well be deleted and nearly doing the same to druid in order to persist a priest vs hunter game for half a year.

Who is ever going to trust these incompetents from here on out to ever do anything right for the game. I mean 2 balance changes and all they did was take shaman down to a 1% playrate at the most 'competitive' level of the game and flip hunter playrate with priest.

It's going to be a slow bleed from here unless they really get this next expansion / rotation right.
It's not *dead* exactly. It's dying yes, but games have been dying before. Up to Blizzard-Activision if they wanna save it, or funnel all their effort into Candy Crush instead.
02/24/2019 09:02 PMPosted by JacktR
The game is dead. Never before have they so neglected so many classes for so long. Completely destroying shaman to the point where the class may as well be deleted and nearly doing the same to druid in order to persist a priest vs hunter game for half a year.

Shaman... what did Thrall do to them? =(

02/24/2019 09:02 PMPosted by JacktR
It's going to be a slow bleed from here unless they really get this next expansion / rotation right.

My thought as well
02/24/2019 09:02 PMPosted by JacktR
The game is dead. Never before have they so neglected so many classes for so long. Completely destroying shaman to the point where the class may as well be deleted and nearly doing the same to druid in order to persist a priest vs hunter game for half a year.

Who is ever going to trust these incompetents from here on out to ever do anything right for the game. I mean 2 balance changes and all they did was take shaman down to a 1% playrate at the most 'competitive' level of the game and flip hunter playrate with priest.

It's going to be a slow bleed from here unless they really get this next expansion / rotation right.


I would just like to say someone very recently hit rank 1 Legend with an Elemental Shaman list.

Yes the game has hit a lull, and I honestly think the problem is that there are too many OTK decks.

I test many off meta/homebrew decks and there are actually some really fun control decks right now. The main problem is that combo/otk decks are too fast and are not weak enough V aggro. They have basically made slower decks unplayable in a competitive setting. Also making matches feel more 1 sided than ever.
Yes, it's dying. It used to be dying slowly and now it's dying a little more rapidly. The game was insanely popular though. So, even dying is going to take years.

I think the rotation is going to be important though. If they do a poor job with the next set it could be a real breaking point for a lot of players. It seems like there are plenty of posts hoping that rotation will spark the game again. I have that hope as well, but part of me is worried that it just won't be able to bring the magic back.

If the next expansion isn't a hit, then the decline will probably accelerate even more. Still if Hearthstone isn't alive and kicking in 2020 then I'll be shocked.
There's a reason why Dog went from playing HS 8 hours a day on stream to playing dota every day instead (for less than half the viewers)....
02/25/2019 02:15 PMPosted by BadSoup
There's a reason why Dog went from playing HS 8 hours a day on stream to playing dota every day instead (for less than half the viewers)....

Yeah but consider that as of this post dog is streaming auto chess with 9,400+ viewers and Hearthstone has 16.6K viewers total. When 1 ex-hearthstone streamer has more viewers than 50% of Hearthstone's total viewership that's a pretty bad sign.

However, twitch viewership may or may not be a good way to judge Hearthstone's player base.
02/25/2019 02:43 PMPosted by EnSabahNur
02/25/2019 02:15 PMPosted by BadSoup
There's a reason why Dog went from playing HS 8 hours a day on stream to playing dota every day instead (for less than half the viewers)....

Yeah but consider that as of this post dog is streaming auto chess with 9,400+ viewers and Hearthstone has 16.6K viewers total. When 1 ex-hearthstone streamer has more viewers than 50% of Hearthstone's total viewership that's a pretty bad sign.

However, twitch viewership may or may not be a good way to judge Hearthstone's player base.


It may not but it shows how much interest is in the game. I remember when I would tune in to watch Amaz or Dog playing, it was fun watching them navigating their deck and try to predict opponent's next card. Now I barely watch any hearthstone streams and playing even less.
Hs is dying yes. Twitch vieuwer numbers are actually a pretty good indicator for this imo.
The game is great but it is just way to expensive to be anything more then a niche game long term.
The game does not lend itself for "grinding",the game gets boring pretty fast if you grind even in arena. Its not a game like chess or even a fps where people can get addicted to and simply can not stop playing.
Hs is not such a game,its a casual game meant to be played casual,and with that in mind the price point is pretty high because playing casual does not allow the f2p option. To be f2p you need to grind,but as said before hs is not a game that is fun grinding. Sure some people will like it,i don't really dislike it myself but vast majority of potential customers wont like grinding hs.
And if you don't grind then you are looking at a price which is to high for anyone who is not heavily into ccg,s to begin with.
More game modes does nothing,2vs2 and 3vs3 would be death within one week of release.

Maybe its the rng nature that has prevented me from becoming addicted to this game.
When playing game people like that everything they do matters,no matter if they win or lose its their own fault. That fuels addiction,you keep trying and trying to get better and make less mistakes. Hs does not have such a clear feedback mechanic because rng plays a bit part. No matter what happens you could blame rng and you would even be right to some extend depending on the situation.
Maybe rng works against people getting addicted to games in general, I don't know(unless when its full gambling,which hs is not)

hs itself will easily last another 10 years I think,just at a bit slower pace.
they can go 2 ways as I see it.
1-cater heavily to the hardcore ccg fans and whales. This would probably mean more complicated mechanics and combos and a more complicated and interesting game in general.
2-trying to keep a large audience and possibly a cheaper game. More simple mechanics and gameplay,less interesting for the whales who now have mtga as a good alternative.
Neither of the 2 options looks that great for blizzard I think,but I would prefer the first one.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum