|
|
On February 24 2014 22:21 Kipsate wrote:
I would be lying if I said I wouldn't want to play Hots, playing stuff like Illidan, Lich King, Stitches, Nova?Sounds pretty fun
the LoL business model is a pretty big turnoff though, one of the major reasons I don't really play LoL is that you have to keep playing a ton or spend money in order to play most champions. Although I can see why Blizzard would want such a model, it is the best in making $.$.
and we all know what blizzard wants
|
I'd probably play it just for the hero models. Shouldn't take me too long to get frustrated/bored at the lack of options/things to do and quit.
|
Don’t we allready have a game with all these Hero models? Iirc it is called Dota 1 (and to a lesser extent 2)  .
I still don’t see the appeal of this game but well… I also don’t see what makes Hearthstone stand out when compared to other f2p tcg’s… The Blizzard logo?
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
Its not just the models, its the fact that the whole game is build around it from music to animations to atmosphere etc, Hearthstone is also really well done I feel. Hearthstone is my first f2p tcg and the fact that its a game with the Warcraft Universe is a pretty big draw.
|
Well the idea of Arthas fighting a siege tank actually pushes me away from the game. There are some things my mind just won't stand
|
I really want to play online tcg's but I get frustrated at the pay model eventually. I just cant bring myself to pay money for something that I know I could replicate with paper scissors and crayons. I cant get over that playing a billion games with cards you dont like before you get the cards you do like.
|
Is there a way to test ability draft combos in a custom lobby?
|
While the heroes are cool, the actual art direction of the game is a turn off. It doesnt have the ease of recognition that dota has. Its much easier to lose heroes and get spells lost in the midst of fights. Big turn off IMO.
|
Czech Republic18921 Posts
Hearthstone is really well polished. The production value is through the roof, each card has it's own voice acting, the art is very nice, the client runs well. The f2p model is also great, you can really do a lot without paying anything, the progression with daily quests feels great, the tutorial early is also very solid. There are no other f2p tcgs that can match Hearthstone in production value or in it's f2p model, let alone in both at the same time. That's why it's so successful, I don't think the Warcraft lore is a big factor at all. In the moba market the competition is much much stronger than in online tcgs. That's why I don't see people using the Hearthstone argument that hots is going to be successful.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
While it remains to be seen whether hots will remain to be succesfull, the intial draw of having the Warcraft Universe is enough to have people at the very least try it out, will it be succesful as LoL?Hell no, but it will be much bigger then Smite/Hon/Strife/IC/etcetc just by being Blizzard and Warcraft. The Warcraft lore is what makes it so great, the animations, cards, voice acting are all based on Warcraft lore and done very well, if it was the Starcraft universe I doubt it would be that succesful as the Warcraft universe is so rich and established. I agree that Hearthstone has entered a rather unsaturated market and quickly took the market position and that it will be significantly harder to establish such a position in the MOBA market though.
|
I think it will carve out a niche for itself on the strength of blizzards large audience and its billing as an even easier game to get in to then LoL.
It certainly wont eclipse dota or lol but I bet it will draw a sustainable crossover userbase from the starcraft/WoW/hearthstone crowd
|
You think hots will be bigger than hon at hon's peak? I thought it was pretty big and still kinda is in sea.
|
Czech Republic18921 Posts
What's weird is that it seems like Blizzard is trying to push hots as a competitive esport. At the first ever gameplay unveiling, they already had a spectator client and it was a commentated match with the developers (I think) playing the game. While at the same time, they're taking basically everything competitive out of the game. As far as I understand the game, all you do is run around the map completting objectives and getting stronger all the time. No last hitting, no experience (there's overall team experience), even no items to buy.
|
I think they see esports as the "new thing" to get in on, but they will realize that a casual playerbase is just as strong financially, and that the "esports" market is pretty saturated and theyl abandon competitive aspirations.
of course it is the ultimate irony that blizzard didnt capture the esports market 10 years ago.
|
Czech Republic18921 Posts
They might also be seeing how the community is trying to make Hearthstone an esport (which is the dumbest thing I have ever seen, but fair enough) and that they maybe made a mistake by not supporting it with the game launch (no spectator client, etc.). And they don't want to make the same mistake again. I guess it's better for them to be save just in case. Anyway, I don't think either of the games (HS and hots) are good competitive titles at all.
|
Yeah they made hearthstone as casual and un-competitive as possible and it instantly sprouted a (horribly misguided) competitive scene. Which now complains that the game doesn't give the comp scene enough tools to hold tournaments and shit.
So blizzard are very concerned about supporting any possible competitive scene in Heroes simply bcuz they look at Dota/LoL and see money printing presses that revolve around their competitive scenes. Even as blizz makes the game as anti-competitive as is reasonably possible (much like hearthstone).
|
On February 25 2014 00:41 cecek wrote:
Hearthstone is really well polished. The production value is through the roof, each card has it's own voice acting, the art is very nice, the client runs well. The f2p model is also great, you can really do a lot without paying anything, the progression with daily quests feels great, the tutorial early is also very solid. There are no other f2p tcgs that can match Hearthstone in production value or in it's f2p model, let alone in both at the same time. That's why it's so successful, I don't think the Warcraft lore is a big factor at all. In the moba market the competition is much much stronger than in online tcgs. That's why I don't see people using the Hearthstone argument that hots is going to be successful.
I don't know much about other online TCG, but Hearthstone as a blizzard's game was really disappointing to me. I mean, you can't trade cards in a TCG, there is no chat, you can't even talk to your opponent (wtf ??????), as much as you can grind there still is this pay 2 win feeling, etc...
Hearthstone maybe is a great online TCG, but it's still another proof for me that Blizzard isn't the one I loved anymore. So about Hots, it might be a cool game for casuals but I'm pretty sure it will be worthless for other players.
|
I can see why Blizzard made it so you can't talk to the opposing player in Hearthstone to be honest.
|
how can it be called competitive when you cant even call your opponent a fag?
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
Esport is a great marketing tool, they didn't make Hearthstone neccesarily with Esports in mind I think, however the community wants it to become one and as such Blizzard will oblige because it is a good way to spread Hearthstone and they see a good oppertunity. As long as the community will want hots to become an esport and organize tournaments then that is what we will see. Hearthstone actually restored some lost faith in Blizzard for me, while it misses some features and the game is in beta the atmosphere, cards etc feel very polished down to the music.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
