|
|
On May 19 2015 00:51 Meta wrote:
The problem with the model from my perspective is that I enjoy the diversity of play experience that comes with Moba games. That diversity is stifled with this business model. I have over 2000 games of dota and I never play the same hero more than once a week, and I play twenty to thirty games in that time. It's great, it never gets stale, and I have developed a robust understanding of every hero and every role. To get to that same level of diversity of experience in hots, I have to shell out hundreds of dollars or play the same 5 heroes dozens of times in a row. That sounds boring to me!
If you want to play new heroes every week isn't that what the weekly rotation is for?
I'll throw my personal situation in. When I hit lvl 30 (pre-gold changes). I bought the starter bundle ($5 for Raynor, Muradin, Malfurion) and 8 other heroes for gold. I had 5k left over I think? Since then I've hit lvl 40 and 180 total wins (~30 co-op I'm guessing).
My highest hero level is 8 to give you an idea of how much I play and I have 50k gold right now. I really don't think the gold gain is that bad depending on what type of player you are. If you're someone who needs a new hero every day then it'll be rough. If you like to actually perfect a hero then it's more than fast enough. Especially since it's front-loaded you can hurry up and figure out which hero you like via weekly rotations and then pick him/her.
Now, part of the perception on gold gain is that the majority of your gold comes from daily quests. So for someone like me who gets 5 games in on a good night, it feels like I'm getting a lot of bang for my buck. For someone who actually gets to sit and plays all day/night then after the first hour all you see is 20-30 g / game and it feels futile (plus people like that are much closer to lvl 10 and needing gold for master skins =p).
|
the thing is that people defend a business model that tries to cut them out of content and make them pay huge amounts of money.
yeah others did it worse. thats not an excuse. look at the arguments for it here, evryone says "its not that bad". thats not what we should aim for. esp when there are others which have proven that you can make a succesful game like this without trying to squeeze evry little penny out.
even if you spend 100$ right now and play 3 months evry day for 2 hours you wont have all the characters. (and lets ignore the ridiculous prizes for even recolor skins which took some intern 3 hours to make).
this isnt good and shouldnt be defended. it will hurt the game longterm (dota guys will often refuse to accept it, lol players wont invest in a 2nd game which requires them to pay a ton forever).
there are tons of ways for a middleground but they choose to rather fuck us.
and just for the record im old enough to afford it. thats not the point. i threw about 50$ at last years compendium for no reason other then wanting to support them, didnt even play more then 20 games of dota in the last 18 monhts.
but i refuse to support models like this. (well bought 30day stim cause they get something for the hours i had so far..)
|
On May 19 2015 03:53 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
the thing is that people defend a business model that tries to cut them out of content and make them pay huge amounts of money.
yeah others did it worse. thats not an excuse. look at the arguments for it here, evryone says "its not that bad". thats not what we should aim for. esp when there are others which have proven that you can make a succesful game like this without trying to squeeze evry little penny out.
even if you spend 100$ right now and play 3 months evry day for 2 hours you wont have all the characters. (and lets ignore the ridiculous prizes for even recolor skins which took some intern 3 hours to make).
this isnt good and shouldnt be defended. it will hurt the game longterm (dota guys will often refuse to accept it, lol players wont invest in a 2nd game which requires them to pay a ton forever).
there are tons of ways for a middleground but they choose to rather fuck us.
and just for the record im old enough to afford it. thats not the point. i threw about 50$ at last years compendium for no reason other then wanting to support them, didnt even play more then 20 games of dota in the last 18 monhts.
but i refuse to support models like this. (well bought 30day stim cause they get something for the hours i had so far..)
By this logic we shouldn't accept anything unless it's 100% free.
Unfortunately, that's not how the world works.
I haven't actually seen anything that substantive concerning what's bad about their pricing model, particularly compared to other MOBA's. All I've heard are the generic, "This takes too long/is too expensive! It's bad and isn't good!" that you hear with every MOBA game.
|
On May 19 2015 02:14 Sponkz wrote:
They want their players to play for years, not months. Obviously it's gonna take an insane amount of time to unlock all heroes f2p style, that's to be expected.
If they want their players to play for years, they should make a game that's worth playing for years, and not try to coerce their player-base into chasing gold on daily quests in order to unlock the full game.
As a dota (and hon) player, the business model of those games is to give away the full game for free. That's the gold standard of moba. I never played LoL so I can't attest to the similarities between that game and this one, but I was really hoping that Blizzard would follow in the shoes of Valve and S2 as opposed to Riot.
In dota and hon, you can start on day 1 and you are immediately given all the same opportunities for success as the most experienced players. It's like starcraft in that way - all the tools are there from the beginning, you just have to learn how to use them. Taking some tools away and charging for them is like removing units from starcraft and then asking people to pay to unlock them. Or you can play 100 games without mutalisks and then "unlock" them, to continue the metaphor - That's coercion in my book.
Where does money come into this? Skins are the most obvious method of monetizing this genre, however dota also allows users to buy tournament tickets to observe tournament games in-client, and they take a percentage of that but the rest goes to the prize pool. I've sunk over $100 into dota 2 in the past 3 years, through these tournament tickets alone. Granted, Valve has only seen 50-75% of that, but their business model has the kind of integrity that I feel good about supporting, and I'll continue to support them for years to come. Spending money on HotS to have the same opportunities as the experienced players strikes me as borderline unethical. Obviously it crosses over that line when they release imbalanced heroes, where it becomes essentially pay-to-win.
This is a fine line for Blizzard to walk, and I'm pretty sad that they've chosen this route.
|
Alternatively, I'd be happy to buy the full game for a standardized price, say $60 to unlock every hero. I wouldn't be upset if they then attempted to garner more revenue through skins and cosmetic items, because everyone would have the same barrier to entry.
There's an objectively right and wrong way to implement the free-to-play model, and Blizzard has gone farther in the direction of "wrong" than I would have hoped.
|
On May 19 2015 04:24 Meta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 02:14 Sponkz wrote:
They want their players to play for years, not months. Obviously it's gonna take an insane amount of time to unlock all heroes f2p style, that's to be expected. If they want their players to play for years, they should make a game that's worth playing for years, and not try to coerce their player-base into chasing gold on daily quests in order to unlock the full game. As a dota (and hon) player, the business model of those games is to give away the full game for free. That's the gold standard of moba. I never played LoL so I can't attest to the similarities between that game and this one, but I was really hoping that Blizzard would follow in the shoes of Valve and S2 as opposed to Riot. In dota and hon, you can start on day 1 and you are immediately given all the same opportunities for success as the most experienced players. It's like starcraft in that way - all the tools are there from the beginning, you just have to learn how to use them. Taking some tools away and charging for them is like removing units from starcraft and then asking people to pay to unlock them. Or you can play 100 games without mutalisks and then "unlock" them, to continue the metaphor - That's coercion in my book. Where does money come into this? Skins are the most obvious method of monetizing this genre, however dota also allows users to buy tournament tickets to observe tournament games in-client, and they take a percentage of that but the rest goes to the prize pool. I've sunk over $100 into dota 2 in the past 3 years, through these tournament tickets alone. Granted, Valve has only seen 50-75% of that, but their business model has the kind of integrity that I feel good about supporting, and I'll continue to support them for years to come. Spending money on HotS to have the same opportunities as the experienced players strikes me as borderline unethical. Obviously it crosses over that line when they release imbalanced heroes, where it becomes essentially pay-to-win. This is a fine line for Blizzard to walk, and I'm pretty sad that they've chosen this route.
First off, your comparison to Starcraft and locking units like Mutalisks unless people play for them just doesn't work, and it's been shot down countless times in the MOBA community.
Second, LoL is very similar to HotS in terms of pricing model.
3rd, as someone coming from LoL, it sounds pretty shady to be charging people to be able to watch your tournaments through your game client.
Alternatively, I'd be happy to buy the full game for a standardized price, say $60 to unlock every hero. I wouldn't be upset if they then attempted to garner more revenue through skins and cosmetic items, because everyone would have the same barrier to entry.
There's an objectively right and wrong way to implement the free-to-play model, and Blizzard has gone farther in the direction of "wrong" than I would have hoped.
I have strong suspicions that charging people $60 and then continuously rolling out more microtransactions would result in a lot more backlash than the current model. For evidence of this, just go over to WoW, or any game out there where there are microtransactions like that. They are not popular.
|
To me all this business model talk is pointless, LoL as done the same thing and it's the number 1 moba on the planet. So please, dota players, stop with your "hots trash business model, dota has a better one", the business model has been proven to work and no matter how you hate it, no one really cares and dota is there for you so I don't see the point in discussing it. Don't like it? Go play dota and leave us alone.
|
nobody said anything about locking mutas - its much closer to locking zerg and protoss
|
On May 19 2015 04:24 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 03:53 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
the thing is that people defend a business model that tries to cut them out of content and make them pay huge amounts of money.
yeah others did it worse. thats not an excuse. look at the arguments for it here, evryone says "its not that bad". thats not what we should aim for. esp when there are others which have proven that you can make a succesful game like this without trying to squeeze evry little penny out.
even if you spend 100$ right now and play 3 months evry day for 2 hours you wont have all the characters. (and lets ignore the ridiculous prizes for even recolor skins which took some intern 3 hours to make).
this isnt good and shouldnt be defended. it will hurt the game longterm (dota guys will often refuse to accept it, lol players wont invest in a 2nd game which requires them to pay a ton forever).
there are tons of ways for a middleground but they choose to rather fuck us.
and just for the record im old enough to afford it. thats not the point. i threw about 50$ at last years compendium for no reason other then wanting to support them, didnt even play more then 20 games of dota in the last 18 monhts.
but i refuse to support models like this. (well bought 30day stim cause they get something for the hours i had so far..)
By this logic we shouldn't accept anything unless it's 100% free. Unfortunately, that's not how the world works. I haven't actually seen anything that substantive concerning what's bad about their pricing model, particularly compared to other MOBA's. All I've heard are the generic, "This takes too long/is too expensive! It's bad and isn't good!" that you hear with every MOBA game.
erm no? there are many completly fine f2p games out there with reasonable models. or look at smites godpack, pay a fair price once and have all the actual gameplay content in the game. things arent just black&white...
and yeah... regarding pricing ofc you gonna hear "its too expensive for what it does" most of the time cause... well what else are you gonna say about a price.. wtf?
your post is just pointless
I have strong suspicions that charging people $60 and then continuously rolling out more microtransactions would result in a lot more backlash than the current model. For evidence of this, just go over to WoW, or any game out there where there are microtransactions like that. They are not popular.
arent almost all AAA multiplayer games done that way nowadays?? full price and then countless optional boosters? cod,bf,sfxtekken,mkx etc etc?
and as said look at smite, the god pack was damn cheap and unlocks evrything noncosmetic.
|
On May 19 2015 05:19 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 04:24 Stratos_speAr wrote:On May 19 2015 03:53 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
the thing is that people defend a business model that tries to cut them out of content and make them pay huge amounts of money.
yeah others did it worse. thats not an excuse. look at the arguments for it here, evryone says "its not that bad". thats not what we should aim for. esp when there are others which have proven that you can make a succesful game like this without trying to squeeze evry little penny out.
even if you spend 100$ right now and play 3 months evry day for 2 hours you wont have all the characters. (and lets ignore the ridiculous prizes for even recolor skins which took some intern 3 hours to make).
this isnt good and shouldnt be defended. it will hurt the game longterm (dota guys will often refuse to accept it, lol players wont invest in a 2nd game which requires them to pay a ton forever).
there are tons of ways for a middleground but they choose to rather fuck us.
and just for the record im old enough to afford it. thats not the point. i threw about 50$ at last years compendium for no reason other then wanting to support them, didnt even play more then 20 games of dota in the last 18 monhts.
but i refuse to support models like this. (well bought 30day stim cause they get something for the hours i had so far..)
By this logic we shouldn't accept anything unless it's 100% free. Unfortunately, that's not how the world works. I haven't actually seen anything that substantive concerning what's bad about their pricing model, particularly compared to other MOBA's. All I've heard are the generic, "This takes too long/is too expensive! It's bad and isn't good!" that you hear with every MOBA game. erm no? there are many completly fine f2p games out there with reasonable models. or look at smites godpack, pay a fair price once and have all the actual gameplay content in the game. things arent just black&white... and yeah... regarding pricing ofc you gonna hear "its too expensive for what it does" most of the time cause... well what else are you gonna say about a price.. wtf? your post is just pointless
Comparing the business model of a giant like Blizzard to a bunch of twat that his Hi-Rez is silly. Hi-Rez HAS to offer something fair else no one would play, just like many F2P titles out there than can't compete with company like Blizz.
|
Forget F2P, just look at other MMOs, if it isn't a super well known property then it's going to be F2P because you can't compete with WoW (and even SWTOR went F2P).
I doubt Smite could have survived by copying LoL's business model, but HoTS can.
|
On May 19 2015 05:29 DPK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 05:19 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:On May 19 2015 04:24 Stratos_speAr wrote:On May 19 2015 03:53 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
the thing is that people defend a business model that tries to cut them out of content and make them pay huge amounts of money.
yeah others did it worse. thats not an excuse. look at the arguments for it here, evryone says "its not that bad". thats not what we should aim for. esp when there are others which have proven that you can make a succesful game like this without trying to squeeze evry little penny out.
even if you spend 100$ right now and play 3 months evry day for 2 hours you wont have all the characters. (and lets ignore the ridiculous prizes for even recolor skins which took some intern 3 hours to make).
this isnt good and shouldnt be defended. it will hurt the game longterm (dota guys will often refuse to accept it, lol players wont invest in a 2nd game which requires them to pay a ton forever).
there are tons of ways for a middleground but they choose to rather fuck us.
and just for the record im old enough to afford it. thats not the point. i threw about 50$ at last years compendium for no reason other then wanting to support them, didnt even play more then 20 games of dota in the last 18 monhts.
but i refuse to support models like this. (well bought 30day stim cause they get something for the hours i had so far..)
By this logic we shouldn't accept anything unless it's 100% free. Unfortunately, that's not how the world works. I haven't actually seen anything that substantive concerning what's bad about their pricing model, particularly compared to other MOBA's. All I've heard are the generic, "This takes too long/is too expensive! It's bad and isn't good!" that you hear with every MOBA game. erm no? there are many completly fine f2p games out there with reasonable models. or look at smites godpack, pay a fair price once and have all the actual gameplay content in the game. things arent just black&white... and yeah... regarding pricing ofc you gonna hear "its too expensive for what it does" most of the time cause... well what else are you gonna say about a price.. wtf? your post is just pointless Comparing the business model of a giant like Blizzard to a bunch of twat that his Hi-Rez is silly. Hi-Rez HAS to offer something fair else no one would play, just like many F2P titles out there than can't compete with company like Blizz.
which is the problem im talking about. ofc blizz CAN do it. and apple can charge 100% more for the same gfx cards in their desktop pcs. that doesnt mean we as customers should defend them for beeing greedy as fuck and defend models that hurt us just because its becoming the norm nowadays.
On May 19 2015 05:39 Wuster wrote:
Forget F2P, just look at other MMOs, if it isn't a super well known property then it's going to be F2P because you can't compete with WoW (and even SWTOR went F2P).
I doubt Smite could have survived by copying LoL's business model, but HoTS can.
which doesnt change a thing about the quality of the model. and i dont think anyone doubts that hots could easily make great profits with a more customer friendly model.
(and its not like hots is a very cost intensive game to make anyways)
well its not gonna change anyways and if your opinion is that big companys should squeeze their customers to the max then fine, throw money at it or be happy with your chopped up games. but dont be surprised if stuff like this becomes the norm one point.whatever
|
On May 19 2015 05:19 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 04:24 Stratos_speAr wrote:On May 19 2015 03:53 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
the thing is that people defend a business model that tries to cut them out of content and make them pay huge amounts of money.
yeah others did it worse. thats not an excuse. look at the arguments for it here, evryone says "its not that bad". thats not what we should aim for. esp when there are others which have proven that you can make a succesful game like this without trying to squeeze evry little penny out.
even if you spend 100$ right now and play 3 months evry day for 2 hours you wont have all the characters. (and lets ignore the ridiculous prizes for even recolor skins which took some intern 3 hours to make).
this isnt good and shouldnt be defended. it will hurt the game longterm (dota guys will often refuse to accept it, lol players wont invest in a 2nd game which requires them to pay a ton forever).
there are tons of ways for a middleground but they choose to rather fuck us.
and just for the record im old enough to afford it. thats not the point. i threw about 50$ at last years compendium for no reason other then wanting to support them, didnt even play more then 20 games of dota in the last 18 monhts.
but i refuse to support models like this. (well bought 30day stim cause they get something for the hours i had so far..)
By this logic we shouldn't accept anything unless it's 100% free. Unfortunately, that's not how the world works. I haven't actually seen anything that substantive concerning what's bad about their pricing model, particularly compared to other MOBA's. All I've heard are the generic, "This takes too long/is too expensive! It's bad and isn't good!" that you hear with every MOBA game. erm no? there are many completly fine f2p games out there with reasonable models. or look at smites godpack, pay a fair price once and have all the actual gameplay content in the game. things arent just black&white... and yeah... regarding pricing ofc you gonna hear "its too expensive for what it does" most of the time cause... well what else are you gonna say about a price.. wtf? your post is just pointless Show nested quote +I have strong suspicions that charging people $60 and then continuously rolling out more microtransactions would result in a lot more backlash than the current model. For evidence of this, just go over to WoW, or any game out there where there are microtransactions like that. They are not popular. arent almost all AAA multiplayer games done that way nowadays?? full price and then countless optional boosters? cod,bf,sfxtekken,mkx etc etc? and as said look at smite, the god pack was damn cheap and unlocks evrything noncosmetic.
If all you can say is, "It's too expensive", you're either too lazy or your point just isn't any good.
Unless there's a particular reason it's too expensive ("It's completely unnecessary", "it's unethical", etc.), then "it's too expensive" is merely a statement relative to the person making it and has no real meaning as an overall claim.
which is the problem im talking about. ofc blizz CAN do it. and apple can charge 100% more for the same gfx cards in their desktop pcs. that doesnt mean we as customers should defend them for beeing greedy as fuck and defend models that hurt us just because its becoming the norm nowadays.
Just because it's more expensive doesn't mean it can automatically hurt us. Blizzard's ability to charge more is based off of their brand, but their brand implies that they produce a product that is better than most competitors, and if their product is good enough, they can charge more. Personally, I agree that HotS is good enough when compared to their competitors to use the pricing model that they do (a pricing model in which you are not being forced to pay a single penny to access any content in the game).
nobody said anything about locking mutas - its much closer to locking zerg and protoss
This is a much better analogy, but then you'd have to add in the fact that there are dozens of versions of Zerg or Protoss and you can easily unlock several of them within the first couple days of playing.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
The thing is, and there are studies proving that, is that most (not all) people who goes around saying "I've spent $1000 dollars ond DOTA 2 because the model is better and I woudl spent $20000 on heroes of the storm if it was cheaper" don't put their money where their mouth is.
The largest barrier is spending money or not. People will either spend money on a f2p game, or they will not, and a lot of companies have showed that it is difficult to make someone who don't want to spend money to do it. Most players will not spend a dime, some will spend a little 10-dollars or less, and a very few will spend more than that.
The thing is, those very few are the ones that keep the game a float, because they will spend A LOT of money.
A company could make things cheaper if their analysist say that will enable them to sell more, and thus make more profit, but in games specially, that has been shown to not apply. A large part of that is because of the demographic. A kid who doesn't have a credit card won't buy something because it is cheaper. A father won't buy this hero for a his teenage son just because it is 2-3$ dollars before. Some people are willing to spend money, some don't, and if you reduce the prices, you end up with the people who are willing to spent money, giving you less of it, and that is why they use this model.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xvDgwy2.jpg)
Odd game today that actually ended quite well on Cursed Hollow playing Kerrigan where I learned a little bit more.
At first the team was getting picked off left and right at first, mostly overextending and not being careful. (mostly Illidan and Hammer)
We also had a Zagara (who went for *drum rolls* a....Baneling build) and a Hammer that loved their lanes a little too much, often ending up way too late at the tribute or getting picked off. It had all the signs of a game that wasn't going to end well.
On top of all that, the enemy team had a healer and a tank, we had neither.
Added to that, my team wasn't going for the tributes in any quick fashion, sp I wasn't about to go in there solo or with just one other hero. I've learned well that soloing an objective like a tribute is just setting you up to get killed by the enemy team.
Hammer of course had yet to learn this and silently typed '...' after trying to solo a tribute and being blown to bits before any of us could even get there.
The game went south fast from there, the enemy team getting two curses and two bosses against us but we managed to keep the Keeps alive at least. In these cases with QM matches I used to hate having chosen Kerrigan because I'd just get killed over and over, but as time went on I've found that playing Kerrigan more carefully and waiting out for a vulnerability is such a joy as you can grab and kill an enemy hero (that is not a tank) that overextends or gets singled out.
Their Kael'Thas and Tychus got sweeped and killed more than a few times overextending or trying to solo.
Previously I would've jumped in the second I saw them but no more of that.
This avoided the levels from getting to far out of hand, usually being 1 or 1,5 levels behind.
We managed to survive till we both had lvl 20 and the game itself was now lvl 20 to lvl 21 for them when I decided to try and see if chatting advice would help. Often trying to give advice in QM has the opposite effect, but since we were losing anyway I figured why not.
And to my surprise it actually did quite a bit. At one point the enemy team finally overextended on a Keep during a third curse (brave Kael'Thas!) and we managed to nuke them down. I instantly pinged the boss like mad (it was 4v0 but they had 5 forts/keeps) and when the next tribute spawned en route I told Nova to go there since she's the safest one to send with her cloak (one hero respawned at this time) and she does little damage to the boss anyway. Ofcourse, only our Illidan went with me to the boss but we still got it just as the enemy team respawned.
We then regrouped in the middle and their Kael'Thas made the mistake of overextending too far once again and quickly died to Kerri's combo + team. Things escalated from there as their team was split dealing with the boss and dealing with us as the next tribute spawned. I told the team to all go tribute TOGETHER and for once they did and we managed to nab Tychus and Li Li as they tried to get the tribute themselves. Muradin fell shortly after trying to chase me down as I was on half health from that fight. (we had no healer)
We now had a curse going and were up a level, 23 vs 22 from the boss and the kills and we had no heroes down and were destroying the middle fort and then keep as the curse lifted. As it lifted my was scattered around the enemy base as the enemy team was starting to respawn. I quickly chatted to the team to fall back and not get killed as they were sticking around whilst they were nearly respawning. Lo and behold, they actually all pulled back. Even Nova. Even. Nova. Okay she had to use Bolt of the Storm but still.
We regrouped in mid but Zagara was overextending trying to take their bruiser camp.
Although we tried, me and Nova couldn't save Zagara, but Muradin overextended right into Illidan as Nova managed to nab Sylvanas. The remaining heroes tried to defend mid but were outnumbered and we traded 1 hero for 4.
We now had three heroes left from the fight but the enemy team was now all dead and we had two lanes pushing the core so I suggested we go for it and we managed to rush the core for a victory just as Li Li respawned.
From a game that looked horribad in composition as well as early game execution to a team victory.
Makes me reconsider how much basic advice could turn a game that I thought (especially in the mid game) was hopelessly lost. Although we all made quite a few mistakes, so did they and only together were we able to use that to turn the game.
The one other thing I actually really noticed for the first time in this match is that falling back on low health (30% or less) should simply be standard, even if the fight isn't over yet or even if there is that Murdain at half health being a tempting target.Too often with Kerrigan did I think I could finish off that hero (and half the time I could) only to still die after.
Although I was already doing that less and less it really stuck out this game.
Though it sometimes feels bad to fall back from a fight (especially having to potentially leave a teamfight), it really is better than dying yourself and giving more XP away and our team another hero down.
Although this meant I had to retreat/hearth more often, it did mean we had a hero up more, gave away less XP and it left me in the position to punish any lone enemy hero overextending. I hearthed/retreated on 10-30% health a lot in this game.
Not that long ago I would've actually jumped a tribute hoping I could steal it, pounce into the enemy team thinking my own team will come in to win the fight (I leave initiating to the Warriors now) as well as sticking around too long, getting killed each time and making Kerrigan sad. But no more and in this game I could see the difference versus an Illidan that dived the enemy team and a Hammer trying to solo tributes.
And as weird as it may feel running away sometimes, it can really be the best option if the fight doesn't start well.
The result? One death (over-defending a fort) on a non-healer/tank team with a hero that only gets escapes from talents.
Learning!
|
nobody talks about the alts.
when you make a new account you can make 10k of gold in the first day.
and a well timed free stimpack will net you another 10k in the first week.
the actual model is bad because promotes the alt creation.
|
On May 19 2015 00:51 Meta wrote:
The problem with the model from my perspective is that I enjoy the diversity of play experience that comes with Moba games. That diversity is stifled with this business model. I have over 2000 games of dota and I never play the same hero more than once a week, and I play twenty to thirty games in that time. It's great, it never gets stale, and I have developed a robust understanding of every hero and every role. To get to that same level of diversity of experience in hots, I have to shell out hundreds of dollars or play the same 5 heroes dozens of times in a row. That sounds boring to me!
Or you could play a couple months casually and end up with 15 heroes and money in the bank waiting for a new interesting hero to come out...
|
On May 19 2015 09:11 Eliezar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 00:51 Meta wrote:
The problem with the model from my perspective is that I enjoy the diversity of play experience that comes with Moba games. That diversity is stifled with this business model. I have over 2000 games of dota and I never play the same hero more than once a week, and I play twenty to thirty games in that time. It's great, it never gets stale, and I have developed a robust understanding of every hero and every role. To get to that same level of diversity of experience in hots, I have to shell out hundreds of dollars or play the same 5 heroes dozens of times in a row. That sounds boring to me!
Or you could play a couple months casually and end up with 15 heroes and money in the bank waiting for a new interesting hero to come out...
I don't think you guys get it. I like playing more than 90% of the heroes in dota, and in this genre, hero selection is everything. They should make all the heroes free and charge for everything else. Charge for additional game modes, skins, etc. But make a basic game mode and all the heroes free.
3rd, as someone coming from LoL, it sounds pretty shady to be charging people to be able to watch your tournaments through your game client.
That's ridiculous. Shady is charging people hundreds of dollars for a full copy of your game. All tournaments are free to watch on twitch, if you are okay with having somebody else control the camera. Paying to watch in-game gives you control of the camera. It's a luxury that comes with the added benefit of supporting esports by adding directly to the prize pool. You guys shouldn't wonder why dota has the highest prize pools in all of esports - it's functionality like this.
To the guy who said "dota is for dota players, leave us alone"
Fine. I will. I'm disappointed that I won't ever give this game a shot, but in retrospect I'm glad I dodged the bullet of LoL, and if this game is going the same direction, then I'll be glad I'm dodging this bullet as well.
Have fun.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
Idk, in my opinion, you should give the game a try. It is different enough from the other two that you won't feel you are playing the same game, you may like the changes it brings into the genre. You may end up liking it, or you may noy, but even if you dissagree with the buissness model, since it is a free to play game you basically don't lose anything by trying it. In the worst case scenario you don't like it, or aftter a week you confirm the buisness model is definitely not for you, or maybe after a week you'll think it isn't as bad as you thought, who knows. I'd recommend you to at least try it, but it's up to you.
|
On May 19 2015 10:48 Meta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2015 09:11 Eliezar wrote:On May 19 2015 00:51 Meta wrote:
The problem with the model from my perspective is that I enjoy the diversity of play experience that comes with Moba games. That diversity is stifled with this business model. I have over 2000 games of dota and I never play the same hero more than once a week, and I play twenty to thirty games in that time. It's great, it never gets stale, and I have developed a robust understanding of every hero and every role. To get to that same level of diversity of experience in hots, I have to shell out hundreds of dollars or play the same 5 heroes dozens of times in a row. That sounds boring to me!
Or you could play a couple months casually and end up with 15 heroes and money in the bank waiting for a new interesting hero to come out... I don't think you guys get it. I like playing more than 90% of the heroes in dota, and in this genre, hero selection is everything. They should make all the heroes free and charge for everything else. Charge for additional game modes, skins, etc. But make a basic game mode and all the heroes free. Show nested quote +3rd, as someone coming from LoL, it sounds pretty shady to be charging people to be able to watch your tournaments through your game client.
That's ridiculous. Shady is charging people hundreds of dollars for a full copy of your game. All tournaments are free to watch on twitch, if you are okay with having somebody else control the camera. Paying to watch in-game gives you control of the camera. It's a luxury that comes with the added benefit of supporting esports by adding directly to the prize pool. You guys shouldn't wonder why dota has the highest prize pools in all of esports - it's functionality like this. To the guy who said "dota is for dota players, leave us alone" Fine. I will. I'm disappointed that I won't ever give this game a shot, but in retrospect I'm glad I dodged the bullet of LoL, and if this game is going the same direction, then I'll be glad I'm dodging this bullet as well. Have fun.
Again, you are not being charged anything for a full copy of your game. As long as you invest time, you can play everything that is a part of this game without spending a dime.
Furthermore, you don't need every hero. The volume of heroes means that you only need a certain amount of heroes to effectively access the entire game. You can complain about "But I want every hero!" all you want, but the fact is that the vast majority of people only play a certain handful of heroes, and your complaint is functionally irrelevant.
Finally, the pricing model is different because LoL and HotS offer a lot more new content than DotA does.
So go ahead, leave and you can just continue crying, "But i want it ALL and I want it to be FREE!". We'll just continue to enjoy this game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
