Blizzard is getting more and more greedy

[asdfen]

Blizzard had great games in 90s and early 2000s Warcraft 1/2, Starcraft, Diablo 1/2 all are great and I still play some of them today. Then they released WoW that I tried when it was released thought that was awfull, then D3 which is at its best mediocre and is a downgrade of D2 and in no way can compete with Path of Exile, Hearthstone has no strategy and some very broken cards trump all cards

 

[Evilsausage]

except its not p2w because a. there is no competitive element and b. you could gear out just fine with patience or the gold AH

There is Ladders that mesure peoples level progress so yes there is a competative element. Even if there where no such thing people would be outraged, because many don't like the thought of people getting gear easier then them just because they choose to pay a little extra.
Even Path of Exile which cost nothing to buy, doesn't have a pay to win feature. Because they know it would upset many players.

And you are basing this claim on...?

Reviewers where obviously hyped and based it on a limited amount of gameplay. Criticzing one of the most hyped games ever made by one of the most beloved companies isn't easy. Warlords of Draenor also got praised as one of the best WoW expansions ever, yet User gave it lower score and shortly after it had a massive player drop....
Im not saying people couldn't enjoy it, but i think reviewers missed some major flaws like horrible loot, AH focused end game and an overall lack of new features. Even its story was mediocre.
Many of the fans obviously didn't like the game and left shortly after. Even on the Diablo forums many of the hardcore fans agree that Vanilla D3 was very flawed.

It got metacritic bombed, thus making that score utterly meaningless. All a red user score on metacritic means is that a bunch of people who may or may not have played the game got butthurt and spammed zeros, complete with melodramatic review blurbs declaring it the worst thing ever.

Yes agreed, it doesn't deserve 4.0 in rating, since many gave it a bad rating only because of the Server issues at start.
Still there where plenty of people giving it low rating based on other things aswell, Reaper of souls also got pretty low ratings even though i would say it was a improvement. People spamming zeros and other spammed 10s to defend it, it still showed that there where plenty of people not satisfied with the game.
Path of Exile however has much higher user rating on meta.

Its an expansion and didn't have 1/10 the hype coming in that D3 did, of course it sold less.

Actually there was a shitload of commercial everywhere, even on TV here in Sweden, which is rare for games.
But yeah people where not as hyped because they had tried Diablo 3. Still 1/3 of the full games sales is not much.

Because some people couldn't get over there being a safe to use in-game economy instead of risky mercurial emergent SoJ based economy and blizz decided the PR boost from giving them less to cry about was worth more than the RMAH?

You mean a game built around the auction house that rewards people paying some extra real money was good? Well im sorry but many people didn't think that. Im not saying RoS no trade at all is great, but RMAH was garbage.

And I don't see the problem with the gold AH. Sell good items that aren't for your class, use the gold to buy good items that are. I actually found the emphasis on trade to be interesting. Although I will say item rarity needed some balancing.

The problem was that the items you found as you progressed on Inferno was always worse then what you could buy, since people at higher acts found better items that you still could use. Combined with the horrible drop rate and the conveniance of putting stuff on the AH. There where always a shitload of items you could buy of the AH.
I agree that trading can be fun, but it ended up being such a major part of the game. Anyway it doesn't change the fact that the Real money thing was bullshit.

How does the way other people play effect you in any way? Besisdes Blizzard was horrible at stopping people from buying gold/items in LoD, can you really blame them for deciding to give the players what they seemed to want, albeit with a much lower chance of credit card theft.

There are some people who seem to want steroids to be legal in sports. Why not make it legal? There are some who want to use hacks in Counterstrike, why not make it legal? Not exacly the same, but you get the point.
I don't think there are that many who really do buy gear for real money, so why add it if it will upset others who think everyone should have the same chance getting items?

[citation needed]

Just look at the content from patches.

But why should they add it for free? Blizzard doesn't owe you a bunch of free cosmetic bullshit and if other people want to pay for it, good for them. (also there were free cosmetic transmogs as season rewards FYI).

Like you said yourself: "Blizzard is a great company at supporting their games."
Times are changing and people expect ARPGS to get supported with patches, Blizzard set the standards for that with Diablo 2s patches. Today Path of exile is constantly getting updated even though its by a much smaller studio.
Since Both Diablo 2 and RoS where quite expensive and wasn't exacly filled with content, I don't think its unrealistic to ask for more.

And they still do. D3 has had so many skill balance patches, WoW is patched constantly, and Hearthstone gets the most outstandingly broken meta builds whacked into line every so often. That degree of balance adjustment is not something I see from many devs.

The amount of content D3 gets from patches compared to PoE is minimal. That game is constantly getting updated with new skills, items and soon even a new act + a shitload of features. D3 can't even compete in terms of content even though its been out longer and also requires you to buy an expansion.
WoW is still patched quite often, which isn't strange when millions of people pay a monthly subscription to get that. Still WoW is getting far less patched today then Vanilla and Burning crusade days. There where much more content like new Raids and instances, battlegrounds etc that came in patches.
Hearthstone takes forever to get balance fixes. People complained on undertaker forever and it took like 6 months to change a single card. Probably because they wanted some OP cards, to encourage people to get Nax expansion.
But the Goblin vs Gnomes patch was pretty nice.

Avoiding the question.

I answerd the question earlier. I saw no info about it, know nothing about the payment so can't really say.

Stat points might have mattered if there was more than one way to correctly distribute them, but there wasn't. Runewords were an exercise in grinding, D3 legs are as interesting, if not more so than those in D2, Good riddance to mana pot chugging, and D3 allows far more build experimentation by allowing you to respec at will.

Okay true I agree that the options for stat points where limited unless you where going for some odd build. Still i liked the fact that I had some control of my char. Instead of just gaining stat at level up and unlocking a certain skill.
Rune words where atleast something to do and gave you reason to pick up cetain socketed items. Yes legendaries are better now, but they where horrible in vanilla, RoS does however suffer from the problem of forcing people into using a few certain sets in endgame, potions in D2 where a bit annoying, but Path of Exile improved it in a interessting way. Yes you can experiment but the amount of option by todays standards aren't really impressive.

And then get flattened and go back to your hammerdin. Also I have a melee wizzard and ranged Barb in D3, just saying.

Okay thats cool, didn't know it existed.

Ohh I see I'm dealing with someone who believes that anything with colors other than the standard GRIMDARKtm pallet is for kids. Lets just say I could not agree less and think the opposite is closer to the truth.

So that must mean pretty much all cartoons got it wrong, its not at all aimed at kids!
Im not saying young people only like the cartoony style, but it sure is pretty damn common in games right now, especially in games by Blizzard. Yes I think the style change where done for the sake of being more mainstream.

And I link the people who complain about those games to that same comic. We live in a always online world, and the idea of people with smartphone all but surgically attached to their faces complaining about "online DURM" make me roll my eyes.

Well its a feature that is forced upon them.
There are lots of people out there with rather poor internet connections, so they are gonna get punished for that because Blizzard is afraid of Piracy. There where also problems with the servers at launch and rubberbanding issues still exist.

The vibe I'm getting here is "I didn't like WoD, ergo its crap and Blizzard is evil".

Exacly I didn't like WoD for reasons I have listed. Its a lazy expansion that offerd very little new. I have played this before just in a slightly different package.

TBC was $40 WoD is $50, "much" is pushing it.

Okay maybe not much cheaper, but its still 10$ cheaper and you received much more content. So yeah its still greedy.

You can only add so many massive core features. Wasn't one of the big things in TBC battlegrounds? you can only add multiplayer once, that's not the kind of big whammy you can repeat every time. Although I will grant garrisons seem less fun than than not Pokemon tm from Pandaria, its still a interesting new feature. And isn't WoD releasing raids gradually rather than having all the content available at launch for big guilds to bum rush?

TBC added some new BG but most importantly it added the Arena, it added Heroic dungeons, PvP zones, flying mounts, it also introduced a higher standard on quests. Less gather 20x feathers for example, stuff that today is standard in all expansions.
Besides that you had about twice the Instances at launch, most of which where bigger and I think 4 raids at launch. But it received a total of 7 before WotLK expansion. Do you think WoD will ever get close to that number?
You also had more set items and reworked all the classes to be more balanced and fun.

Just because they can't add BGs again, doesn't mean there is no room for more innovation. Adding a similar continent, with similar quests, with similar instances and raids is gonna feel repetative. They have a massive budget to think of things to add.

Ok, now you arbitrate what a major corporation "Deserves"? Tell you what, from where I'm standing they "deserve" whatever they can make through sound business and solid game making.

Well righ now they are kinda pushing it, is it sound to pay 10$ for a Portrait in Hearthstone? Some might pay for it, but its still a greedy move which makes me lose respect for them.
Blizzard once made games I bought without hesitation but today... I would not. The whole reason they can charge high prices is because they have buildt up a great reputation. The question is at what point will they go too far at asking for more and more money?

The problem with trying to refine the old WoW talent trees is that there is always going to be an optimum build, and the way dungeons and raids are set up, no one is ever going to want to use anything but the most ideal setup, making everything else so much chaff. The only way to eliminate this would be to totally remake the combat to be skill based action, and we both know that's never going to happen.

Actually by having different builds together with more item variety giving bonuses, the game could give people more options. And WoW sure needs more item variaety, currently its too much items that are too similar.
I played a Shockadin during Burning Crusade, it sure wasn't conciderd optimal yet I still did instance/raids as a healer and sometimes tank with shockadin spec. I also got high rating in the Arena.

And hearthstone cards need to be programmed an animated, and they cost less. seems like a decent tradeoff to me..

Most cards share existing animations, an animation is made once and not the same as stuff getting printed over and over using materials. Which then has to be shipped and sold at stores.

If someone is buying them, then clearly its not greed, its giving the customers what they want. Also still not seeing why its worth getting worked up over cosmetics.

Well they could be giving the customers what they want by charging half the price and probably get more buyers. Its not like the cost is in anyway reflecting the amount of work they have put into it.
Some people pay a shitload 40$ bottled water, but that doesn't mean others can't think stuff like that is bullshit.
EA and Ubi is constantly pushing the boundries when it comes to greed, by your logic there is no greed because some are buying their products. I think many will disagree, shit like that is why people tend to dislike those companies.

So now not only are you somehow privy to the inner workings at Blizzard, you are calling them greedy for making a sound business decision?

Yes its a safe business decision, but its a boring one. Taking chances and trying something new is usually the games that truly become memorable. Blizzard did this once upon a time, that together with the high quality of their products is what made them so big in the first place.
Call of Duty is milking the popularity of modern military shooters, but that doesn't mean all those sequals are going to be rememberd as bring anythign special to the genre like Half-Life, Deus Ex, Quake did.

I would question if the skill level of randoms has anything to do with the overall complexity of the game, and I would say no.

But you said teamwork makes up the lack items, if there is bad teamwork in many teams it must mean its less complex then other MOBAs.

Please don't try to play the "fact" card in a internet argument about the subjective ethics of a corporate entity as argued by two people without any kind of academic background on the topic. (I retract this statement if you have a bachelors in business or something).

Hehe no I don't have any academic background in that, but you don't exacly need to have that to figue it out.
Look at the stuff I listed as greedy on the first page and compare it with what Blizzard did before lets say 2008, roughly around the time Activision came into the picture.
Where there microtransactions? Where pay to win features in Diablo 2?(for example) Did they support buying gold and levling services in WoW? Did they charge more or less money for their games then? Well you get the point.
If they truly where, then im wrong, but since i know im not, Im will to say its a fact Blizzard is more greedy now.

Circa 2005 maybe, but at this point I though it was standard practice to regard anything done by a major company with cynical disdain and jaded suspicion unless said company is Valve or CDProjekt

Yes because at that point they weren't as greedy and they where still making games that truly gave people that "wooow" factor. At that time people where already starting to pick on EA. So yeah Blizzard must have done something to lose some of its spotless rep.

...Everything? Classes all feel the same because they share a passive grid and actives come from items, skill gems adds a triple layer extra grind (pray for gem drops, pray for armor that can socket that type, then go grind to level up that gem so it does something resembling worthwhile damage) and left me able to use IIRC a whopping three different actives by the end of the first act, almost all skil gems are incredibly boring and basic, You burn mana far too fast and don't get it back quick enough, your attacks all hit with the sundering fury of a baby's giggle turning every single encounter into a chore as you slowly chip away at your foes, the passive grid was the worst kind of boring only noticeable in the long term "oohh do I want +.0004 dexterity or +.07% ice damage" stat incrimenting bar a few deeply buried interesting ones, the act 1 boss was about as much fun to fight as Duriel i.e not in any way fun, the world was unrelentingly dreary and uninteresting, the barter system is annoying, loot drops are perplexingly rare, the community was full of "lel get good scum" dickbags, ect.
I did like the way potions work, that was cool.
To be fair all of this is circa Sacrifice of the Vaal so they may have fixed some of my gripes, but I doubt it would be enough to put the game above Grim Dawn, let alone Diablo 2/3 in my book.

Well I have to agree that the game doesn't offer spectacular gameplay at start. But to be fair neither did D2.
Path of exile is a game that improves once you start getting more skills and get further in the talent tree.
The support skills makes the biggest differance, where D3 can have 1 glyph to alter a skill, PoE can have up to 5 and more if your item has a build't in one. Once stuff starts to come together the game is not slow at all.

 

[zumbledum]

i cant see any real change blizz have been perfectly happy to charge what the market will bare since they started selling mounts and pets for 15 bucks, the buy me a yacht button as i thought o fit.

but to answer your question , no they are not being too greedy they are being exactly as greedy as they can be. and whining a blizz for playing to the rules is a bit of a waste of time , want to change it change the retarded way we do our economy.

 

[CritialGaming]

Look personally, I don't care what booster packs or cosmetic shit costs in games that are free to play to begin with. It is when they start to put microtransactions in games that either already cost full retail price, or cost a monthly fee to play in general.

WoD was 60 dollars not 50. So it was 20 bucks more than a normal expansion costs AND they delivered only a fraction of content from previous expansions, AND they fucking outright REMOVED features in the game that have been there for 8 years! They took out flying and yet they still have the fucking balls to charge me 25 dollars for a fucking microtransaction FLYING mount. That means you can go bum fuck yourself with a big fat Fist.

 

[Aeshi]

Today Path of exile is constantly getting updated even though its by a much smaller studio.

And most of those updates are/were far smaller than Blizzard's. Back when I played PoE the current "big thing" was... bigger versions of the standard chests. Woo-fucking-hoo.

I haven't played in a while though, so maybe they kicked it up a notch.

it also introduced a higher standard on quests. Less gather 20x feathers for example, stuff that today is standard in all expansions.

Um... what? TBC was almost nothing but "gather 20(0) of this" quests aside from the occasional bombing run quest.

Besides that you had about twice the Instances at launch, most of which where bigger and I think 4 raids at launch. But it received a total of 7 before WotLK expansion. Do you think WoD will ever get close to that number?

Yes, because they're staggering the raids out this time. In TBC they released the raids as soon as they were ready, and you know what that got them? People rushing through it all and then complaining that there was no content.

Yes its a safe business decision, but its a boring one. Taking chances and trying something new is usually the games that truly become memorable. Blizzard did this once upon a time, that together with the high quality of their products is what made them so big in the first place.
Call of Duty is milking the popularity of modern military shooters, but that doesn't mean all those sequals are going to be rememberd as bring anythign special to the genre like Half-Life, Deus Ex, Quake did.

And on the day that you can pay your bills in "memorable" or "woooow factor" that will be a damning statement, but as is those are both entirely meaningless sentiments, Beyond Good & Evil was "memorable", Shadow of the Colossus had a "wooow factor" yet neither of them sold very well. Correlation is not Causation and all that.

 

[MHR]

Jeebus, I can't believe I read everything.

Stopped playing Wow after BC came out when I started smelling which way the shit winds were blowing, came back for a month right before WoD came out. I'm glad I bailed before I got suckered into buying the expansion. Neutering the remaining respectable elements of the game in favor of the shitty instanced mobile game is pretty much the worst thing that could have happened there. Fuck that.

Starcraft 2 isn't the same kind of RTS Warcraft was, so I haven't played it, and I don't care to. Torchlight and Borderlands were scratching my horde-smashing lootfest itch just fine, so fuck if I was going to pay 60 dollars and get gouged for expansions when everyone said the game was playing poorly and was rigged with always-online and auction houses everyone was hating anyway.

I have no complaints about hearthstone. It's F2P and it didn't ruin anything by existing, because nothing came before it. All the cards can be gotten for free. New expansion? Save up some golds and dusts to get the stuff. I'm still not playing it anymore though because there is little room to have any fun with the game. Either you get some of the best cards together by following a stupid copy-paste guide from the internet and follow the arena draft hierarchy list to pick the decks for you, or you eat a ton of losses trying to make a gimmick deck or just including a few cards you actually want to play. Losses are not only unfun, but they're time consuming. It's much better to just play something else.

I couldn't give two shits about all this other garbage Blizzard is trying to make now. A competitor to TF2, good luck. Overwatch is going to be like TF2 without even the kinks worked out. Better team-based shooters have died out from lack of longevity.

Heroes of the Storm is in an even worse position. I haven't had this kind of doomed-to-mediocrity feeling since Bethesda announced they were going to make an Elder Scrolls MMO.

 

[Evilsausage]

And most of those updates are/were far smaller than Blizzard's. Back when I played PoE the current "big thing" was... bigger versions of the standard chests. Woo-fucking-hoo.

I haven't played in a while though, so maybe they kicked it up a notch.

It receives a constat flow of new skills and unique items, on each new 4 month ladder (Softcore and normal) gets new stuff. Features that later gets added into the full game. Chests, shrines, bloodlines(spawns demons), Nemises mod on monsters etc...
It has received many reworkd versions of the passive tree, added a new class start location, new monsters and levels, reworkd bosses, it has added Hideouts which you can decorate. You have masters now that you can gain rep with to get certain bonuses, adding stats on items, crafting etc...
You have corrupted gems, corrupted orbs, corrupted areas with small bosses. You have a end game boss Aziri and a Uber version of her.
But the biggest things is coming this summer, A completly new act for free, that has 9 major big bosses. New items, monsters and all that. You also get a jewel system, they can be found and has different bonuses, which can be placed in certain locations in the passive talent tree. You also get Divination cards, fixed desync, new skills and probably more that i have forgotten.
So yeah with Diablo 3 + its expansion is not getting anywhere close in terms of content to PoE:Awakening. Sadly Diablo 3 just isn't a big priority because they aren't getting as much money from it as other titles

Um... what? TBC was almost nothing but "gather 20(0) of this" quests aside from the occasional bombing run quest.

It still had quests like that, but compared to Vanilla it was a massive differance.

Yes, because they're staggering the raids out this time. In TBC they released the raids as soon as they were ready, and you know what that got them? People rushing through it all and then complaining that there was no content.

Rushing through raids in BC was not so easy. And the game received new raids over time like Sunwell. Sorry but there is no excuse to have 1 ready raid at launch. They claim to have the biggest team ever to work on WoW, yet somehow the can't supply people with more then that.

And on the day that you can pay your bills in "memorable" or "woooow factor" that will be a damning statement, but as is those are both entirely meaningless sentiments, Beyond Good & Evil was "memorable", Shadow of the Colossus had a "wooow factor" yet neither of them sold very well. Correlation is not Causation and all that.

I don't think anyone is expecting Blizzard to make a niche game like Shadow of the Colossus. But Blizzard made games belive it or not back in the day that had a massive impact on the gaming industry. Just because those games pushed the genre forward. What if Blizzard would have made a direct c&c copy back then instead of Stacraft? Think stuff like that would have made Blizzard into a giant?

 

[kingthrall]

I am one of those diehard anti MMO/ MOBA players. Honestly I don't care if you like playing that childish filth its not what appeals to me. However what does annoy me is that the final expansion for Starcraft II has taken absolute ages to be released, later than this woeful micro-transaction hearthstone game.

Starcraft 2 was released in 2010, its 2015 and they have not released the final expansion of the same engine.. Its really really sad in my opinion and goes to show they have not got their priorities straight.

Even if Starcraft 2 is quite cheesy plotwise, the actual gameplay is fast paced and fun and by all means its not the best rts ever made (MYTH II soublighter I would say is my favorite i.m.o) however it is indeed the most popular

For the record: MOBA should be considered a different genre there is no real-time stratergy involved as far as I am concerned just a glorified diablo pvp with abilties!).

 

[asdfen]

I am one of those diehard anti MMO/ MOBA players. Honestly I don't care if you like playing that childish filth its not what appeals to me. However what does annoy me is that the final expansion for Starcraft II has taken absolute ages to be released, later than this woeful micro-transaction hearthstone game.

Starcraft 2 was released in 2010, its 2015 and they have not released the final expansion of the same engine.. Its really really sad in my opinion and goes to show they have not got their priorities straight.

Even if Starcraft 2 is quite cheesy plotwise, the actual gameplay is fast paced and fun and by all means its not the best rts ever made (MYTH II soublighter I would say is my favorite i.m.o) however it is indeed the most popular

For the record: MOBA should be considered a different genre there is no real-time stratergy involved as far as I am concerned just a glorified diablo pvp with abilties!).

in complette agreement on Starcraft 2 I also would like to add my complete spite for breaking a single game into multiple parts for no reason other than allowing them to sell the same game multiple times for a full price. By the way imo Starcrat 2 did not improve anything over Starcraft 1 which I still prefer to this day.
PS: Myth games are amazing but they are tactics only not strategy.

 

[Hawki]

Well, this went off topic quickly. Oh well. Battlelines have been drawn, so I'll take a dip:

Hearthstone

Haven't played it, but as a casual observer, I can't see Hearthstone doing anything that a CCG doesn't already do. By definition, a CCG requires acquisition of cards to play it. If one can play with cards in a F2P model, great. If you have to pay for cards, again, nothing that a physical CCG doesn't already do. I think that $10 for a reskin (e.g. Muradin being a new warrior) is a bit much, but since it has no effect on gameplay, it's, as TB called it, a "first world problem."

And even from an outsider's perspective, I can't deny that Hearthstone has been one of the most successful games released in recent times.

World of Warcraft

Don't play either, but again, like Hearthstone. I can't deny the impact it's had on the MMO landscape or culture (not geek culture, just culture) as a whole. Whatever WoD may or may not have done I can't say, but WoW, by itself, is a juggernaut. And from an outsider's perspective, I can't see anything that I can call out of hand. Subscription model? Fine by me. Mounts costing $25? That sounds insanely expensive, but as I understand, it's an aesthetic matter only. Yeah, WoD saw a massive subscriber dip, but WoW is still the most widely played MMO around, and there's far smaller and older MMOs still going (Ultima Online, EverQuest, etc.), still going, so I don't see WoW going anywhere either.

StarCraft II

I enjoyed StarCraft. It's no. 4 in my top 10 RTS games, and was the second RTS I ever played. SC2, while far less groundbreaking admittedly, is, IMO, an improvement in practically every regard (bar music, but that's a personal nitpick). Oh, and the Starter Edition is a free download which gives players access to a sizable portion of the game, including multiplayer matches. And despite what some claim, WoL was a full game - nothing's been broken up. HotS is no different than Brood War - an expansion that adds new units, continues the overall story, etc., and priced as such. And now we have LotV which is a stand-alone, yet priced as an expansion. Honestly, the worst thing I can say about this is that it?s made it hard to go back to SC1, since it improves everything over it gameplay-wise.

Diablo III

This seems to have been discussed the most. For the record, I like Diablo III. Then again, I?m one of those weird people that dislikes Diablo II (I like D1 though) and Path of Exile, and likes D1 more than D2 (and likes Torchlight more than D1). Both D1 and D3 get a place in my top 10 RPG games, and?yeah. Honestly, I?ve never had a problem with D3, and it?s one of the most enjoyable games I?ve played in recent years for the reasons that have already been described on this thread. While the online-only requirement is nonsense, it never really affected my enjoyment of the game. The auction house is academic to me, since I care about combat far more than loot. Not the best analogy in the world, but if D1 was the atmospheric, tactical ARPG, and D3 is the story and combat focused RPG, and D2 is (for me) the awkward middle child that doesn?t exceed in anything bar cinematics, grinding, and spreadsheets of skills, then yeah.

Quite frankly, I don?t see anything in D3 that would constitute ?greed.? The auction house? Not really, that?s not something unique to D3, and items were traded in previous games as well through illicit means. F2P in Asia? It?s Asia. It doesn?t affect the Western versions of the game. So?yeah. Whatever D3 may or may not do/have done, it is, to me, my favorite Diablo III game, mainly due to the quality of the gameplay. That?s what?s important at the end.

Heroes of the Storm

HotS has been called ?the MOBA for people who don?t like MOBAs.? Well, I?m one of those people. And?yeah. Came for the characters, stayed for the gameplay. This is easily one of the most innovative ARTS games I?ve seen in recent times, and more importantly, one of the most enjoyable. While nowhere near the depth as SC2 in strategic depth, there?s still a variety of strategy through the talents and objective systems, not to mention the emphasis of teamwork. The no. of times our team has snagged a win through coordination, whether it be through a push or objective rush, is something I can?t compare anything else to. Honestly, I can see HotS staying around. It?s testament to Blizzard?s ability to iterate in pre-existing genres (something that?s been going on since the Lost Vikings, which yes, I have played).

If HotS has a problem, it?s its price model. Fine, rotation I can get behind ? other ARTS games have better options (DOTA, Strife), but it?s not untoward, and the daily quests are a nice touch. However, when I?m asked if I want to pay $25 for a unicorn mount?yeah. I?ll save my gold for those 10,000 gold heroes.

Conclusion

So?yeah. That?s it. Honestly, if there?s a theme I?m seeing here, it?s that Blizzard tends to price things in its F2P games a bit heavily, but it?s the price I have issue with, not the model itself. And I?m willing to stomach such issues if the gameplay is fun. And?yeah. SC2 is bloody SC2. D3 is my favorite Diablo game. HotS is now my go to ARTS. As much as I?d love a Warcraft IV, I can?t deny the success and impact of Hearthstone and WoW.

 

[InterstellarFascist]

All i've played from Blizzard in recent history is some Starcraft 2, but i'd say looking at the games they've been advertising lately... kinda... yeah. A cross over fan fiction game that is based on another game sounds pretty greedy, if not creatively bankrupt to me. Wouldn't be surprised if it has micro transactions.

I just hope Blizzard will finish Legacy of the void and push out the inevitable 'full edition' before they go bankrupt since I don't want to spend 150$ on a video game.

 

[Evilsausage]

Well, this went off topic quickly. Oh well. Battlelines have been drawn, so I'll take a dip:

Hearthstone

Haven't played it, but as a casual observer, I can't see Hearthstone doing anything that a CCG doesn't already do. By definition, a CCG requires acquisition of cards to play it. If one can play with cards in a F2P model, great. If you have to pay for cards, again, nothing that a physical CCG doesn't already do. I think that $10 for a reskin (e.g. Muradin being a new warrior) is a bit much, but since it has no effect on gameplay, it's, as TB called it, a "first world problem."

And even from an outsider's perspective, I can't deny that Hearthstone has been one of the most successful games released in recent times.

World of Warcraft

Don't play either, but again, like Hearthstone. I can't deny the impact it's had on the MMO landscape or culture (not geek culture, just culture) as a whole. Whatever WoD may or may not have done I can't say, but WoW, by itself, is a juggernaut. And from an outsider's perspective, I can't see anything that I can call out of hand. Subscription model? Fine by me. Mounts costing $25? That sounds insanely expensive, but as I understand, it's an aesthetic matter only. Yeah, WoD saw a massive subscriber dip, but WoW is still the most widely played MMO around, and there's far smaller and older MMOs still going (Ultima Online, EverQuest, etc.), still going, so I don't see WoW going anywhere either.

StarCraft II

I enjoyed StarCraft. It's no. 4 in my top 10 RTS games, and was the second RTS I ever played. SC2, while far less groundbreaking admittedly, is, IMO, an improvement in practically every regard (bar music, but that's a personal nitpick). Oh, and the Starter Edition is a free download which gives players access to a sizable portion of the game, including multiplayer matches. And despite what some claim, WoL was a full game - nothing's been broken up. HotS is no different than Brood War - an expansion that adds new units, continues the overall story, etc., and priced as such. And now we have LotV which is a stand-alone, yet priced as an expansion. Honestly, the worst thing I can say about this is that it?s made it hard to go back to SC1, since it improves everything over it gameplay-wise.

Diablo III

This seems to have been discussed the most. For the record, I like Diablo III. Then again, I?m one of those weird people that dislikes Diablo II (I like D1 though) and Path of Exile, and likes D1 more than D2 (and likes Torchlight more than D1). Both D1 and D3 get a place in my top 10 RPG games, and?yeah. Honestly, I?ve never had a problem with D3, and it?s one of the most enjoyable games I?ve played in recent years for the reasons that have already been described on this thread. While the online-only requirement is nonsense, it never really affected my enjoyment of the game. The auction house is academic to me, since I care about combat far more than loot. Not the best analogy in the world, but if D1 was the atmospheric, tactical ARPG, and D3 is the story and combat focused RPG, and D2 is (for me) the awkward middle child that doesn?t exceed in anything bar cinematics, grinding, and spreadsheets of skills, then yeah.

Quite frankly, I don?t see anything in D3 that would constitute ?greed.? The auction house? Not really, that?s not something unique to D3, and items were traded in previous games as well through illicit means. F2P in Asia? It?s Asia. It doesn?t affect the Western versions of the game. So?yeah. Whatever D3 may or may not do/have done, it is, to me, my favorite Diablo III game, mainly due to the quality of the gameplay. That?s what?s important at the end.

Heroes of the Storm

HotS has been called ?the MOBA for people who don?t like MOBAs.? Well, I?m one of those people. And?yeah. Came for the characters, stayed for the gameplay. This is easily one of the most innovative ARTS games I?ve seen in recent times, and more importantly, one of the most enjoyable. While nowhere near the depth as SC2 in strategic depth, there?s still a variety of strategy through the talents and objective systems, not to mention the emphasis of teamwork. The no. of times our team has snagged a win through coordination, whether it be through a push or objective rush, is something I can?t compare anything else to. Honestly, I can see HotS staying around. It?s testament to Blizzard?s ability to iterate in pre-existing genres (something that?s been going on since the Lost Vikings, which yes, I have played).

If HotS has a problem, it?s its price model. Fine, rotation I can get behind ? other ARTS games have better options (DOTA, Strife), but it?s not untoward, and the daily quests are a nice touch. However, when I?m asked if I want to pay $25 for a unicorn mount?yeah. I?ll save my gold for those 10,000 gold heroes.

Conclusion

So?yeah. That?s it. Honestly, if there?s a theme I?m seeing here, it?s that Blizzard tends to price things in its F2P games a bit heavily, but it?s the price I have issue with, not the model itself. And I?m willing to stomach such issues if the gameplay is fun. And?yeah. SC2 is bloody SC2. D3 is my favorite Diablo game. HotS is now my go to ARTS. As much as I?d love a Warcraft IV, I can?t deny the success and impact of Hearthstone and WoW.

Hearthstone

I know alot that i brought up might seem a bit nitpicky. I don't have a big issue with Hearths prices yet.
Its just when there is one little thing there, then some more in another games and together its snowballing to somthing ugly.
Hearthstone is still young so Im worried about how far they will go with the milking.

World of Warcraft

I don't think anyone can disagree that WoW has been the biggest thing that has happen in the MMO genre.
WoW really was a huge leap forward compared to many previous MMOs. It made that genre mainstream and other MMOs had trouble competing in quality and content.
Today WoW has really lousy competition. Sadly this has made Blizzard Lazy.
They know they got loyal fans out there that stays in WoW because there isn't any other good option and they got a network of friends there.

When WoW gets less content Then before while they at the same time have people work on microtransactions then its rude.
People are paying a monthly fee for content.

Starcraft 2

Can't say anything about it really.


Diablo 3

Diablo 2 never exceeded in anything? Its probably the most influential ARPG ever. Gonna list what it improved over the first one.

1. Better combat

2. More classes with their own talent trees.

3. Different Acts with unique settings.

4. More fun loot.

5. Horadric cube crafting.

6. Better support for multiplayer.

7. Ladders

8. Runewords

9. A huge increase in skills for each class

10. Mercenaries

11. More quests with some nice rewards.

12. PvP

And there is probably more that I have missed. The point is D2 Introduced alot to the genre.
What did Diablo 3 bring us? I agree that the combat is better, but besides that it didn't bring much new. The Auction house and talent system where new but where disliked by many.
Vanilla D3 even completly lacked stuff like a ladder, it had worse loot then D2, no PvP, more linier and less randomized levels, pointless quests that you got nothing from.

The Auction House in itself wasn't greedy. But the Real money feature was. The game was very expensive so throwig in a Pay to win feature is no doubt greedy. It was only done for the sake of profit even if it had a bad impact on the game.


Heroes of the Storm

Innovative, well maybe a little, its different because you got more objectives and not always the same maps.
Lack of items, shared level ups and no gold is different because its more beginner friendly. But I would not call it innovative. Most MOBAs has some things to make them different.
Still if we compare HoTS to lets say Starcraft, Diablo, Warcraft 3 etc... its far less innovative.

 

[Politrukk]

I dont play WoW anymore, but has it really been 8 years since Burning Crusade?

thanks for making me feel old ;o;

-high fives with aching back-


They're Molyneuxing this one up better than he ever could.

Perhaps Blizzard's next endeavour will be a paywalled god game?