It's fun topic Thursday, which is not a recurring column here, and that means we're going to be going over how insane it is that players of games don't understand the different roles within a game development team. Since the Mercenaries reveal earlier in the week, the Hearthstone community has been a bit of a cesspool when it comes to anger surrounding the mode and its "cash grab[ness]" (lol, no its not) and how other parts of the game suffered because of it (some truth, but not really).
Most importantly though, the developers deserve absolutely zero harassment. If you aren't having fun, find a new game to play! Life is way too short to be angry on the internet.
Misdirected Anger
When you walk into a restaurant and someone messes up your order, why on Earth would you begin yelling at the person cleaning the bathroom? In fact, you shouldn't even be yelling at anyone because that isn't going to accomplish much at all - unless you just want to ruin someone's day for something that was more than likely out of their control (this makes you a dick and your deck slots should be taken away). Add a touch of warmth to your complaint and you'll more than likely end up with better service as a result.
Give developers constructive feedback to let them know why you don't think something is good.
"Nerfing by 1 mana is shit"
vs
"I don't think 1 mana is going to be enough of a nerf, the class being targeted won't be slowed down much at all because..."
Its so depressing when players direct their frustrations toward the community team, stating they are wasting their time writing a funny tweet instead of balancing the game. To think for even a second that that one tweet, even if it did come from someone from the balance team, is responsible for cards not getting nerfed, that's the highest level of wrong that is possible. Or, when someone in there time off work is doing anything else outside of balancing the game. The entitlement is unreal.
Many have stated over the years that community teams are meant to be punching bags and that you should only get in that role if you can deal with it, and in a way, yes, those people are correct, but only because that has been a common thing they must engage with. Imagine how tiring it must feel to see that every single day firsthand when from the outside looking in, it already feels tiring seeing someone else write that in. Damn. Community Managers do not get enough love.
When a new mode is being developed, and folks don't like it for whatever reason and respond by saying "oh the mode looks like shit, this is why balance has been so bad", that enters the exact same territory. We've very clearly seen a reactive balance team from Blizzard during the development of Mercenaries, so why are people being so stupid about their comments? Some of the folks that are doing live balance are also responsible for upcoming constructed expansion content and we certainly haven't seen those slow down either due to Mercenaries... its almost like there are different teams within the Hearthstone team that are responsible for different things. What was that? That is indeed the case? Lightbulb Moment.
Yes, Some Stuff in Hearthstone is Neglected
Tavern Brawl. Oh my sweet summer child.
Mercenaries has unfortunately caused some slowdowns on the side of the live content team; This has previously been confirmed by Dean Ayala in his weekly Q&As where he has stated the mode became the main focus of the team. With Book of Heroes being done, Book of Mercenaries possibly still being worked on (if it isn't finished yet internally), and Mercenaries finally coming out soon, there is renewed hope for those that love to play Tavern Brawls and Duels. These two modes are a part of the live content team that has been hard at work on Mercenaries so yes, sometimes we do end up with rough spots on other modes, but its pretty clear that balance in the main constructed game isn't one of them.
Development is always going to be a list of priorities. I've never expected Tavern Brawl to be very high on that list, especially as Blizzard refines their live content model for the good of the game.
But Mom, Wild is Neglected Too!
You'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
I feel for Wild players, I really do. No one should feel neglected by the developers in a game, but the way that some of the very vocal players in the format are going about demands for changes are doing so the wrong way. The problem I see though is that Blizzard has always had a different vision for Wild from what the players want and we should set our expectations accordingly. They want to keep the format as close to the original printings of cards as possible and that's a completely valid strategy, it is their game at the end of the day and supporting the mode the same as Standard is not something that was intended from the very beginning.
Quote From A New Way to Play Wild Will Be Wild
Wild is our new name for the Hearthstone you already know, because it’ll be the format where anything can happen. While Standard puts a bright spotlight on recently released cards and brings a more balanced experience, when you queue up for Wild, you’ll be cozying up with the crazy fun of Hearthstone you’re already familiar with. Of course, as more and more cards are added over time, the wilder and more unpredictable Wild will be!
This post is from over 5 years ago, and I'm not saying its right to bring it up again because there have been so many things that have changed over the years in Hearthstone that Blizzard never really touched. Do you remember when we didn't receive many balance changes at all because they "want to make as few changes to cards as possible. We do feel really strongly about this."? These past two years make that statement look insane.
People change. Opinions change.
It is so comical when people bring up 10 year old information on somebody and act like they said it yesterday - see much of "cancel culture". There are plenty of really stupid things that I said many, many years ago that I definitely don't believe or did so to get a rise out of folks and I'm certain I'll do it again and reflect upon it in another 5 or 10 years and laugh about how stupid that was; This happens in games too, especially when the development team has changed so much over the past few years like we've seen in Hearthstone. Could the original creators of Hearthstone been a part of that problem? Were they inflexible because what they created was deemed perfection? It can be hard to "undo" the work that you've put into something, but another artist sees a different picture and begins to paint that instead.
With that said, Blizzard still has a similar stance on Wild with Dean recently stating the following.
Quote From Dean Ayala We don't intend for Wild to be Standard 2.0. I don't expect the philosophy around Wild balance to change in any drastic way going forward. We'll make light changes to major power outliers, we'll make major changes to extreme negative feeling gameplay archetypes.
Both of those things are just very subjective. To us, Warlock currently is on the edge power outlier and will probably see some further minor adjustment.
And guess what? Now Alec Dawson is further confirming that the current case [of Warlock] is clearing the bar of an extreme case of imbalance. We do get changes!
"But Flux, these aren't the changes I want. These changes won't do anything!"
Alright, and I think the extreme mana cheating in Hearthstone is absolutely not fun to play, but plenty of other players do like it. Plus, we don't even know what changes are going to happen, how can anyone say they aren't going to be enough?
I'm not saying that folks should find something else to play if they don't like the way Blizzard is handling Wild and their responses, because I know the team is extremely open to feedback despite saying they don't expect the philosophy to change, but damn, could we have some actual constructed conversations that don't involve "you're a shit developer" or "fuck Warlock"? Yeah, its frustrating and its a good idea to find a way to vent it, but this ain't it, champ.
I'm willing to open up the front page here to folks that want to start an actually constructive conversation about Wild. I would love to see Blizzard take a more hands-on approach to the format because there are tons of really cool cards that should get a chance to shine. There are a few different ideas that I've had regarding Wild over the years:
- Keep Wild as Wild - Make a new format that is Standard+Some Wild Sets+Banned Cards, rotate twice a year.
- Balance Wild, create a new format called Eternal with NO CARD CHANGES EVER. Much like Classic mode, unnerf everything.
If you are interested in starting that discussion and want to write intelligent, constructive walls of text, my messages are open.
Mercenaries
I'll take topics hotter than the Firelands for 500, Alex.
I don't think Blizzard did a great job with their Mercenaries stream. They clearly put a lot of work into it and they are very passionate about this new game but cramming everything that they did into a 30 minute stream didn't work out in my opinion. The game is very complicated when compared to base Hearthstone, we were getting information moving at the speed of light, and some visuals were up on screen for such short periods of time, you couldn't read half of it.
Mercenaries is its own game and it should have been treated like that. When Hearthstone was originally announced at PAX East 2013, we had an almost 40 minute presentation which gave a very high-level overview of the game and took us through a bit of slow gameplay. The base of Hearthstone is so much simpler, especially back in that day, so its almost crazy to think that the team wanted to give us a dive into Mercenaries in only 30 minutes. A longer stream with information coming out at a slower pace alongside an actual game within the mode would have made for a much better viewing experience. Instead, several blogs were posted, some with broken links to important pack information, during the show, which added more to the information overload which much of it was more fluffy than real substance.
And I get it.
We're still just over 5 weeks away from Mercenaries launching, which arrives on October 12, so there is still plenty of time to talk about the mode and maybe we'll even get to see a gameplay-focused stream with a couple of Blizzard folks having a back and forth as they talk about the game during play. The event just felt so strange! Hell, they even took some time during it to announce that there was a World of Warcraft promotion coming.
I believe this was a great learning experience for them and I hope they know that going forward they aren't just making a quick presentation to a generic gaming crowd to get them pumped up, but rather, actual Hearthstone players. We're talking folks that know a little bit about Mercenaries from previously released information so they could have taken their time and given us more thorough explanations - we'd have stuck around for another hour if it meant good content.
Also, on the subject of monetization, it was a huge, missed opportunity to better explain why those pack bundles exist. They are not the same as regular card packs and with them currently just sitting in the in-game shop, its intimidating. Why were we not presented with the pity timer information in the presentation? Rightfully so, some folks are concerned or angry about the high monetization of a mode we aren't even going to see for over a month; Blizzard could have done a better job by showcasing what the free-to-play players could expect as far as unlocks go. Can Mercenaries reliably be played F2P?
If Blizzard wanted to do a shorter stream, it is my opinion that we should have started out with gameplay mechanics and then done another stream closer to the mode coming out detailing systems. Moving the pre-orders to this later stream would also feel better from a player point of view because it wouldn't pollute the shop, which might be the most surprising part of all this, and my money wouldn't be tied up for 5 weeks without anything to show for it; It makes sense to pre-order expansions when you get stuff to play with immediately, this, not so much.
Personally, I think the mode looks like a lot of fun and it'll be something easy they can update over time which is awesome because Hearthstone needs more modes that you can add bits and pieces to on a shorter development cycle. Dropping in a few new Mercs or a few new bosses won't be as hard now that all the systems are in place. I can't wait to actually play it and form a proper opinion on it at that point in time.
Players Are Ruining the Game
I truly believe that the more angry folks get about stuff and the worse they handle it, the more Hearthstone, or any game, gets ruined.
Its so disappointing day after day to have to read the same commentary from folks. Many people can distance themselves from it, but those that want to talk about the game or those that are forced to follow conversations taking place everywhere in the community, its exhausting and it creates a really shitty atmosphere. We need more positivity or at least people being constructive when they want to say that something is bad.
There's one main reason I quit League of Legends after playing for many years; The toxic bullshit in-game.
Don't breed this same environment within the few places that discuss Hearthstone.
Thanks
<3
If you take only three things away from this post let it be:
- Developers don't deserve to be harassed.
- There are different teams of people within a game's development team. One working on something doesn't always neglect something else.
- We still need more information on Mercenaries.
A Challenge
Send a message to someone on a game team and tell them why you appreciate them. It could be the way they interact with the community or a feature you thought was really cool that you know they worked on. Do something positive! Hell, make it a weekly thing. Involve content creators because we know they get a ton of bullshit too and its not always just love. Leave a nice YouTube comment the next time you watch a great video, if you learned something in an article leave a comment thanking them,
Gaming sometimes feels like the ultimate thankless job when you consider how many people you encounter every single day.
Also, don't be a dick in-game.
Comments
What bothers me the most is all the misinformation people are willing to believe -- and even more willing to spread -- just because they are upset or distrustful or plain or ignorant.
I've seen so many people ranting about things that aren't even true, it makes me wonder how they even know Mercenaries exists. They certainly haven't taken the time to find out any actual facts about it.
Sure, the customer it's always wrong...
I get it Flush you want things to cool down and be less toxic. But to be honest. Players are expressing themselves about how they feel.
Sometimes if comes out in very aggressive way and the natural human reaction is blaming x,y,z. We know that so all the ranting you see right
now is not really about the Mercenaries (the game itself). It's not about the devs and who is responsible. I believe it's about the what HS is, was...it's
about a game they love and they see it taking a direction they do not like. Monetizing the game is ok but here it certainly crossed a line the players don't
like. It's about the direction the game is heading. You are going to tell me Blizz is looking at the hard cold data to make decisions. OK, but that's doesn't
mean the interpretation of the data is correct. Windstorm + the arrival of Mercenaries is telling the players that HS is taking a drastic turn and obviously
they don't like it. Time will tell if Blizz is right but right now I have never seem some many post disappointed players...that's a clear sign. How Blizz will
handle it is crucial. The last point of frustration I think the players have and I am sure Blizz thinks it's not the case. Perception: Players feel Blizz is
hearing them but they are not LISTENING. The perception is mostly based on the balance changes made.
There's no doubt in my mind that the mercs showcase was too short, and honestly poorly done. That there are lots of stick over the monetization of the mode is largely because there's very little known about it, except for its price tag, and blizz would do well to communicate better over this specific area.
However, no one should be harassed over this. Its really too petty to get angry at something that's not even released, and have absolutely no impact on the game that everyone is enjoying right now. Mercs is its own thing; if you don't like it, then feel free to ignore it, it won't change a anything in both hearthstone hearthstone and hearthstone battlegrounds.
That being said; short, angry words bordering on personal insults to others via the internet is about as intimidating as the public toilets. I honestly find long worded statements more scarier because then I'll have to actually read through it and process a response in my head as opposed to simply ignoring it.
I literally don't use public toilets, those things are disgusting. Anyways I think it is absurd that consumers would pin the blame on a specific dev instead of the company. It reminds me of when I was a teenager, and people would complain to me about whatever corporate decision they didn't like as if I were responsible. Part of me Imagines a lot of the people going onto twitter just haven't ever had a job in a corporate setting,
Complaining is easy and people need something to vent, I can understand that. But there's a fine line between venting and making people genuinely uncomfortable, and unfortunately our society aren't really good at educating people about this.
In my mind, anyone with a real job wouldn't really have much time to care about twittering bs on the internet, but then again twitter itself encourages short angry bursts as opposed to well thought-out responses. If they wouldn't put any ounce of effort into writing a response, I guess its only fair that most, like me, would just ignore it.
This is totally true. I remember saying I liked the meta here a week or two ago and I got super downvoted. I feel like in most video game communities (especially in more easily accessible forums such as Hearthpwn and Reddit) people get upset if your opinion goes against the grain. People who enjoy combo metas never get to enjoy them for long, lol.
What bothered me most about Mercenaries was the $130 preorder options
Hearthstone at least eased us into the $100 mega bundles + rewards track purchases - we knew what we were paying for when they were introduced
Mercenaries coming out the gate asked for such a irregular price considering the value of said purchase is largely unknown
Love HS and continue to do so, but this is the FIRST preorder offering since BETA which I haven’t immediately dropped $$$ on
I agree with this comment so much. Honestly HS is expensive, I'm upset and angry at how the cost to play has continued to increase in the game I love. I don't need to buy, so long ago, I limited myself to just a pre-order. Still dropping $130 (more for me here in Aus after 'exchange' rate) on a game we know nothing about really makes me feel sad for the state of the game. The motive is $$ that's it, confirmed, they may as well have said "don't you guys have credit cards?" The comparison to "Raid" and other games of that ilk make me sadder that a once great PC gaming company (actually maybe never true considering lawsuits) , is taking this shallow path to profit. Re the game mode, I'll give it a go, but having recently bought and played Slay the Spire and loved it, and being wary of getting sucked into a new uber expensive mode I've resolved to not spend a $. If this come across as negative, it's just a reflection of how I feel about the changes in the game.
I get this 100%! I personally am feeling like the Mercs mode will be fun and something I enjoy, but unless we get some sort of pre-release open beta play to see how much I like or dislike the mode, I won't be pre-ordering anything. This is partially because I would want the Diablo and/or Lich King bundles, which are pricey, and because I already spend too much on the main game mode every year.
Ultimately though, I feel like Mercs is going to be so vastly different from HS that it could have been a stand alone game with completely separate audiences. So really the high monetization is likely not to punish people playing traditional HS, but to capture value out of players returning to HS just to play Mercs. Is that greedy? Maybe. Is it a solid plan on monetizing the new mode? Of course! BGs only monetization right now is cosmetics (plus perks if you don't get them in the mega pre-purchase card bundle). And Duels has no monetization other than the players paying $$$ for a competitive run instead of using gold. But how many people do that? I bet almost none.
So the team put a lot of effort into Mercs and they want to try and make some cash off it. That's fine! But I'm with you on not immediately jumping to pre-order. If there is no open beta and I end up liking the mode after release, perhaps I'll pick up the occasional $20 hero + packs bundle for Mercs. Or maybe it'll actually be relatively f2p friendly! They mentioned daily rewards and match making taking into account your team's overall power level. So despite not buying a lot of packs to power up you could potentially still do well if you are successfully matched up with other f2p players around your level on a regular basis.
This. Love you man.
Negativity breeds fast. I'm pretty sure if I made a post on reddit about how I'm still kind of excited for Mercenaries, I'd be downvoted into oblivion. Neither Battlegrounds nor Duels held my attention past the first month, but while the mechanics are very different from what I expected, Mercenaries does seem like it'll deliver the repeatable PvE content I was hoping for. And if that's all your concerned with, there's no need to buy every character and cosmetic, so it won't be that much of an investment.
If I want PvP, I'll play "traditional" Hearthstone.
I agree with this article's sentiment. I'm surprised we haven't seen a brain drain in the games industry given how much crap gets thrown at anyone even slightly publicly facing.
Over the years, the two opinions I've heard most often about Wild are:
The first opinion seems to be more popular among people who don't actually play Wild, which makes me I attach less value to it. More importantly though, it is never going to work: the strongest Wild decks are made by combining the best cards and the synergies from all the sets. If people want to replay their old favorites, I think that will only work when players are restricted to the same card pool those decks were made from, in a time-shifted Classic mode.
When you look at the popular decks in Wild, I don't think any of them existed in Standard. Secret Mage still somewhat resembles the K&C Secret Burn Mage, but even there almost half the deck is cards from sets that weren't in Standard at the time. Other decks, like the current Odd Hunter and Pirate Warrior are very different decks compared to their old Standard counterparts.
While the current lack of balance in Wild is not healthy, the opposite is not great either: if Wild has a meta that is never disrupted, the same decks will be played year in and out. My appreciation of Wild would certainly improve if I didn't have to play another game versus Secret Mage any time soon.
As a deck builder, I would very much like a mode with a limited number of sets that rotates often, for example every month. Something like the Brawl Block, but with slightly more cards: 3 expansions and no core set was too limiting.
I truly believe that the more angry folks get about stuff and the worse they handle it, the more Hearthstone, or any game, gets ruined.
Yeah, sure its my fault the game gets ruined, I am hard control player my first time legend was back in vanilla with control Warrior and I sticked with that format until the release of Stormwind expansion, now I can´t play control anymore in Standard nor in Wild, I am forced to play arena and duels, because yes duels is more balanced than Standard.
What can I do other than complain to the dev team, yes they are the main responsibles to "develop" Stormwind expansion, yes they are.
Agree, killing control and removing the need to consider your resources, board, opponents board has just really made the game feel bland.
I understand your frustration, but your comment is actually showcasing exactly what Flux is talking about. The game isn't necessarily ruined even if it is "ruined" for you because the deck or type of deck you like isn't particularly strong right now. Because for many other people, they might enjoy the current meta. And here in lies where Flux says your anger and toxic attitude (in game and in forums) is what is ruining the game. He's talking more about the community being "ruined" rather than the actual game and its development.
While I play everything from Aggro, to Control, to Midrange, to Combo, and straight up memes I can also get frustrated at times. Last night I was playing a Galakrond Shadow Priest that had a surprise Mind Blast combo in it if I was able to survive long enough and needed some burst, and that was frustrating as hell. But when I am having issues with one deck I just swap to another. And I think here is your biggest issue with the current state of the game: you personally don't want to play other types of decks, so if the type you enjoy is weak you feel the game as a whole is bad.
I forget how many different deck archetypes the casters mentioned people bringing to Master's Tour over the weekend, but in the Top 16, or Top 8 maybe, every class had at least one archetype represented, with some having two, and a few archetypes even having 2-3 varying builds within the same archetype. Hell, Kibler was playing Rat King Hunter yesterday, using Jewel of N'Zoth to bring back three Rat Kings, and eventually got a board that almost never didn't have at least one living Rat King and 1-2 about ready to respawn on the next death of one. Was it the most successful? No, probably not! But he was beating some of the "top tier" decks with it so it has merit.
TLDR: I'm sorry that you feel that way, but unless you absolutely hate other archetypes outside of Control there are a lot of options available in the meta right now. Handbuff Paladin is a little more Midrange, but might be an archetype you enjoy as you can play it more like a control deck in some situations.
Just wanted to say that I fully agree with everything you wrote -- so much so that you've convinced me to get a Premium subscription! :-)
Regarding Mercenaries specifically, Regis Killbin has been putting out a series of videos on his YouTube channel breaking down this new "mode" (really, it's a full, separate game, just like Battlegrounds). He's got 2 videos already, and more are coming. This is a much better way to present the information, in my opinion.
I don't know why Blizzard felt the need to rush this out in a single 30-minute stream (interrupted by 2 special announcements related to other games, no less!). A better approach would have been a gradual reveal over several weeks, with a focus on basics first before moving on to more advanced concepts (what are our units? what are their capabilities? how do they interact? how do they improve? etc.)
I think some people should just stop playing HS or at least take a break. (I think about the people who can`t say anything good about the game anymore and all they do is rant about the game.)
On one side this side is a bit "too chilled" about the bull**** Blizz Activision is doing way too often in my opinion - but this is the "lesser evil" compared to a cesspool like "Saltpwn" where about 95% of all posts are only ranting and whining.
But to the topic about the "outcry" about Wild:
Yes, the devs are saying time and time they don`t try to "truly balance" Wild. This is just a undeniable fact which frustrate some players (me included) but it is how it is. Deal with it or play something else. Most of the part it`s "ok" for me. But a lot of players can`t accept the unbalance when it is so big that it "breaks the format".
In this year I was very pleased about how fast Blizz reacted when a card "broke" Wild. The Tiller combo broke Wild. Blizz reacted quickly and I applauded for that.
Stealer of Souls broke Wild. Blizz reacted quickly and I applauded for that. I think banning the card wasn`t the best solution but I was ok with that. The problem "was solved" quickly. Good Job Blizz again!
I was very happy and impressed about how quick Blizz addressed the issues when Wild become "broken". It seems like Blizz finally treated the format "with some respect" - in contrast to for example the time where Naga broke Wild and we had to wait "far too long" for a solution.
And today? For me and I think for a lot of other Wild players it seems like / we have the strong opinion that the Warlock Quest broke Wild again. And therefore "there has to be" a quick solution. But until now Blizz "did nothing". The small nerfs to Flesh Giant while the Quest is still as broken as before feels like Blizz doesn`t care about our beloved format or even worse: this "useless" tiny changes feeling like Blizz "making fun of Wild" and its players. The players don't feel taken seriously and this makes people angry. A lot of player are very upset because Wild is "broken" again and Blizz reacts like "nah, this is fine, Wild don`t has to be balanced like Standard". Such a reaction is inappropriate. The anger is not about "oh Warlock is unbalanced at the moment" it is about "Warlock breaks Wild" and this is a huge difference.
So what is the difference between "unbalanced" and "broken"? There is no 100% clear line there but I would summarize it like that:
A deck is "broken" when the complete Meta is warped around this deck. The deck acts "like a black hole" and "devours" a hugh amout of other decks and archetypes so they become "unplayable" and all the other decks which "survive" at this moment are "swirling" around this deck trying to counter it.
And at the moment Questlock is this kind of "black hole" which "eats all control decks" in Wild. All what is left is Questlock, super fast aggro decks and some other combo or Quest decks which wants to kill you "asap". That is not only "unbalanced" this is broken and requires a fix as fast as the Tiller problem or the Stealer of Souls problem. But Blizz "did nothing" so far and it sounds like (at least for a lot of players) like they don`t care that Questlock breaks Wild. The community begs for a solution but Blizz take no action "ignoring" this problem. And that makes people angrier and angrier...
Props for speaking up about this. I feel like it can be hard for people to get the courage to speak against haters, because haters bring energy and more haters with them. Maybe a challenge we need is for more of the unspoken gratitude to be spoken so the devs and community team can get some rest from the unrelenting torrent of aggressive criticism
Agree wholeheartedly with this - loads of love is put into the game and sometimes it’s a little off-balance but that just makes it interesting for a while as they are now quick at addressing balance. The new mode looks really cool, and if you don’t like it then you don’t HAVE to play it, and the old adage of ‘if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything’ rings true. It seems like it’ll be pretty easy to progress in mercenaries without spending any money, based on info about the packs and the current level of free packs given out for standard, as well as heroes progressing based on exp. I dislike all the negativity too. TLDR; don’t buy the new bundles if you don’t want them, but give it a go when it’s out and you might just enjoy it