So I played some heroes of the storm today with a couple friends. At first I really enjoyed the accessibility but my issue with it so far is that I sort of want to treat it like a fighting game. What I mean is that when I play fighting games I like to play all the characters a bit and get competent with most to all of them. The free to play nature of the game kinda prohibits me from doing that. I bought Raynor with the coins I got from the tutorial and then I played through most of the free characters and now I'm feeling a bit bored with it.
It's sorta a personal issue but I sorta wish they either went the Dota route or just let me buy the game and get all the characters at least.
Played this over the weekend. My number one gripe is that hero choice must be selected before the game starts. This means that you could have five people queue up as supports, which is especially frustrating when solo-queueing. The only way to ensure a decent team composition is to five man, which is...annoying to say the least.
Played this over the weekend. My number one gripe is that hero choice must be selected before the game starts. This means that you could have five people queue up as supports, which is especially frustrating when solo-queueing. The only way to ensure a decent team composition is to five man, which is...annoying to say the least.
Once you get to level 30 you can play Hero League instead of Quickmatch. In Hero League you draft heros. Quickmatch is where you have to start so you can learn how to play various heros. The benefit is that you pick a hero, and you are going to play as them no matter what.
Played this over the weekend. My number one gripe is that hero choice must be selected before the game starts. This means that you could have five people queue up as supports, which is especially frustrating when solo-queueing. The only way to ensure a decent team composition is to five man, which is...annoying to say the least.
Once you get to level 30 you can play Hero League instead of Quickmatch. In Hero League you draft heros. Quickmatch is where you have to start so you can learn how to play various heros. The benefit is that you pick a hero, and you are going to play as them no matter what.
Yeah that seemed kinda bullshit to me. Maybe by the time you get to 30 if you are buying all the cheapest heroes you might have ten but I sort of doubt it. Of course I guess if you're playing a game for that long it might be worth throwing some money their way but if something is free to play I have a hard time ever justifying paying money for it even if I play it a lot.
Played this over the weekend. My number one gripe is that hero choice must be selected before the game starts. This means that you could have five people queue up as supports, which is especially frustrating when solo-queueing. The only way to ensure a decent team composition is to five man, which is...annoying to say the least.
Once you get to level 30 you can play Hero League instead of Quickmatch. In Hero League you draft heros. Quickmatch is where you have to start so you can learn how to play various heros. The benefit is that you pick a hero, and you are going to play as them no matter what.
You also have to own ten heroes.
Yes, it is bullshit. To get enough gold for ten heroes you either have to pay real money, or grind like crazy. Even grinding like crazy won't be enough to get 10 that easily. I think they want to make sure only really dedicated players get into hero league to maintain its high quality.
The other thing I find hilarious is that people are hardcore complaining about HotS monetization model. I agree that it is BS. DotA does it the right way. That being said, these same people defended LoL as not being Pay2Win, even though it has the same model as HotS.
You can't give Ryu for free and charge $10 for Guile.
Killer Instinct on XBONE did it pretty well too where you can buy any of the characters for $5 or there is a rotating character to play. Or you can just buy the full game for like $40-$60 I believe.
You can't give Ryu for free and charge $10 for Guile.
Why not? I only play Ryu. That's sounds amazing for me. Free Ryu game!!! Everyone else is stupid for buying Guile.
You don't need every champ in a MOBA, and I'll argue that you don't NEED every SF character. I like to try them all, but I'm seldom good with all of them. I only really play the ones I like.
The problem comes with new champs being "OP". They're not always necessarily "OP." They're just new. That mean you don't know how to counter them yet. Same goes for SF. "I've fought 1000 Ryu but never a Cammy."
I think they're all OP and that's why I like it.
HotS lets you try them (and skins) before you buy them. The color variation is nice. DotA is still the best model.
You can't give Ryu for free and charge $10 for Guile.
Why not? I only play Ryu. That's sounds amazing for me. Free Ryu game!!! Everyone else is stupid for buying Guile.
You don't need every champ in a MOBA, and I'll argue that you don't NEED every SF character. I like to try them all, but I'm seldom good with all of them. I only really play the ones I like.
Even when you don't play Guile, you still should learn to play against Guile and sometimes to help you play against a character you should play as the character to know it's strengths and weaknesses firsthand.
You can't give Ryu for free and charge $10 for Guile.
Why not? I only play Ryu. That's sounds amazing for me. Free Ryu game!!! Everyone else is stupid for buying Guile.
You don't need every champ in a MOBA, and I'll argue that you don't NEED every SF character. I like to try them all, but I'm seldom good with all of them. I only really play the ones I like.
Even when you don't play Guile, you still should learn to play against Guile and sometimes to help you play against a character you should play as the character to know it's strengths and weaknesses firsthand.
The wrong people would argue that you can learn the character when it comes around on free rotation.
The real problem is this. In Street Fighter you actually choose characters secretly and simultaneously. Nobody can pick rock after seeing that their opponent picked scissors.
In these MOBA games, you are drafting. You have some information about the opponent's pick before you make your own. Now, of course you are going to lean towards picking a hero you have the most practice with. But even so, any good player is going to be decent with just about any hero. If you're playing in the Hero League you should have a general knowledge of all the heros by that point.
So let's say it comes to your turn to pick, and you see the opponents have picked rock. You want to pick paper, but you don't have it. Nobody on your team has it who hasn't already picked a character. Even though you you have less practice with paper, you still see picking it as the best chance to win. It's at this point it is pay to win bullshit.
In these MOBA games, you are drafting. You have some information about the opponent's pick before you make your own. Now, of course you are going to lean towards picking a hero you have the most practice with. But even so, any good player is going to be decent with just about any hero. If you're playing in the Hero League you should have a general knowledge of all the heros by that point.
So let's say it comes to your turn to pick, and you see the opponents have picked rock. You want to pick paper, but you don't have it. Nobody on your team has it who hasn't already picked a character. Even though you you have less practice with paper, you still see picking it as the best chance to win. It's at this point it is pay to win bullshit.
I disagree. This Rock Paper Scissor analogy only matters at higher levels of play. It does not make a significant difference in low levels. Getting too caught up in the meta games takes away from the actual skill of the players. In high level play, they're all super skilled and small differences make big changes. Not so much in low levels.
So even if it ONLY matters at higher level play you still need to know all the characters and how people tend to play them when you get there to be most effective. Quick match works fine enough for this, but 95% of the time people are playing the free characters. I've played maybe 10 games and out of the other nine players you might see one non free rotation character. So you either wait until each character rotates and play enough during that time to get familiar or you buy the characters and play them yourself. The thing about this is in quick play people tend to be at the same experience as you for learning these characters too. So they will be at a similar skill level (nice, you're not guaranteed to get blasted) but you also don't learn how people play these characters optimally.
Sure you might get good at fighting the guiles while they're free, but then you need to wait for them to switch and then you'll get okay at playing the zangiefs but then they switch again and you haven't practiced against the guiles in a while but no one has that character anymore. Whatever, in low level it doesn't matter, but what happens when you move into higher level. On top of this DOTA and HOTS require that you know at least 10 well enough to play. Not just one.
I think the only reason this method works for League of Legends is because of the vast difference between the cost of different champs which is reflected both in the in game currency cost and the real money cost. For example I can get some of the earliest released heroes after playing 3 games without paying money. These heroes aren't even shitty because they are consistently reworked to be kept in balance with the rest of the game. I can get 3 of the most OP champs after playing 9 games. However if I want to get the newest released champ (who is often not really balanced, either too weak, too strong and constantly banned anyway, I have to have ground thousands of in game currency). Currently 4 of the most competitively OP champs can be gained after 9 to 12 games. Early on people get addicted for getting in game currency which equates to champs, unlocking parts of a mastery tree and rune book which allow you to fiddle with how the champ's early game stats feel.
Also when you're under level 30 you can still pick a 5 man team composition which makes sense.
With HOtS everything costs a lot both out of game and in game. The different maps each have the better champions which pressures the player even more to own all the champs.
Dota 2 does not encourage you or let you play all the champs when you first play, you can't play a ranked game straight away and your champion pool is limited to beginner champs the last time I played. Also Dota 2 works on the basis of real hard counters where League of Legends works on soft counters so there isn't the pressure to play a champ because they are considered better.
Riot games has a model which wins monetarily and also in the player base even though you would think it wouldn't.
Buying the Nexus Bundle is pretty much buying the game. If I find myself playing the game more than I do now (I'm playing it less as time goes on) I would consider that. It's $40, which is the price of a video game. It gets you enough heroes to play all the game modes well. You're going to have enough gold to get a few more heros on top of that for free anyway.
Everyone keeps saying the starter bundle is a good idea for $5, but those are all 2000 gold heroes, the easiest to get for free. Why pay money for heros so cheap? Pay real money for the ones that are a ton of gold. If you have decided to buy into the bullshit, then you want to consider how much time you save with each dollar. Spending a dollar to buy a hero that would take you almost no time to earn for free isn't worth it. Spending money to get a hero that would take you years to get for free is a good idea.
This Rock Paper Scissor analogy only matters at higher levels of play.
SUDDENLY HUSKAR AGAINST MAGIC ONLY LINE-UP. It happens at lower levels of play just as well. The analogy still doesn't work if you understand the basics of the game (spoilers: it's a team game, unlike RPS).
[...]Currently 4 of the most competitively OP champs can be gained after 9 to 12 games.
Really now? Did they finally make stuff affordable with the in-game currency? I recall getting to level 30, and having 4 or 5 champions available (not counting whatever was on rotation), and one was free due because of season end or something? And no rune diversity available yet either, so that must've been changed (finally).
Dota 2 does not encourage you or let you play all the champsheroes when you first play, you can't play a ranked game straight away and your champion pool is limited to beginner champs the last time I played.
It DOES encourage you to play all the heroes with the A-Z challenge build into the game, and it does let you play all the heroes from the get go. The tutorial is entirely optional.
Also Dota 2 works on the basis of real hard counters where League of Legends works on soft counters so there isn't the pressure to play a champ because they are considered better.
Do explain this more please, unless this is a fancy way of saying "All LoL champions have a steroid, a dash and a nuke."
Riot games has a model which wins monetarily and also in the player base even though you would think it wouldn't.
It 'wins' because it's older. The same argument applies to comparing WoW with a newer MMO, WoW wins due to seniority. The same applies to LoL, it was released 4 years prior to Dota 2, and marketed heavily across the globe. Then just let the gambler's fallacy work its magic.
Buying the Nexus Bundle is pretty much buying the game. [...] It's $40, which is the price of a video game. It gets you enough heroes to play all the game modes well.
No, it's not buying the game if you're still gated. Enough heroes would be all current and future heroes added to the game. If they let you buy the game, yet still gate you, it's not buying the game, it's just getting a bundle of heroes for one price, and I'm going to go out on a limb and say you get all the cheapest heroes with maybe one or two newer ones that would probably not cost that much more if you bought them individually (the difference would be in being able to pick and choose which you want and which you don't want). I looked up the prices, holy shit nvm, the bundle is still overpriced garbage though, but holy shit those prices, read on.
A proper example of buying the game would be SMITE, where you can buy a bundle that unlocks all current and future gods in the game. For less than $30, or 3 HotS heroes at a freaking $9.99 a piece. Hell, for that money you can buy not nine, not eight, but only seven of the cheapest tier of HotS heroes, sadly, as of writing the information I have lists only 6 in said tier. SO YOU'LL ONLY GET SIX. (no, adding one hero from one tier up puts you above the $30 budget).
[...]Currently 4 of the most competitively OP champs can be gained after 9 to 12 games.
Really now? Did they finally make stuff affordable with the in-game currency? I recall getting to level 30, and having 4 or 5 champions available (not counting whatever was on rotation), and one was free due because of season end or something? And no rune diversity available yet either, so that must've been changed (finally).
Players get IP boosts at early levels and free 300 IP + 340 money equivalent after playing I think 10 games. For playing with teams you get multiplicative IP. Average game will give you 100 or so IP, Sivir, Ashe, Ryze are pick or ban champs and are 450 IP each.
Dota 2 does not encourage you or let you play all the champsheroes when you first play, you can't play a ranked game straight away and your champion pool is limited to beginner champs the last time I played.
It DOES encourage you to play all the heroes with the A-Z challenge build into the game, and it does let you play all the heroes from the get go. The tutorial is entirely optional.
Last time I played I went through the tutorial and there was no A-Z challenge. May have changed.
Also Dota 2 works on the basis of real hard counters where League of Legends works on soft counters so there isn't the pressure to play a champ because they are considered better.
Do explain this more please, unless this is a fancy way of saying "All LoL champions have a steroid, a dash and a nuke."
My friend who plays Dota 2 said this was one of the main differences and the reason that champ select was structured as it is. I don't play the game so I'm not sure how true or false his statements are. He's on 5000+ battle points or whatever they're called. Let people play what they want to play.
Riot games has a model which wins monetarily and also in the player base even though you would think it wouldn't.
It 'wins' because it's older. The same argument applies to comparing WoW with a newer MMO, WoW wins due to seniority. The same applies to LoL, it was released 4 years prior to Dota 2, and marketed heavily across the globe. Then just let the gambler's fallacy work its magic.
It wins regardless of how long your queue times are. I wanted to try out Dota 2 when the closed beta was on, I waited for a month or so after entering the stupid survey forms. Didn't get in so when friends invited me to play this other game I did. Interesting blanket to spread, wins because it is older. Command and Conquer was released in 1995 but was beaten by Starcraft which was released in 1998. People will gravitate towards the game that gives them the better experience. If it's only for the fact that that one is more popular and friends play it, so be it, popularity is a valid variable.
[...]Currently 4 of the most competitively OP champs can be gained after 9 to 12 games.
Really now? Did they finally make stuff affordable with the in-game currency? I recall getting to level 30, and having 4 or 5 champions available (not counting whatever was on rotation), and one was free due because of season end or something? And no rune diversity available yet either, so that must've been changed (finally).
Players get IP boosts at early levels and free 300 IP + 340 money equivalent after playing I think 10 games. For playing with teams you get multiplicative IP. Average game will give you 100 or so IP, Sivir, Ashe, Ryze are pick or ban champs and are 450 IP each.
They're pick/ban champions for now. Riot's enforced meta-shaping ways haven't changed so next patch/season 6500 IP cost heroes may be the only pick/ban or be doomed champions. It's good to see they've increased the IP rewards though, beyond just the first win of the day that was. Still is ridiculously gated though.
Dota 2 does not encourage you or let you play all the champsheroes when you first play, you can't play a ranked game straight away and your champion pool is limited to beginner champs the last time I played.
It DOES encourage you to play all the heroes with the A-Z challenge build into the game, and it does let you play all the heroes from the get go. The tutorial is entirely optional.
Last time I played I went through the tutorial and there was no A-Z challenge. May have changed.
Yes, they added the A-Z challenge at some point, the tutorial was never mandatory though, so it does let you play all the heroes when you first start.
Also Dota 2 works on the basis of real hard counters where League of Legends works on soft counters so there isn't the pressure to play a champ because they are considered better.
Do explain this more please, unless this is a fancy way of saying "All LoL champions have a steroid, a dash and a nuke."
My friend who plays Dota 2 said this was one of the main differences and the reason that champ select was structured as it is. I don't play the game so I'm not sure how true or false his statements are. He's on 5000+ battle points or whatever they're called.
The draft is just your regular old snake-draft. It's used in sports as well. You still haven't explained what you actually meant though, just that you parroted someone while using ELO/MMR as argument for validity. So again, please explain your 'soft' and 'hard' counter stuff.
Riot games has a model which wins monetarily and also in the player base even though you would think it wouldn't.
It 'wins' because it's older. The same argument applies to comparing WoW with a newer MMO, WoW wins due to seniority. The same applies to LoL, it was released 4 years prior to Dota 2, and marketed heavily across the globe. Then just let the gambler's fallacy work its magic.
It wins regardless of how long your queue times are. [...] Interesting blanket to spread, wins because it is older. Command and Conquer was released in 1995 but was beaten by Starcraft which was released in 1998. People will gravitate towards the game that gives them the better experience. If it's only for the fact that that one is more popular and friends play it, so be it, popularity is a valid variable.
C&C and Starcraft aren't free-to-play games without single player offline modes and in-game real-money payment options for cosmetics/champions and were released during a time where the internet wasn't very wide-spread yet so social interactions were on a much smaller scale. Also, both games were popular enough to get sequels so I fail to see how one lost to the other when clearly they both won.
I mentioned the gamblers fallacy for a reason. People are invested financially and socially, having paid money for cosmetics/champions and made friends and teams in an environment where it's significantly easier to find opponents than it ever was in C&C or Starcraft.
I compared it to WoW, because the exact same thing happens in the MMORPG genre as happens in the ARTS genre, many clones are created with little to no innovation to try and get in on the money with little luck since most people go back to their previous game after trying out the hot new shit since they're socially invested in it if not financially. In both genres there's very few titles that survive alongside the giant(s), SMITE is one such an example. So yes, it 'wins' due to getting to markets first. LoL, like WoW, didn't really do anything new in its genre. It just added QoL improvements/accessibility and marketed itself to the greater masses so it got seen. Night-Elf Mohawk?
Let people play what they want to play.
I wanted to try out Dota 2 when the closed beta was on, I waited for a month or so after entering the stupid survey forms. Didn't get in so when friends invited me to play this other game I did.
PJSalt? You're the one seemingly dead-set on declaring just one winner in something that isn't a contest (monetarily, by your own words) (note that I've been using 'win' for a reason). It's a business, both LoL and Dota 2 are financially very successful, so... see my point about your RTS example. I don't recall ever grounding you from playing whatever game you like by the way.
I mentioned the gamblers fallacy for a reason. People are invested financially and socially, having paid money for cosmetics/champions and made friends and teams in an environment where it's significantly easier to find opponents than it ever was in C&C or Starcraft.
That sounds like the sunk cost fallacy, not the gambler's fallacy.
Comments
It's sorta a personal issue but I sorta wish they either went the Dota route or just let me buy the game and get all the characters at least.
The other thing I find hilarious is that people are hardcore complaining about HotS monetization model. I agree that it is BS. DotA does it the right way. That being said, these same people defended LoL as not being Pay2Win, even though it has the same model as HotS.
You can't give Ryu for free and charge $10 for Guile.
You don't need every champ in a MOBA, and I'll argue that you don't NEED every SF character. I like to try them all, but I'm seldom good with all of them. I only really play the ones I like.
The problem comes with new champs being "OP". They're not always necessarily "OP." They're just new. That mean you don't know how to counter them yet. Same goes for SF. "I've fought 1000 Ryu but never a Cammy."
I think they're all OP and that's why I like it.
HotS lets you try them (and skins) before you buy them. The color variation is nice. DotA is still the best model.
The real problem is this. In Street Fighter you actually choose characters secretly and simultaneously. Nobody can pick rock after seeing that their opponent picked scissors.
In these MOBA games, you are drafting. You have some information about the opponent's pick before you make your own. Now, of course you are going to lean towards picking a hero you have the most practice with. But even so, any good player is going to be decent with just about any hero. If you're playing in the Hero League you should have a general knowledge of all the heros by that point.
So let's say it comes to your turn to pick, and you see the opponents have picked rock. You want to pick paper, but you don't have it. Nobody on your team has it who hasn't already picked a character. Even though you you have less practice with paper, you still see picking it as the best chance to win. It's at this point it is pay to win bullshit.
IE: My shiny scissors will cut your shitty rock.
Sure you might get good at fighting the guiles while they're free, but then you need to wait for them to switch and then you'll get okay at playing the zangiefs but then they switch again and you haven't practiced against the guiles in a while but no one has that character anymore. Whatever, in low level it doesn't matter, but what happens when you move into higher level. On top of this DOTA and HOTS require that you know at least 10 well enough to play. Not just one.
Currently 4 of the most competitively OP champs can be gained after 9 to 12 games. Early on people get addicted for getting in game currency which equates to champs, unlocking parts of a mastery tree and rune book which allow you to fiddle with how the champ's early game stats feel.
Also when you're under level 30 you can still pick a 5 man team composition which makes sense.
With HOtS everything costs a lot both out of game and in game. The different maps each have the better champions which pressures the player even more to own all the champs.
Dota 2 does not encourage you or let you play all the champs when you first play, you can't play a ranked game straight away and your champion pool is limited to beginner champs the last time I played. Also Dota 2 works on the basis of real hard counters where League of Legends works on soft counters so there isn't the pressure to play a champ because they are considered better.
Riot games has a model which wins monetarily and also in the player base even though you would think it wouldn't.
http://www.polygon.com/2015/6/9/8751383/heroes-of-the-storm-is-expensive-this-is-your-guide-to-what-to-buy
Everyone keeps saying the starter bundle is a good idea for $5, but those are all 2000 gold heroes, the easiest to get for free. Why pay money for heros so cheap? Pay real money for the ones that are a ton of gold. If you have decided to buy into the bullshit, then you want to consider how much time you save with each dollar. Spending a dollar to buy a hero that would take you almost no time to earn for free isn't worth it. Spending money to get a hero that would take you years to get for free is a good idea.
and I'm going to go out on a limb and say you get all the cheapest heroes with maybe one or two newer ones that would probably not cost that much more if you bought them individually (the difference would be in being able to pick and choose which you want and which you don't want).I looked up the prices, holy shit nvm, the bundle is still overpriced garbage though, but holy shit those prices, read on.A proper example of buying the game would be SMITE, where you can buy a bundle that unlocks all current and future gods in the game. For less than $30, or 3 HotS heroes at a freaking $9.99 a piece. Hell, for that money you can buy not nine, not eight, but only seven of the cheapest tier of HotS heroes, sadly, as of writing the information I have lists only 6 in said tier. SO YOU'LL ONLY GET SIX. (no, adding one hero from one tier up puts you above the $30 budget).
I mentioned the gamblers fallacy for a reason. People are invested financially and socially, having paid money for cosmetics/champions and made friends and teams in an environment where it's significantly easier to find opponents than it ever was in C&C or Starcraft.
I compared it to WoW, because the exact same thing happens in the MMORPG genre as happens in the ARTS genre, many clones are created with little to no innovation to try and get in on the money with little luck since most people go back to their previous game after trying out the hot new shit since they're socially invested in it if not financially. In both genres there's very few titles that survive alongside the giant(s), SMITE is one such an example. So yes, it 'wins' due to getting to markets first. LoL, like WoW, didn't really do anything new in its genre. It just added QoL improvements/accessibility and marketed itself to the greater masses so it got seen. Night-Elf Mohawk? PJSalt? You're the one seemingly dead-set on declaring just one winner in something that isn't a contest (monetarily, by your own words) (note that I've been using 'win' for a reason). It's a business, both LoL and Dota 2 are financially very successful, so... see my point about your RTS example. I don't recall ever grounding you from playing whatever game you like by the way.