Am I just unlucky?

Corn_Noodles

EDHdad wrote:

I don't understand what is so difficult about this concept: card collectors want to complete sets. There should be a mechanism in this game which allows people, after spending either hundreds of hours or hundreds of dollars, to complete a set.

But if a mechanism was put into place, it needs to be something that makes business sense.

Here's how a rolling bonus would work: For each card you receive that is a duplicate, you get a small bonus to the next card you receive not being a duplicate. You might want to cap that chance % or might not. So the same rarity system is still in place with a rolling bonus to the next card having a chance to be unique. Your next card could be a common, uncommon, rare, or mythic based on the same numbers they are already using. Could this be gamed a bit? Yes if you open a number of cheap packs before claiming a guaranteed rarity card from an event. I think that gaming might be fair in that it would require people using crystals to get the packs to burn for the bonus chance, unless they save up a number of reward packs.

jackvett

Corn Noodles wrote:

Here's how a rolling bonus would work: For each card you receive that is a duplicate, you get a small bonus to the next card you receive not being a duplicate. You might want to cap that chance % or might not. So the same rarity system is still in place with a rolling bonus to the next card having a chance to be unique. Your next card could be a common, uncommon, rare, or mythic based on the same numbers they are already using. Could this be gamed a bit? Yes if you open a number of cheap packs before claiming a guaranteed rarity card from an event. I think that gaming might be fair in that it would require people using crystals to get the packs to burn for the bonus chance, unless they save up a number of reward packs.

Isn't this reinventing the wheel though?

Card shops for the popular card game Magic: the Gathering typically sell singles that are pulled from booster packs, because the vast majority of the playerbase understands that throwing money at an inherently random system does not work...

Just price out the cards and let us spend money for them. Obviously, people think spending forty bucks on a planeswalker is a waste without the guarantee of cards to play with them...why D3 can't see the obvious solution is beyond me.

unrelated: did you finish top10, corn noodles? was rooting for ya

Corn_Noodles

jackvett wrote:

Isn't this reinventing the wheel though?

Card shops for the popular card game Magic: the Gathering typically sell singles that are pulled from booster packs, because the vast majority of the playerbase understands that throwing money at an inherently random system does not work...

Just price out the cards and let us spend money for them. Obviously, people think spending forty bucks on a planeswalker is a waste without the guarantee of cards to play with them...why D3 can't see the obvious solution is beyond me.

unrelated: did you finish top10, corn noodles? was rooting for ya

Selling single cards would be better, yes, but they haven't done that and they may not want to do that. I was just proposing a different system for obtaining unique cards based on the belief that single sales won't be coming.

I ended up #5 in my bracket and my coalition-mate rob443 ended up #1. Thanks for the good vibes!

Omega Red

EDHdad wrote:

I don't understand what is so difficult about this concept: card collectors want to complete sets. There should be a mechanism in this game which allows people, after spending either hundreds of hours or hundreds of dollars, to complete a set.

One thing to consider is that while this game certainly has a card collection element, it is not a card collector game and its business model certainly isn't looking to monetize the market of card collectors. Why? Because there's a lot more money to be made with this property in another market, with another business model. Why sell a card to a minority of collectors for ten bucks when you can sell boxes for several hundreds of dollars to a minority of big spenders who are chasing the same card?

When people buy Linvala or Olivia, they're not just buying another picture of a pretty (or ugly) girl with wings to show off to friends during next tournament. They're buying the competitive edge that such cards bring to their game over everyone else who chooses to wait for the same card via boosters. It's the scarcity, not the stats or qualities what creates value on any given card.

Also, this game doesn't provide only cards, it also provides the platform, the playground and the tournaments where those cards can actually be played. In the long run, D3 is not interested in having players with complete collections, but players who keep coming back to the playground to spend money in the never-ending chase of cards.

The game as a card collector and deck builder where everyone has equal access to all the cards provided they spend a reasonable amount of money or a monthly subscription or whatever is a nice sentiment, but this game wasn't designed to be that.

jackvett

Omega Red wrote:

One thing to consider is that while this game certainly has a card collection element, it is not a card collector game and its business model certainly isn't looking to monetize the market of card collectors. Why? Because there's a lot more money to be made with this property in another market, with another business model. Why sell a card to a minority of collectors for ten bucks when you can sell boxes for several hundreds of dollars to a minority of big spenders who are chasing the same card?

Are you just so confused about your role as the consumer that you're justifying being gouged to play this game? While we certainly would all agree that people who work should be paid....arguing that the current system is fair/transparent in any way is absolutely ridiculous. I've called someone an apologist on this forum before and regretted it, but your position is so full of self-hate that I'm right there on the line.

Omega Red wrote:

When people buy Linvala or Olivia, they're not just buying another picture of a pretty (or ugly) girl with wings to show off to friends during next tournament. They're buying the competitive edge that such cards bring to their game over everyone else who chooses to wait for the same card via boosters. It's the scarcity, not the stats or qualities what creates value on any given card.

Again, really? You're justifying the current pay-to-win model that nearly every other player, whales included, hates. If I wanted to beat strangers using literally only the power of my wallet and not my brains in the slightest, I'd conspicuously consume everything in my life. Expensive watch, car, doesn't matter because I can BUY it.

Like....seriously? I am pretty sure I'm smarter than I am rich.

Omega Red wrote:

Also, this game doesn't provide only cards, it also provides the platform, the playground and the tournaments where those cards can actually be played. In the long run, D3 is not interested in having players with complete collections, but players who keep coming back to the playground to spend money in the never-ending chase of cards.

If so many aspects of the game are blatantly hostile to the playerbase, there will not be players coming back because the playground will have been emptied long ago. Might I also remind you and our readers that you are not a D3 employee, and thus really can't go around making declarations like that. People might take you seriously!

Personally, I think that the game has provided plenty of space to be F2P. Weekly crystal income for me, who can't keep on a coalition's roster to save my damn life is roughly 300-400 rocks. I see that this game is inherently not competitive so it doesn't bother me that I can't have Exert Influence or Mirrorpool right away. So I'm happy consuming the content that's recycled in every single game mode, and I don't worry too much.

I'd also remind you that the current star child for profitability and playerbase on the mobile client is Hearthstone. Hearthstone is infinitely more accessible as a F2P player, yet the game rakes in money hand over fist. To argue that it's impossible to be profitable when you give players what they want is just stupidity.

glggwp

jackvett wrote:

I'd also remind you that the current star child for profitability and playerbase on the mobile client is Hearthstone. Hearthstone is infinitely more accessible as a F2P player, yet the game rakes in money hand over fist. To argue that it's impossible to be profitable when you give players what they want is just stupidity.

really? i want to switch now... tbh, the current pvp events are very repeatitive and getting a little old... i care less and less about my ranking and would just stop playing once my progression is completed

Omega Red

jackvett wrote:

Omega Red wrote:

One thing to consider is that while this game certainly has a card collection element, it is not a card collector game and its business model certainly isn't looking to monetize the market of card collectors. Why? Because there's a lot more money to be made with this property in another market, with another business model. Why sell a card to a minority of collectors for ten bucks when you can sell boxes for several hundreds of dollars to a minority of big spenders who are chasing the same card?

Are you just so confused about your role as the consumer that you're justifying being gouged to play this game? While we certainly would all agree that people who work should be paid....arguing that the current system is fair/transparent in any way is absolutely ridiculous. I've called someone an apologist on this forum before and regretted it, but your position is so full of self-hate that I'm right there on the line.

Omega Red wrote:

When people buy Linvala or Olivia, they're not just buying another picture of a pretty (or ugly) girl with wings to show off to friends during next tournament. They're buying the competitive edge that such cards bring to their game over everyone else who chooses to wait for the same card via boosters. It's the scarcity, not the stats or qualities what creates value on any given card.

Again, really? You're justifying the current pay-to-win model that nearly every other player, whales included, hates. If I wanted to beat strangers using literally only the power of my wallet and not my brains in the slightest, I'd conspicuously consume everything in my life. Expensive watch, car, doesn't matter because I can BUY it.

Like....seriously? I am pretty sure I'm smarter than I am rich.

Omega Red wrote:

Also, this game doesn't provide only cards, it also provides the platform, the playground and the tournaments where those cards can actually be played. In the long run, D3 is not interested in having players with complete collections, but players who keep coming back to the playground to spend money in the never-ending chase of cards.

If so many aspects of the game are blatantly hostile to the playerbase, there will not be players coming back because the playground will have been emptied long ago. Might I also remind you and our readers that you are not a D3 employee, and thus really can't go around making declarations like that. People might take you seriously!

Personally, I think that the game has provided plenty of space to be F2P. Weekly crystal income for me, who can't keep on a coalition's roster to save my damn life is roughly 300-400 rocks. I see that this game is inherently not competitive so it doesn't bother me that I can't have Exert Influence or Mirrorpool right away. So I'm happy consuming the content that's recycled in every single game mode, and I don't worry too much.

I'd also remind you that the current star child for profitability and playerbase on the mobile client is Hearthstone. Hearthstone is infinitely more accessible as a F2P player, yet the game rakes in money hand over fist. To argue that it's impossible to be profitable when you give players what they want is just stupidity.

Jack, sounds like you are projecting your own prejudices about P2W games because I never said anything about D3 running a nice, fair or justifiable operation. I was just explaining why cards are so hard to obtain in this game and why that is good from a business point of view and ultimately for the long-term health of the game. I'll concede that my delivery is quite cynical but I'm just trying to make a point here.

Having said that, I neither think that P2W games are a cancer that should be erradicated from online gaming. If a developer wants to sell expensive digital content and there's a market looking to buy it, please be my guest, I'll freeload as much of it as I can!