Enter Hearthstone; Blizzard's answer to CCGs, following the "free to play" model, Hearthstone has set out to create an engaging card game that their website totes as "Deceptively simple. Insanely fun.". I think it does this and a lot more.
I have said, much to the scepticism or complete surprise of a few players, that Hearthstone has made me a MUCH better MTG player. I want to walk you through why.
---
If you talk to some of the best players in magic as I've been lucky to do, you get a real sense of the depth of their understanding of the game. There are unique deck archetypes, card dynamics, and a general synergy that new players try to understand, but at the core, they still don't "get it".
To back up a bit, let me walk you through a common approach I have to problems (in games and in life). I internally examine if the problem is important enough to me to get where I want to go. I look at the major vectors involved in the problem and how it's constructed. Finally, I boil the problem down to the core elements I need, break the pieces apart, and rebuild from the ground up. Magic the gathering, on the surface, seems like a deceptively easy problem to solve. There are game items (cards), rules of play, and there are always a series of objectives that you have to accomplish to achieve your desired goal; winning the game. Here lies the deception, and as a new player, you don't see it until you've been around the block to truly appreciate the depth of the card pool (I still can't see the bottom), and respect the raw value that you can only gain from worthwhile experience.
Let me run some numbers past you; The first iteration of MTG: Alpha, had a card pool of 295 cards, Beta had 302, currently there are over 13,000 unique cards in existence and 1,278 of those are legal in Standard. While so many of those cards are functional reprints of cards you veterans of the game have seen many times before, it's a new and daunting experience for us new kids on the block to see and appreciate each one.
Hearthstone has 465 playable cards. Based on MTG (there is no denying that), it has come to the forefront as a game that has greatly benefit from the balance issues, and many pitfalls that MTG has overcome over 20 years. In many ways Hearthstone has been given the evolutionary roadmap that MTG (As the only big kid on the block) has laid out over years of growth and experience.
---
I will never get the opportunity to play as some of you guys/gals did in the early stages of magic, when there was a reasonable limit to the number of cards and options you had at your disposal. I will likely never get the chance to see a COMPLETELY new archetype shape the future of card games. But Hearthstone, to me, is the closest I will ever get to that opportunity and really is analogous to a polished version of the Alpha and Beta days. It has given me the chance to witness raw card value, lines of play that are worth setting up, an appreciation for long and short game strategies. Importantly it does so with a sense of tangible achievement as I go along, in a casual and non-intimidating manner, in a manner that respects my time and finances.
This simplification of the "problem", in an accessible and well fleshed out presentation, comprised of short, feel good experiences, is arguably the best opportunity for players who don't have a veteran players to guide them through card games and lack personal experience. This brings me back to my original seemingly baffling sentiment; Hearthstone has given me an exponentially richer opportunity to not only improve my understanding of MTG but gaming as a whole. While experienced players may be quick to dismiss it as simple magic, or just not for them, I think it provides the critical fundamentals for new and established players to grow.
Give it a try! Add me to Battle.net: Ricostravels#1196, let me know what you think :)
#FreeToPlayValue
#Lookatitwithfresheyes
#TWEETMEYOURTOKENSYOULUCKYFEW
@Ricostravels
I almost wonder if i should have titled this WHY instead of HOW :)
ReplyDeleteYou could do a follow up article with the how : )
ReplyDeleteI really like this suggestion, Thanks! :D
DeleteThe TL;DR version of this blog is: Hearthstone has a tighter and smaller card pool than magic, and when combined with its simpler structure provides an easier experience for new players.
ReplyDeleteWhile this statement is true there are many other angles that Blizzard has succeeded over WotC that have been left unmentioned.
Reduced player interaction aka “Time runs out on me”. The only time a player must make a decision is when he attacks with a minion or plays a card. All other choices are through automated triggers or the target is chosen randomly instead. The time limit is also set to be “per turn” instead of “per match”. This leads to a faster game as fewer player driven decisions results in less game time spent waiting on said decisions and thus keeps up the pace of the game. Nothing is more frustrating than playing Magic Online and having to wait for your opponent to make a decision during your own turn.
Variance aka RNGesus aka “Well Played”. Players will always blame luck regardless of whether it’s pure luck or just probability manipulation. Hearthstone has a lot more random spells where you can get either the desired result or something very horrible. An example would be Brawl, at first new players love this card since it’s splashy and has the chance to kill all of your opponents creatures. However more experienced players avoid this card due to its unreliability. Another example being Deadly Shot which is a card that kills a random enemy minion. This card teaches new players that you must manipulate the odds in order to produce the desired result. Killing that Ragnoros is important enough that you might do whatever possible to kill off all other creatures to make sure that Deadly Shot hits.
Manabase Simplicity. By ensuring that you steadily get 1 additional mana per turn Hearthstone removes one of the biggest issues that plagues earlier Magic player. Being mana screwed or flooded in Magic leads to frustration and is another demon of the game that can convince a new player that Magic is too luck driven. The comfort in knowing that in 4 turns I will be able to play the 4 drop in my opening hand lets a player focus more on WHEN he should play a card instead of whether he CAN play a card. This in turn give the player more mental space to focus on his lines of play. “The more you practice something the better you become at it.”
Removal of game phases. In Heartstone you can attack with a creature at any time during your turn in addition to be able to play a card any time during your turn. The turn phases of Magic while good for making gameplay easier to structure is just another restriction on new players. There is a phrase that I hate to hear from new players: “can I do this now?” It’s like playing a text adventure. “Can I do this? No. How about this? Not now. But I want to do this. Nope, not yet.” Curiosity and freedom go hand in hand and to provide a player with so many lines of play during their turn is an advantage that Hearthstone has exploited to great success.
Awesome! :D
DeleteEasily the most in depth comment #Gentlemenburninatorsociety has had :)
The first three paragraphs contain some lovely preamble however your definition of a psychological barrier is unclear. By stating “there is something others see that I just don’t get” you are reducing your credibility on the subject by openly admitting that you do not fully understanding the reason and existence of this psychological barrier. It would be very useful if you defined exactly WHY you don’t see something others do and WHAT elements you actually DO understand. Doing so gives you a golden opportunity to list things you did not “get” regarding Magic that you came to learn through Hearthstone.
ReplyDeleteParagraph four is a statement that needs evidence and/or additional explanation. There is a saying “to put the pussy on a pedestal” and this paragraph is merely a repetition of your previous statement in paragraph one but now superimposed on other players instead of only yourself. You start off discussing how long term players have “a real sense of the games depth”. While an excellent observation, please provide examples or references to support this observation. The use of personal experiences here would greatly increase your credibility on the topic to the average reader. (Not trying to insult you here. I don’t think you’re an idiot.)
Paragraph five is a well detailed description of how you analyze problems or in this example Magic. The take away is that your method of analysis is overloaded by the vast card pool of Magic. Your biggest error is in stating “I still can’t see the bottom”. Combining this statement with the others you made in previous paragraphs you create the expectation that any player worth his cardboard should have a deep understanding of every card and their interactions. That is a bold statement that is inherently false; the easiest counter argument being the existence of “Rogue Decks”.
“Rogue Decks” such as Blue Moon from the recent Modern Pro Tour are counterpoint to your statement as many top ranked players claimed to have never thought of building such a deck. Further proof lies in running a search of decks similar to Blue Moon before the date of Jan 2014, this search will yield very little relevant information. (Sorry for the digression)
Paragraph six. You mention standard as being a smaller sample size but you fail to mention limited (very similar to Arena) and block constructed formats which are much smaller and are also heavily played. Scars of Mirrodin Block (my fav) was only 544 cards while Core sets are only 234 cards. By listing these formats you could then compare the vast number of Magic formats to Hearthstones two formats as another angle to prove your statement about how new Magic players can be overwhelmed.
Paragraph seven discusses an “evolutionary roadmap” but provides no reference to events or “pitfalls” made by WotC that Blizzard could have learned from. All examples that you could have listed here would be very useful comparison tools to help show why you found learning Hearthstone to be an easier experience.
Paragraph eight contains a contradictory statement where you reminisce about the old days of magic yet you previously claimed to never have played during those days. You then list several points. “witness card value, lines of play and stages of the game” Each of these should be pursued in detail to share how you’ve come to learn more about them. For example: “Hearthstone taught me to be conservative with my removal since I knew that by turn 7 I would be able to 3 for 1 my opponent with a Flamestrike when playing as a Mage. Instead of wasting my Fireballs in 1 for 1 trades I played creatures to progress my board position.”
Paragraph nine is not a conclusive paragraph and it’s contents would be better placed before paragraph eight. The sentences in paragraph eight and nine are too prosaic and layered with repetitive adjectives. I use this table to add more brevity to my descriptive sentences http://i.imgur.com/m9dKQut.png
A good read that could use much more detail and trimming of the sections that are much more rant heavy. I can feel the passion in your words. <3
Thanks Bruce, I definitely sense you're passionate about the quality of articles you read and I'm very flattered that you've taken the time to put your analysis to words for mine!
DeleteI think GBS has always been a opportunity for me express what's on my mind with respect to MTG and mostly spurred from a need for an outlet for this obsession.
One of the most challenging things I face when putting these together, is finding a balance between having a concrete message and it being a random blog. When i realized that there was an viewer base interested in my perspective, I tried to keep things as brief as possible so readers could enjoy the content and maybe incorporate it into their thinking at a later time.
I think one of the refreshing things with my site is that the reader is just getting my perspective, which I've tried to highlight are really just the thoughts of a perpetual newb (who in this case found the simplification of HS a real help in understanding the core elements of MTG). What I'm noticing recently though with new readers is that at times people don't know I'm still learning and maybe it's my fault for glossing over that point in assuming people have known me from the early HM days.
All that said, thanks for your analysis, I'll see if I can balance things more effectively in the future while staying true to the overall feel of the site :D