Page 2 of 69 FirstFirst 1234561252 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 1373

Thread: The current state of Magic

  1. #21
    Site Contributor

    Join Date

    Apr 2014
    Posts

    950

    Re: The current state of Magic

    If SaffronOlive's article is anything to go by it seems like MTGO was initially created to prove that MTG could be played online. It seems like the problems that it has had have been because Wizards really isn't a software company and have no idea how to manage software. Not sure what the reasons were but it seems like their online client was probably one of the lowest items on their list of concerns which leads us to the state of MTGO now. I think that they could have easily have let the company that developed the original program maintain it or contracted out if they wanted to come up with a brand new client. I don't know if it's a direct result of their new management but it seems like someone light a fire underneath the MTGO team in order to improve whatever they can about the program.

    Fwiw, I think the most impressive part of MTGO how the MTG ruleset (for the most part, minus all the dumb bugs that show up every now and then) have been implemented online.

  2. #22
    Administrator

    Join Date

    Sep 2009
    Location

    Vienna, AT
    Posts

    470

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by CptHaddock View Post
    Fwiw, I think the most impressive part of MTGO how the MTG ruleset (for the most part, minus all the dumb bugs that show up every now and then) have been implemented online.
    It's been a while since I've last seen the MODO client (played my last games on it in 2011 or so, I think), but unless things have massively improved, that is also the ONLY (mildly) impressive part of it.

  3. #23

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Seth View Post
    ...

    I don't think Masterpieces are really panic mode. I think they would've done that regardless, as expeditions were apparently popular on the whole. There's a big difference between doing something, then quickly reversing on it (rotation) compared to doing something, then deciding to keep doing it (Expeditions/Masterpieces). The former can be a sign of "panic," but not so much the latter.
    I'm not a fan of masterpieces since they look like a pretty blatant cash grab, but they're not a 'state of the game' problem.

    I think R&D went off the rails a bit with the whole 'creatures are powerful' new world order thing. Part of that is that planeswalkers seem to have displaced creatures as efficient victory conditions, so creatures have been shifted more toward splashy immediate effects that were once more the domain of non-creature spells.

    I also feel like R&D screwed up the current standard environment because they wanted to ensure that vehicles and graveyard synergies were strong in constructed.

  4. #24
    Member

    Join Date

    Aug 2014
    Location

    Central New York
    Posts

    175

    Re: The current state of Magic

    If the numbers from OP's article are accurate, it's just more writing on the wall. Gamers continue to see a substantial shift with what interests them. For all the strengths MTG has, playing the game in person cannot compete with digital games moving forward (meaning both digital collectible games and "esport" video games).

    I'm equating Magic's situation to video rental stores being overtaken by Netflix (or digital media in general). Magic/Hasbro may financially stable today, but I honestly question its future --- especially as young gamers grow up with digital apps/digital ccgs in place of Magic. That has already happened with university students not understanding Blockbuster. You could also equate the situation to Millennials cutting out traditional cable television.

    Magic's online client was designed in the late 90s and implemented in the early 00's. It hasn't adjusted to a marketplace centered around iOS/Android/free-to-play games. IMO everyone is glossing over Magic's Achilles's heel: complex rules and economics. Magic has so many cards, numerous phases with sub-rules to remember during a turn, "the stack", and keywords on basically every card. Sometimes competitive rules or card errata change. That's daunting for new players. I've tried playing different board games and card games with similar amounts of verbiage and just shut down.

    By contrast, I've dabbled in Hearthstone. It's a bit too straightforward when you come from competitive legacy play, but I no doubt see its appeal. It has a slick interface, is simpler to play, and cost me $0 for several hours. Unlike MTG, Hearthstone can adjust errata, numbers, and create complicated-to-do-by-hand mechanics because it is digital. Economically, if I wanted to put money into Hearthstone (or a digital game), $100 goes a lot further than it does in MTG (paper or online).

    This part of the article resonates with me the most as to why I believe Magic is in trouble moving forward:
    SuperData also noted that 7.6 percent of digital card game players in the U.S. buy in-game content. Many digital card games, including Hearthstone, are free-to-play, and buying digital packs is usually the fastest way to get new cards.

    Also, 86 percent of digital card game players watch online videos of other people playing digital card games. This includes influencers who broadcast and upload their play sessions on sites like Twitch and YouTube as well as esports tournaments. Many watch as a way to learn new strategies.
    Unless I'm mistaken, there is no "grind" for Magic Online. The client is just a digital representation of the paper game. IIRC, there's no free-to-play aspect. You're paying full retail for a business model created in the 90s (boosters, theme decks, etc). The appeal of watching someone play Magic on a stream is prohibited by 1) the client looking like crap and 2) the game being complicated.

    So is the sky falling? I was under the impression we're beyond peak-MTG. It began its slow decent years ago. Can't exactly put my finger on when, but the game has felt stale to me since Modern became a thing.

  5. #25
    Member
    Barook's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2007
    Location

    Germany, Germering, Munich
    Posts

    7,489

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Shareholder earnings remarks

    Go to Page 7.

    Game category up my 9%, led by PIE-FACE (the fuck is this? ) and then MtG as the fastest growing games.

    I've also looked through the other shareholder papers. Nothing disproves the slowed down growth of Magic, especially how certain categories are lumped together.

  6. #26
    Member

    Join Date

    Aug 2014
    Location

    Central New York
    Posts

    175

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by Barook View Post
    Shareholder earnings remarks

    Go to Page 7.

    Game category up my 9%, led by PIE-FACE (the fuck is this? ) and then MtG as the fastest growing games.

    I've also looked through the other shareholder papers. Nothing disproves the slowed down growth of Magic, especially how certain categories are lumped together.
    This is pie face: http://www.hasbrotoyshop.com/webapp/...game-b70630000

    As for their numbers, there's a lot of noise within their data. Nothing concrete for MTG aside "the 8th straight year of growth
    in MAGIC: THE GATHERING". There are veiled references to Magic doing well, but there's number distortion and spin as Hasbro is a giant with a "$1.4 billion gaming portfolio". Internationally their franchise brand revenues are up 3% (MTG lumped in there).

    From what I've glanced, Hasbro increased its profit margins but "...had higher expenses associated with investments to profitably grow Hasbro for the long term. These include investments in MAGIC: THE GATHERING and our consumer products teams; higher depreciation from our investment in IT systems; and higher compensation expense associated with our stronger performance." I can't parse out how much of the MTGO factors into said IT investment.

  7. #27
    Greatness awaits!
    Lemnear's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2010
    Location

    Berlin, Germany
    Posts

    6,998

    Re: The current state of Magic

    @ Warden

    There is literally ZERO need for WotC to create a client being able to cover all the complicated mechanics from more than 2 decades.

    They can focus on a client with the mechanical niveau the MTG 2013 platform (PSN) introduced. Basic mechanics and interface worked fine, but the game had no lasting appeal as the game was very limited in terms of deckbuilding, collecting and compeditive play. Why not create a cross platform client able to handle current T2 mechanics and rules for a season and then add the mechanics and cards of the next one paired with a ranking/reward system just like Hearthstone?
    www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!

    Join us at Facebook!

    Quote Originally Posted by Echelon View Post
    Lemnear sounds harsh at times, but he means well. Or to destroy, but that's when he starts rapping.

    Architect by day, rapstar by night. He's pretty much the German Hannah Montana. Sometimes he even comes in like a wrecking ball.

  8. #28
    Member

    Join Date

    Jul 2013
    Location

    Texas
    Posts

    1,184

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by Lemnear View Post
    @ Warden

    There is literally ZERO need for WotC to create a client being able to cover all the complicated mechanics from more than 2 decades.

    They can focus on a client with the mechanical niveau the MTG 2013 platform (PSN) introduced. Basic mechanics and interface worked fine, but the game had no lasting appeal as the game was very limited in terms of deckbuilding, collecting and compeditive play. Why not create a cross platform client able to handle current T2 mechanics and rules for a season and then add the mechanics and cards of the next one paired with a ranking/reward system just like Hearthstone?
    You answered your own question. If MTG started in Theros, there's really not enough separating it from Hearthstone or other competitors to make it worth it. MTG's greatest competitive advantage is its depth in card pool, rules, and history. Anything that separates players from that is simply not the same game. They could do anything they want with the IP and the rule set. But if they made a living card game version of MTG where they didn't have to worry about development mistakes burning off months of revenue, it wouldn't be backwards-compatible, and wouldn't be able to leverage 20 years of established players.

    Wizards' original sin is the reserved list. Many of their poor/vexing decisions can be traced back to it. By artificially cutting itself off from many of its most powerful tools, they are unable to create a product for that segment of its audience. That means they have to double- and triple-down on finding customers that aren't influenced by it. But in doing that, they have to compete in a market against games that weren't developed before Netscape was founded.

    Magic is also heavily dependent on the LGS to distribute and rationalize its product. But it's 2017. Leaning on a brick-and-mortar experience is harder than ever. Blockbuster is the perfect example. Both Wizards and the LGSes need a vibrant tournament scene to survive. We are seeing that that isn't a guarantee with Wizards R&D right now. This explains why in the past several years there's been a big shift in the profile of limited/draft, which sells a booster box every time it fires. Plus it's easier to curate.

    But it's not the same game and doesn't retain customers the same way. Constructed drives the conversation. See this board.

    One thing I've noticed over the past couple years is the increased profile of board games. A store I went to for months loyally, spent hundreds on cards, decided to switch to a heavier board game strategy. "They'll die without the MTG community," we said. Two years later, still in business. The LGS in my town has marginalized comics, offers few other card games -- just a big emphasis on board game nights and selling board games, and running MTG drafts. (Can't find any singles there but there are stacks of draft chaff EVERYWHERE). The store I go to most regularly doesn't even sell any comics or other card games -- just MTG, MTG supplies, and board games. MTG is surviving on its history and loyal fan base, but even when it comes to the in-store/in-person experience, the cheaper and lighter (from a rules perspective) board games are encroaching on that market. For deeper games and even competitive play, the digital games are eating MTG's lunch.

    Sky's not falling, but there are cracks in the ceiling for sure.

  9. #29
    Greatness awaits!
    Lemnear's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2010
    Location

    Berlin, Germany
    Posts

    6,998

    Re: The current state of Magic

    I have no idea how "the game is completely unable to attract any new players" isn't a fundamental problem in your eyes
    www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!

    Join us at Facebook!

    Quote Originally Posted by Echelon View Post
    Lemnear sounds harsh at times, but he means well. Or to destroy, but that's when he starts rapping.

    Architect by day, rapstar by night. He's pretty much the German Hannah Montana. Sometimes he even comes in like a wrecking ball.

  10. #30
    Member

    Join Date

    Jun 2015
    Location

    NYC
    Posts

    1,329

    Re: The current state of Magic

    I hate the reserved list as much as anyone, but I think it's a little too convenient to put the blame on the thing that makes magic worse for legacy players. They cut themselves off from selling the same cards again and again - but you don't make money by selling the same cards again and again. ABU duals are not actually very interesting cards, they merely serve as an upper bar of 'what a dual land could be', vintage-power stuff has no place in tournament magic, and the only other relevant cards on the reserved list are some junk for commander or a few key legacy rares. Hearthstone didn't rise because of the reserved list. There is a ceiling on the amount of people in America who were ever going to be interested in playing a game with 'Flusterstorm your Flusterstorm' complexity. (That includes current Magic players.)

    I feel like a lot of the problems for the company are ultimately due to how conservative they are when it comes to pushing any sort of boundaries with the structure of the game. Sets still come out in blocks, limited means draft and sealed, decks always have 40 or 60 cards, tournaments have a t8, etc. etc. A lot of these things are accidents of history and were never the result of top down planning or a long-term strategic plan - it's all just path dependency. There are a lot of directions you could go with all of these structures, some of which could lead to really new and engaging tournament experiences.

  11. #31
    Hymn-Slinging Mod
    H's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2008
    Location

    The U-easy-anna
    Posts

    3,413

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by iatee View Post
    I feel like a lot of the problems for the company are ultimately due to how conservative they are when it comes to pushing any sort of boundaries with the structure of the game. Sets still come out in blocks, limited means draft and sealed, decks always have 40 or 60 cards, tournaments have a t8, etc. etc. A lot of these things are accidents of history and were never the result of top down planning or a long-term strategic plan - it's all just path dependency. There are a lot of directions you could go with all of these structures, some of which could lead to really new and engaging tournament experiences.
    Well, I think the real "original sin" of the game is the distribution model. It's positively antediluvian at this point. Why are people looking at things like LCGs and board games? In no small part because it's all there in the box. No need to waste money on packs, play the lottery with boxes, or hunt down singles. Getting kids into the game where you are pitching spending several hundred dollars on a deck that the metagame might obsolesce in 6 months or even less and at best you can play for 2 years is a pretty tough sell, really and that's just for Standard. It's even worse when you pitch it at a thousand for Modern, or two thousand for Legacy.

    We have to realize that we, as Legacy enthusiasts, or Vintage or whatever, actually have something wrong with us. We are not the average consumer, by any stretch of the imagination.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  12. #32
    Member

    Join Date

    Jun 2015
    Location

    NYC
    Posts

    1,329

    Re: The current state of Magic

    I think there is some genius in the distribution model - people like collecting things, that becomes a game in itself and it's easier to spend large amounts of money on Magic when you do it over tons of small purchases. Opening up packs is a more socially acceptable way to play the lottery.

    But I agree that it's important to realize how far we are from average consumers. This forum has a dedicated thread where people show off their $20,000 Japanese foil decks and then other people insult them for not spending enough money on their deck.

  13. #33
    Member
    Barook's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2007
    Location

    Germany, Germering, Munich
    Posts

    7,489

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by iatee View Post
    I feel like a lot of the problems for the company are ultimately due to how conservative they are when it comes to pushing any sort of boundaries with the structure of the game. Sets still come out in blocks, limited means draft and sealed, decks always have 40 or 60 cards, tournaments have a t8, etc. etc. A lot of these things are accidents of history and were never the result of top down planning or a long-term strategic plan - it's all just path dependency. There are a lot of directions you could go with all of these structures, some of which could lead to really new and engaging tournament experiences.
    One thing I've seen from a couple of online games, even those who try to emulate Magic, is fixing one of Magic's most glaring problems gameplaywise: Non-games, especially due to resources.

    We've accepted getting fucked over by manaflood/manascrew because we're veterans, but what about players new to the game? They've removed Stone Rain and any other decent attempt at LD from the game forever due to how negatively received the inability to play your cards is (some reason why counters were nerfed to hell). Yet WotC sees getting screwed by RNG as the Holy Grail of game design since it's "awesome" when Jonny Spike loses one game out of hundred to Casual Mc Nooblord due to screw/flood.

    I do wonder how Magic would change (aside form mana denial getting significantly worse) if we had a "land library" and a "non-land library". Whenever you draw a card, you could choose from which pile you draw your stuff. Same goes for search, reveal effects, etc.; this would basically prevent you from ever getting manascrewed/flooded. I'm well aware that it would need safety measures (like a minimum library size to prevent T1ing every turn because a too small non-land library would allow to draw combos every starter hand) and would fundamentally change how certain cards work in terms of power level (e.g. Brainstorm, Bob, etc.), but it's just a silly thought experiement.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    We have to realize that we, as Legacy enthusiasts, or Vintage or whatever, actually have something wrong with us. We are not the average consumer, by any stretch of the imagination.
    Anybody right in their mind would put up with MTGO, either.

  14. #34
    Member

    Join Date

    Jun 2015
    Location

    NYC
    Posts

    1,329

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Everything that decreases RNG is ultimately a gift to highly competitive players. I don't think that the system is perfect or anything, but I would be surprised if the mana system is really is the thing that keeps new players out of the game, since as you mentioned, having good luck (opening up a bomb in limited, opponent getting mana-screwed, etc) is generally how they get their signature wins.

  15. #35
    Greatness awaits!
    Lemnear's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2010
    Location

    Berlin, Germany
    Posts

    6,998

    Re: The current state of Magic

    I am pretty sure a whole Generation of Legacy Players got to enjoy "ensure your opponent is manascrewed" in Legacy
    www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!

    Join us at Facebook!

    Quote Originally Posted by Echelon View Post
    Lemnear sounds harsh at times, but he means well. Or to destroy, but that's when he starts rapping.

    Architect by day, rapstar by night. He's pretty much the German Hannah Montana. Sometimes he even comes in like a wrecking ball.

  16. #36
    Member

    Join Date

    Jul 2013
    Location

    Texas
    Posts

    1,184

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by iatee View Post
    I hate the reserved list as much as anyone, but I think it's a little too convenient to put the blame on the thing that makes magic worse for legacy players. They cut themselves off from selling the same cards again and again - but you don't make money by selling the same cards again and again. ABU duals are not actually very interesting cards, they merely serve as an upper bar of 'what a dual land could be', vintage-power stuff has no place in tournament magic, and the only other relevant cards on the reserved list are some junk for commander or a few key legacy rares. Hearthstone didn't rise because of the reserved list. There is a ceiling on the amount of people in America who were ever going to be interested in playing a game with 'Flusterstorm your Flusterstorm' complexity. (That includes current Magic players.)
    Well, in making this point it's a little oversimplified, but... The point is that there is a place where things like duals and power are balanced. Those formats are the ones we play (Legacy and Vintage) which have safety valves built in like Force and Wasteland. But because Wizards is unable to support these formats, they cut themselves off from being able to serve the component of their market that doesn't want to keep up with Standard rotation. They know this, which is why Modern exists. But Modern, of course, has its other issues, which I'm not going to go through here because the point is about customer retention, not whether or not the format is good.

    Of course, without the RL, the necessity to invent Standard never would've existed. Like I said, I have to oversimplify the point a bit. But I do think a game company promising to never print certain game pieces ever again was a clear miscalculation, because who knows what utility something could have down the road, either in game play or in reprint equity? (Imagine you were around when the RL was announced and asked people which card they thought would be worth more in 20 years if the game was still being played: Cadaverous Bloom or Lion's Eye Diamond.) I give the company a pass for not thinking 20 years out in 1996, because who would, but I still think every year that passes reinforces the folly of the list.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    Well, I think the real "original sin" of the game is the distribution model. It's positively antediluvian at this point. Why are people looking at things like LCGs and board games? In no small part because it's all there in the box. No need to waste money on packs, play the lottery with boxes, or hunt down singles. Getting kids into the game where you are pitching spending several hundred dollars on a deck that the metagame might obsolesce in 6 months or even less and at best you can play for 2 years is a pretty tough sell, really and that's just for Standard. It's even worse when you pitch it at a thousand for Modern, or two thousand for Legacy.

    We have to realize that we, as Legacy enthusiasts, or Vintage or whatever, actually have something wrong with us. We are not the average consumer, by any stretch of the imagination.
    I agree with this. But the difference between this and the RL is that no one in 1994 knew how the internet was going to upend business models. E-commerce has drastically changed MTG by removing the barrier of card availability (assuming unlimited financial resources). That's not even to discuss the very concept of a living card game. Hell they were still issuing straight-up errata that you had to track down in the mid-90s. They had no concept of the potential audience for this game or how the economy would grow around it. So I wouldn't call it an original sin just because it wasn't an unforced error like the RL. If anything, it's amazing that this game and the LGS model has survived to this point when titans like Borders, Tower Records, and Blockbuster, that were similarly dependent on their roles as distributors of leisure content, have been relegated to the dustbin of history.

    Quote Originally Posted by Barook View Post
    One thing I've seen from a couple of online games, even those who try to emulate Magic, is fixing one of Magic's most glaring problems gameplaywise: Non-games, especially due to resources.
    This and the rest of your post, and some other posts ITT, talk about the gameplay of MTG relative to competitors, and while there are definitely valid criticisms, I think it has to be noted that Magic is a fundamentally solid game, and many of its so-called competitors are just aping the "good" parts and cutting out the "bad" (for better or for worse). Hex: Shards of Fate is basically a fanfic where MTG was invented in 2013 instead of 1993.

    The thing is that you can't look at MTG's gameplay in a vacuum. All the other issues we're discussing are part and parcel to the MTG experience. If the ruleset was different from the start, who knows whether the game would've resonated for a generation. And while growth may be slowing, it's certainly not stopping. But no property can really be invincible from market forces. The most accurate view of MTG, I guess, would be that it has an quickly narrowing margin for error as the market evolves, and disasters like what happened to Standard over the past couple rotations have downstream effects that are concerning. (I would've immediately fired Sam Stoddard and Mark Rosewater when the Standard bannings were announced, since that was the pure implementation of their vision of what standard should look like in order to avoid bannings like JTMS and SFM, and they clearly misjudged what to do.)

  17. #37
    Member

    Join Date

    Jun 2015
    Location

    NYC
    Posts

    1,329

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by maharis View Post
    Well, in making this point it's a little oversimplified, but... The point is that there is a place where things like duals and power are balanced. Those formats are the ones we play (Legacy and Vintage) which have safety valves built in like Force and Wasteland. But because Wizards is unable to support these formats, they cut themselves off from being able to serve the component of their market that doesn't want to keep up with Standard rotation. They know this, which is why Modern exists. But Modern, of course, has its other issues, which I'm not going to go through here because the point is about customer retention, not whether or not the format is good.

    Of course, without the RL, the necessity to invent Standard never would've existed. Like I said, I have to oversimplify the point a bit. But I do think a game company promising to never print certain game pieces ever again was a clear miscalculation, because who knows what utility something could have down the road, either in game play or in reprint equity? (Imagine you were around when the RL was announced and asked people which card they thought would be worth more in 20 years if the game was still being played: Cadaverous Bloom or Lion's Eye Diamond.) I give the company a pass for not thinking 20 years out in 1996, because who would, but I still think every year that passes reinforces the folly of the list.
    Wasteland/FoW/Brainstorm are indeed the key distinction between modern and legacy. They're also not on the reserved list. If Wizards wants to print powerful safety valves in the format, they mostly just need to be willing to print new modern cards that skip standard. And beyond already-reprintable Wasteland/FoW/Brainstorm, 'the reserved list' is a drop in the bucket of the set of all possible magic cards. Wizards can print whatever the hell they want. We care about these existing old cards for nostalgic reasons, not because they actually represent some pinnacle of magic design. Outside of the duals, most of the relevant reserved list cards for legacy are design fuckups like LED.

    Reserved list was obviously not part of some long-term strategic plan and nobody at Wizards loves it. But if all the modern players right now were playing legacy instead, does that change anything for the business? Modern masters is just called legacy masters and has duals in it instead of goyfs.

    Modern is also, despite its flaws, extremely popular, the most successful non-standard constructed format of all time. It might even be more popular because of its flaws - these days it's a better pet deck format than legacy and non-rotating players are a little more casual.

    In short:
    - If they want modern to have the 'fair' aspects of legacy, they can just print them.
    - Maybe people would be having more fun if they were playing legacy instead of modern, but I doubt the total number of people in this group would be substantially different.

  18. #38
    Just call me Dick.
    Richard Cheese's Avatar
    Join Date

    Feb 2011
    Location

    Your mom's house.
    Posts

    2,106

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by Lemnear View Post
    @ Warden

    There is literally ZERO need for WotC to create a client being able to cover all the complicated mechanics from more than 2 decades.

    They can focus on a client with the mechanical niveau the MTG 2013 platform (PSN) introduced. Basic mechanics and interface worked fine, but the game had no lasting appeal as the game was very limited in terms of deckbuilding, collecting and compeditive play. Why not create a cross platform client able to handle current T2 mechanics and rules for a season and then add the mechanics and cards of the next one paired with a ranking/reward system just like Hearthstone?
    Have you played the current iteration of Duels of the Planeswalkers? It's on Steam, iOS, Android, and I'm pretty sure PSN/XBL too. Definitely got off to a rocky start, but most of the bugs have been ironed out at this point, Stainless is getting better at communicating, and updates are showing up on time. Has seasons, has rankings, can grind for cards or spend real money. Pretty decent IMO.

    I just don't think a digital version of MtG is ever going to be as good as something that was designed to be digital. Duels does a pretty good job, but they've definitely had to drop some of the more subtle/obscure rules interactions, and you still end up with an awkward "response window" timer and something that just doesn't flow as well as Hearthstone. Hopefully I'm wrong and they'll find some really talented game designers who can come up with really elegant solutions for things like that.

    Personally I think they should be leveraging the solid product they already have. Not that a digital counterpart is bad, but I always thought a big part of what makes Magic fun is getting to hang out with other people that have similar nerdy interests and I hardly ever see them pushing that aspect. Their marketing is either some weird ego trip shit like "Here I rule!" and "power up your deck with more mythic bullshit to crush your opponents!", or it's completely focused on plotlines and main characters.

    Meanwhile, they exercise no quality control over stores or venues, have fair to mediocre coverage of large events, and seem to be on an active crusade to make those big events as unappealing as possible to physically attend. They're also moving at a snail's pace in response to fairly widespread coverage of buyouts and counterfeiting.

    To their credit, they are pushing multiplayer products pretty hard, and getting some reprints in at the same time with the draft-only sets. I just wish they'd put some effort into showing that the game is a social activity. A bunch of kids gathered around a table losing their shit when a player top decks their only out, people laughing and comparing sealed pools, handshakes after a hard-fought match, marathon gaming sessions in the basement with movies and snacks and shit. That's what Magic has that Hearthstone doesn't, and I think it is (or should be) a large part of the appeal of the game.
    I think the biggest thing is the deep seeded emotional understanding that the right play is the right play regardless of outcomes. The ability to make a decision 5 straight times, lose 5 times because of it, and still make it the 6th time if it's the right play. - Jon Finkel

    "Notions of chance and fate are the preoccupation of men engaged in rash undertakings."

  19. #39
    Member

    Join Date

    Jul 2013
    Location

    Texas
    Posts

    1,184

    Re: The current state of Magic

    Quote Originally Posted by iatee View Post
    Wasteland/FoW/Brainstorm are indeed the key distinction between modern and legacy. They're also not on the reserved list. If Wizards wants to print powerful safety valves in the format, they mostly just need to be willing to print new modern cards that skip standard. And beyond already-reprintable Wasteland/FoW/Brainstorm, 'the reserved list' is a drop in the bucket of the set of all possible magic cards. Wizards can print whatever the hell they want. We care about these existing old cards for nostalgic reasons, not because they actually represent some pinnacle of magic design. Outside of the duals, most of the relevant reserved list cards for legacy are design fuckups like LED.

    Reserved list was obviously not part of some long-term strategic plan and nobody at Wizards loves it. But if all the modern players right now were playing legacy instead, does that change anything for the business? Modern masters is just called legacy masters and has duals in it instead of goyfs.

    Modern is also, despite its flaws, extremely popular, the most successful non-standard constructed format of all time. It might even be more popular because of its flaws - these days it's a better pet deck format than legacy and non-rotating players are a little more casual.

    In short:
    - If they want modern to have the 'fair' aspects of legacy, they can just print them.
    - Maybe people would be having more fun if they were playing legacy instead of modern, but I doubt the total number of people in this group would be substantially different.
    Sorry -- my point was that Wasteland is balanced in a world where your duals come in for no life -- you couldn't put such a thing in a shockland format because it would severely pressure mana instead of strategically pressuring it. Whether or not Wasteland is on the reserved list is immaterial -- it is too powerful in a world where the duals are anything worse than the ABUR editions. There are similar arguments for Force and several other cards in Legacy.

    I agree with you about Modern. In fact the amount of time and energy expended on Modern indicates that what the most vocal and enfranchised players want to do with this game is strategic, competetive constructed, but this is at odds with Wizards' goal of perpetual expansion. What feeds that goal is things like limited and standard, but those don't appeal to the same feelings.

    So you have a game whose depth is a key reason that people get invested and stay involved, but that depth also makes perpetual profitability and customer acquisition incredibly difficult. It's not a great equation.

  20. #40

    Re: The current state of Magic

    I think that the only way Magic can die is if card design continues to get worse, I think that as long as card design is good magic will continue to grow. I disagree with those who say that Hearthstone and other online card games will kill magic, the reason why is that the experience of face to face gameplay where you can feel your cards and talk with your friends in real life is a very significant part of magic that online card games will never be able to replicate. I think that Magic can definitely exist as an online game in the form of an improved MTGO software, but trying to convert the game to an online-only, watered-down, direct competitor to Hearthstone will probably kill the game. I also dont think that Magic is continuing to get harder to play and learn complexity-wise. I think that once you know the fundamental aspects/basics of the game the only thing you have to do to play whatever format or deck you want is the ability to read the cards. MTG's learning difficulty is lessening if anything.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)