No more Magic Invitational

[Wallace]

Not really much to say here, I hope they bring it back in the future.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mr344

[Bardo]

Meh.

[Illissius]

What are they going to cancel next? Worlds?

[Nihil Credo]

I normally don't enjoy being a Cassandra, but I'm starting to feel that by 2020 Magic will only be Online.

[xsockmonkeyx]

I normally don't enjoy being a Cassandra, but I'm starting to feel that by 2020 Magic will only be Online.

And I would say that this is estimate very optimistic.

[Elficidium]

Trying to focus on Grassroots my ass, they just fucked up FNM in the entire area. We have no core-level TO's and now this. Whats next, cancel the Pro Tour?

The whole Pro circuit and stuff like invitationals was one of the main ways to get people to take this hobby seriously.

[Skeggi]

The whole Pro circuit and stuff like invitationals was one of the main ways to get people to take this hobby seriously.

There's no need to have people take a hobby seriously. In fact: they're easier to beat if they don't :cool:

But it is a sad loss indeed :cry:

[Nihil Credo]

Incidentally, I thought the whole MtG business used to be WotC's cash cow. To anyone's knowledge, has this changed?

[Elfrago]

I normally don't enjoy being a Cassandra, but I'm starting to feel that by 2020 Magic will only be Online.

No way! Selling the same cards both in real and online to the same guy is way better to selling it only once.

[Tenant_Tron]

WOTC is really fucking up, first they cut a PT, then Prereleases, now the Invitational. It wont be long before the entire competitive scene gets cut and the only thing that will exist will be Eternal players. Very sad, everyone see they are fucking up but them.

T.T

[Illissius]

States too.

[Roman Candle]

FUCK. How am I supposed to force them to print Riggers now?!

[Wereodile]

I thought the invitationals were a real highlight for players, you know something to look forward to. Well I guess it's all part of MaRO's master plan.

[Bardo]

Incidentally, I thought the whole MtG business used to be WotC's cash cow. To anyone's knowledge, has this changed?

WotC is a wholly-owned division of Hasbro. I'm sure Hasbro wants all of their profit centers to do well, and MTG is a successful game, but you can't look at just MTG alone, given Hasbro's numerous properties.


Well I guess it's all part of MaRO's master plan.

Definitely not. Rosewater sounded genuinely sad to see the Invitational cut in his Mailbag article on Monday.

The Invitational was a fun little tournament and I liked following it, but it apparently doesn't return enough buck for the bang.


No way! Selling the same cards both in real and online to the same guy is way better to selling it only once.

Totally. I think Worth Wollpert said that MODO makes about 50% of the revenue for MTG. FIFTY-PERCENT. That is insane. But if you stopped printing cards, basically cutting your printing, collating and distribution costs (probably the heftiest), the well might run dry for the online part of the game, since the competition for computer games is extremely fierce and MODO is a apparently a sub-standard product.

[Slag]

I'd be terribly surprised if Mark Rosewater was doing any more for this plan than shilling it. All the recent turns of events in magic point to company management (hasbro) trying to streamline magic to get the most money out of it.
1. "grassroots play" campaign - basically boils down to getting more people to buy cards.
2. cutting down on bigger tournemants - reducing overhead
3. increase in must-have rare cards ignoring power level standards (tarmogoyf, thoughtseize, upcoming super-rares) - getting the regulars to shell out for more cards. Although, except for the enemy filters, eventide had a lot of general utility commons and uncommons.
Wizards has always been proud that Magic is the "respectable" and "competitive" trading card game, so this mess probably all comes from higher up.

Edit: Gah, beaten to the punch.

[Giles]

Totally. I think Worth Wollpert said that MODO makes about 50% of the revenue for MTG. FIFTY-PERCENT. That is insane. But if you stopped printing cards, basically cutting your printing, collating and distribution costs (probably the heftiest), the well might run dry for the online part of the game, since the competition for computer games is extremely fierce and MODO is a apparently a sub-standard product.

Honestly if this 50% of the revenue stream is from MODO. I am surprised that they are not spending millions on making it better. Upgrading servers, better design, and more events would bring more player to MODO. Yet they trashed MTGO3 and losing players because of it.

[Sek'Kuar]

Incidentally, I thought the whole MtG business used to be WotC's cash cow. To anyone's knowledge, has this changed?

It will now if it hasn't already
On the flipside, from someone who plays casually as well (ie. Precon decks etc) their idea to force you to customize the precon is kinda cool, even if it is a blatant way of asking for more $

[Bardo]

Honestly if this 50% of the revenue stream is from MODO. I am surprised that they are not spending millions on making it better. Upgrading servers, better design, and more events would bring more player to MODO. Yet they trashed MTGO3 and losing players because of it.

Totally. It boggles the mind. They're losing tons of money (millions) because of customer disgust.

[cdr]

Totally. It boggles the mind. They're losing tons of money (millions) because of customer disgust.

They are not. MTGO v3 is a terrible product, and they're raking in cash hand over fist. And that is exactly why they don't put any more effort into it - why bother?

[Barook]

Upgrading servers, better design, and more events would bring more player to MODO. Yet they trashed MTGO3 and losing players because of it.

Is it really that bad? I haven't touched MODO for a while because MODO 2.Crap was a real insult to all the customers. Is it still so bad/even worse? :confused:

[Bardo]

They are not. MTGO v3 is a terrible product, and they're raking in cash hand over fist. And that is exactly why they don't put any more effort into it - why bother?

So they can make more and conquer the world? I mean, um, make more money. :)

[Pinder]

So they can make more and conquer the world? I mean, um, make more money. :)

Yeah, I've always wondered why they didn't at least try harder. I mean, even if they are making money, do they have no pride in their work? I would think that making a quality product is, in at least some way, it's own reward, right?

[Anusien]

While MTGO v3 could probably be improved, as a software guy I recognize that you can't wave your hands and make software better. They've brought on a number of developers in recent years. But it's not like they can hire 30 new devs and magically make the project better. Specifically, adding more man hours to a late project often makes it later.

In other words, it's not that they're ignoring MTGO. It's just that making software is hard.

[thefreakaccident]

I may be retarded, I always thought that confidant looked like bob mahar (however you spell that name) jr... but that was the point... THAT's hilarious!


This inspired me to look at shadowmage infiltrator, and it does looks a little like finkel, but not much...

[m03]

While MTGO v3 could probably be improved, as a software guy I recognize that you can't wave your hands and make software better. They've brought on a number of developers in recent years. But it's not like they can hire 30 new devs and magically make the project better. Specifically, adding more man hours to a late project often makes it later.


Also known as Brooks's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks%27s_law).

[Barook]

While MTGO v3 could probably be improved, as a software guy I recognize that you can't wave your hands and make software better. They've brought on a number of developers in recent years. But it's not like they can hire 30 new devs and magically make the project better. Specifically, adding more man hours to a late project often makes it later.

In other words, it's not that they're ignoring MTGO. It's just that making software is hard.

Isn't the main problem that the old coding sucks beyond fixing and needs to be done from the scratch? Wizards just keeps going and going with the old client which is a complete trainwreck. I just read the story about MODO 3 and how it was released mid-April (4 months behind schedule) incomplete, just because the old client version couldn't handle the mass of data anymore. :confused:

[Illissius]

In other words, it's not that they're ignoring MTGO. It's just that making software is hard.

And yet good software exists in the world.

Conclusion: WotC is incompetent.


Isn't the main problem that the old coding sucks beyond fixing and needs to be done from the scratch? Wizards just keeps going and going with the old client which is a complete trainwreck. I just read the story about MODO 3 and how it was released mid-April (4 months behind schedule) incomplete, just because the old client version couldn't handle the mass of data anymore. :confused:

Close, but not quite. V2 was written not by WotC directly but by some other company they contracted (Leaping Lizards?), which had since ceased to exist; so WotC was stuck maintaining code they didn't write, which is not easy in the best of times, and the best of times these weren't. So they decided to rewrite it from the ground up in house, which is V3, and managed to fuck it up even worse than it was before.

[freakish777]

While MTGO v3 could probably be improved, as a software guy I recognize that you can't wave your hands and make software better. They've brought on a number of developers in recent years. But it's not like they can hire 30 new devs and magically make the project better. Specifically, adding more man hours to a late project often makes it later.

In other words, it's not that they're ignoring MTGO. It's just that making software is hard.

MTGO v3 could be improved, a lot. As a Software Engineer, I recognize that writing software and fixing bugs isn't magic. They've brought on a number of devs in recent years, to try and fix their problem but, they're either:

A) Just throwing money at the project, and don't realize that they need professional Project Managers to handle the design aspect to either straighten out pre-existing design flaws, or if the PM says "Dear God, this code base is a piece of shit, we're starting over from scratch" you listen to them, and trust they won't introduce any design flaws of their own into the spec.

B) Not throwing enough money at the project, and hiring people at $45k a year instead of getting a couple Senior Software Engineers at $85k a year who know what the fuck they're doing, won't introduce new bugs

C) Lazy, and doing exactly what Akki suggested and don't fucking care because the customers pay for the product that's shit anyways and that pays your entire dev staff with a huge profit margin on top of it. Why bother?

I'm guessing it's all 3. Also, do they have an actual QA team, or do they just drop it on users and let them do all the work? I mean seriously. My first job had a QA team that was about 1/4th the size of the Dev team. If your shit didn't work in the QA environment, it didn't go to production. If it didn't go to production by the deadline, the Dev team was responsible. To many times your team didn't make the deadline, people started getting let go from your team. Seriously, it's not just about the code, it's about having a development process that allows you to meets standards. If your standards are low (like "let's find some $5 crack whores" low), then you get shit like MTGO v3.

In other words, it's not like they're ignoring MTGO (although maybe they are, who knows, I certainly don't work there, I've said it before and I'll say it again, I want nothing to do professionally with MTGO unless there's a six figure salary involved), they just don't have any idea how the fuck to design and develop software.

[Anusien]

They're a group that's not traditionally a Software Development environment trying to make the transition. They've had a lot to learn about making software. From what I understand, they didn't start V3 completely right, but they've been making significant progress on making it not suck. Problems inevitably abound when you have a software product that isn't the #1 focus at the company.



A) Just throwing money at the project, and don't realize that they need professional Project Managers to handle the design aspect to either straighten out pre-existing design flaws, or if the PM says "Dear God, this code base is a piece of shit, we're starting over from scratch" you listen to them, and trust they won't introduce any design flaws of their own into the spec.

B) Not throwing enough money at the project, and hiring people at $45k a year instead of getting a couple Senior Software Engineers at $85k a year who know what the fuck they're doing, won't introduce new bugs

C) Lazy, and doing exactly what Akki suggested and don't fucking care because the customers pay for the product that's shit anyways and that pays your entire dev staff with a huge profit margin on top of it. Why bother?
Or, you know... not all software products succeed. You can get all the right people together and still have a poor product for whatever reason. They've certainly been out hiring experienced programmers, and based on what's going on, they certainly do seem to care about the product. I don't know what kind of Project Management they have on board though.

Like honestly, all of you bitching and moaning at V3. Have any of you ever talked to someone that works on V3, or know more than whatever goes in BDM's column once a month about V3? Or know the first thing about writing software (well, hello world is the first, so I guess the second)? As a software developer myself, I understand that writing software is hard. But you know what's not harder than being a software developer? Not being an ass about something you don't understand.


And yet good software exists in the world.

Conclusion: WotC is incompetent.
God, what a dick.

</RANT>

[Skeggi]

I think it's safe to say this thread has officially been hijacked.

[jazzykat]

Or, you know... not all software products succeed. You can get all the right people together and still have a poor product for whatever reason. They've certainly been out hiring experienced programmers, and based on what's going on, they certainly do seem to care about the product. I don't know what kind of Project Management they have on board though.



I'm a project manager that does/has done software, and systems projects. I've also written software before this life. What you have stated is a classic developer mentality that allows people to put out untested, poorly designed, and poorly executed code.

While not all software may succeed commercially it can be technically decent i.e. IF MTGO didn't have many bugs and they were fixed quickly but only 2 people wanted to play it.

Also, a non-existent or ineffective project manager will also cause you lots of grief.

What you meant to say is that sometimes people do not succeed.

[cupajoe]

The amount of money Wizards was losing on the Invitational was massive.....

It was a great decision to cancel it.....

99.9 percent of all players had no chance of being invited to the Invitational.....so what was left was merely a marketing tool....

As demonstrated by the failure of the Pro Player cards, the vast majority of people do not follow pros or care how they do in tournaments, so why should they care about the Invitational? The answer is: They don't.

If the idea is to promote the wacky formats the Invitational had, then there's many more inexpensive ways to do that.....

The realization that the Pro Tour is a loss leader that is not really doing much for the marketing of the game is a realization that the company honchos have had for some time now.....

I believe you will see the Pro Tour die a slow death, and if Wizards was smart, they would pump at least some of the money that they used to spend on the Pro Tour into prizes for local store owners....That's where the tourney scene that affects the most people is at....the local stores.....If the local stores had less financial risk, that would be better overall for the game

[freakish777]

They're a group that's not traditionally a Software Development environment trying to make the transition. They've had a lot to learn about making software. From what I understand, they didn't start V3 completely right, but they've been making significant progress on making it not suck. Problems inevitably abound when you have a software product that isn't the #1 focus at the company.

Then they should start by hiring a consulting firm to propose how to make the transition and get into the market in a competitive fashion. Not flail about and make themselves look like tools.



You can get all the right people together and still have a poor product for whatever reason.

Highly unlikely. If you have the right people on the project and give them the tools they need to succeed (ie, don't shaft them on hardware), there should be little to nothing standing in their way of releasing a product that has minimal bugs. As it stands, V3 is unusable. Unusable is completely different than "Poor product, but at least it works." Unusable programs are unacceptable (when the cards go invisible, it becomes a little hard to play a game of Magic, which should be their #1 use case, but apparently everyones is too busy trying to cram crappy visual distractions down our throat for them to be bothered about making sure users can see the cards they bought).


They've certainly been out hiring experienced programmers

Have you seen their resumes?


Or know the first thing about writing software (well, hello world is the first, so I guess the second)? As a software developer myself, I understand that writing software is hard. But you know what's not harder than being a software developer? Not being an ass about something you don't understand.

Quit typing and learn to read.


As a Software Engineer, I recognize that writing software and fixing bugs isn't magic


I work in a .NET 3.5 environment (developing on VS 2008 & MS SQL Server 2005) as a Software Engineer for Xerox and have had 2 previous jobs as a Software Engineer, how bout you?

[mercenarybdu]

That means they will be skipping a year on voting for who will be competing in that kind of event that everyone has grown so found of.

Anyway, I could understand why it was axed as well. It all has to do with Ferret's first video about the lame job WIzards was doing with that event and last year's Legacy portion of Worlds.

I hope they bring it back with a chance to vote people from other walks of the community to compete in the events. It shouldn't be just limited to Pros.

Evan made his point about how some players were unfairly represented on the ballot due to only one or two people picking out all the players to be cast on there.