Crowdsourcing - What Has Made Magic Successful?

Hello everyone,

Quick background, I’ve been playing Magic on and off from when my friend and I made up the rules in 3rd grade with a pile of Ice Age cards, to Standard around Mirrodin, to playing Legacy and Vintage for the last few years with a real focus on spicy lists. It just keeps drawing me back in.

I am also in my last month of business school, and I have decided to write a paper on how Magic broke from the pack and sustained over the last 20+ years and what it should be doing now. I thought I'd drop this on the Legacy forum since it's likely a lot of you have been following the game for a long time, and these forums are a great opportunity for crowdsourcing, so I have a few questions for you all that would be immensely helpful.

1. What are some of the critical decisions Magic has made over the years that you think contributed to or detracted from its success? Examples would be implementing a rotating Type 2 / Standard format, a public Pro Tour, pushing FNMs, creating the Restricted List, Sample Decks for new players (the free 30-card decks at LGS), MaRo’s active community engagement, etc.

2. Any insight anyone has about how Wizards and, specifically, the Magic team is run. Incentives, culture, organizational structure, decision-making process, teams, etc.

3. What are some examples of competitors (e.g., Yu-Gi-Oh, Pokemon) doing something wrong that took them out of contention? An example might be that (from what I understand) Yu-Gi-Oh never implemented rotating format and instead chose to just ban, which has led to power creep over time.

4. And, of course, what do you think of Magic's digital strategy over time and how do you think Arena will fare? This is especially interesting to me since it looks like 2017 was the first fiscal year since 2008 in which Magic posted a decline in revenue. After a monster 2014, monster 2015, and “growth” in 2016, it looks like we have reached an inflection point, so Arena’s success seems like an important factor.

Thank you!

There is a pretty lengthy thread in the legacy format section (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...state-of-Magic) that can provide you with a fairly detailed account of how many on here feel things are going. In general I think the sentiment is that it is a very well designed and complex game that is mismanaged/ poorly managed by Wizards of the Coast.

I thought that worldwide, Yu Gi Oh is more popular than Magic.

Point 1:
After playing following some other TCGs:

Things that WOTC has done/continues to do well:

- Produces a comprehensive rulebook that can answer every possible question, and cards have clear templating that works within this framework. In other TCGs there have been cases where even with the rules text of the card and a copy of the rulebook, there is no definitive solution for some situations. 'The head judge at the first big event where this was used decided it works this way, this is now the official ruling' was used several times historically in Yugioh (but that game has 'cleaned up its act' in regards to this in the last several years).

- Same thing but for the IPG and the MTR, and the policies within these actually make sense, and WOTC/DCI listens to feedback from the players. Yugioh at one point in history (it still might, I'm not sure) had a vague provision in its IPG for penalising 'rules sharks' and in general the penalties seemed way too harsh with respect to the infractions. On the other hand, Pokemon is way too lenient, e.g. with how it treats slowplay/stalling.

- Transparent with its policy on how it designs cards. Statements and articles to the effect of 'Kamigawa was received poorly because of xyz, we have learned from these mistakes and will make better sets moving forward'. 'We generally don't like to make cards that do X thing, because Y'. This is good for player confidence in the company. Same thing for their ban/restricted announcements. In general cards in mtg seem to be designed with more thought than in other games. People have been really upset with standard recently but imo this is partly to do with the fact that the preceding few years of MTG sets mean that people have high expectations by default.

- Gameplay and products are internationally consistent. Most MTG players probably take this for granted. In many other games:
a) Sets are released on different schedules in different countries (for YGO and Pokemon and probably every other Japanese game the western world gets their cards after a significant delay). The contents of these sets might be different, with some cards (temporarily) exclusive to different regions. In YGO there are promo cards distributed to specific regions (e.g. countries where the JUMP magazine has official syndication) that are illegal to play in places where the card is not officially available. Effectively people around the world are all playing different versions of the game. Worlds for yugioh is almost a farce because the format attempts to unify the card pool amongst all the players, so the results have essentially no relevance for anybody outside of the tournament. (Although you could say the same thing about the WMC and unified standard)
b) In the case of yugioh it was often the case that cards had their rarities altered on the western releases, which was obviously a cash-grab from Konami and typically made the English version of the game far more expensive to play competitively.
c) Cards sometimes function differently in different regions (In YGO this is not only true for the Japan/NonJapan split but even between US/Europe).
d) Some games have rules restricting the legality of cards such that their printed language has to match the local language of the tournament

- I think the prize support for competitive MTG is still better than many other paper TCGs, even if MTG still sucks in this regard. For example Yugioh tournaments have never offered cash prizes. (This is at the express wish of the game's creator, in an attempt to keep it 'kid friendly', which is a sentiment with some merit but is obviously not ideal for competitive players).

- The management of the different formats is a positive thing, the fact that there are so many different versions of the game that different people enjoy is a testament to how good of a game it is. It is true that yugioh only has one format ('legacy'); the game is sustainable by a combination of an ever-growing banlist, power creep, and significant mechanics changes that invalidate past strategies by introducing new card types or modifying the rules. However there are still interesting/skillful formats even though the game is 'bursting at the seams' - I wouldn't say the way yugioh works is inherently bad, but it does feel less 'directed' than magic.

Things that wotc does badly:

- They have no idea how to treat the secondary market:
a) MAYBE the reserved list made sense at the time; in hindsight it was obviously a TERRIBLE decision. Of course this is a legacy board so this might not be the thoughts of the average magic player, but in my opinion this one fuckup almost single-handedly erases all of the other positive aspects of MTG.
b) They release the 'planeswalker decks' which have some cards exclusive to those decks. There was one event where some pro players were concerned they couldn't obtain one card from the Chandra deck. This should not be a problem. There have been numerous yugioh formats where the tier 1 deck required a playset (3x) of a card that was only available in a precon deck (and the precon only had one copy per deck). There is always plenty of stock. If you can't (or don't want to) print a similar supply of planeswalker decks then they shouldn't have unique cards in them. This issue has cropped up again in MTG with the new exlusive buy-a-box promo that isn't released in the main set.
c) They release masters sets with a print run / pricing / setlist as if they are afraid to actually reduce the price of singles. The last 2 masters sets have just been awful, meanwhile the price of modern cards continues to go to the moon

- The card stock is poor. New cards are noticeably more flimsy than they have been in the past. This seems inexcusable because every kusoge weeb game from japan (FoW, Buddyfight etc) spares no expense on these really solid cards with insane foiling and embossed shit all over the place.

Point 2: No idea (at least not enough to say anything meaningful about it)

Point 3: I mainly only know about yugioh and pokemon which still seem to be going relatively strong. The bigger TCGs that have died are VS System and the WoW card game so I would try to find people who played those games if you want an answer to this question. Some small games (e.g. Spoils) have flopped but this would seem to be more a case of 'never seriously got off the ground and just kind of fizzled out' rather than the parent company made a big mistake.

Point 4: People seem upset at the economy aspect of MTG arena more than anything (too difficult to obtain the cards in game). Perhaps this is a reflection of how WOTC seems to 'not get it' in paper either, e.g. the recent masters sets. Even if they got this perfectly right I think that the game ('real mtg') is too complicated to steal any of Hearthstones pie, and that they should have gone with an approach more like Yugioh Duel Links or the Duels of the Planeswalkers games. Slightly modify the rules to make it more simple and suitable for mobile, keep the key features and all of the MTG IP. Keep MODO and the paper game the same, and while the simple game can still be a fun, competitive experience in its own right, indirectly encourage people to migrate over by e.g. hosting tournaments for the digital game at big paper events like the PT (like a sunday super series or whatever).

EDIT: One common complaint about MTG that I almost certainly don't agree with is the decline in art quality.
In this I think people are mostly just blinded by nostalgia.

This is a really interesting topic.

1) When it was created, Magic was a game like no other. The ability for cards to alter the rules of the game offers tremendous room for variation and possibility. WOTC tries to come up with new mechanics and fresh design ideas with every new set. Twenty-five years in, that's a lot harder to do, but the breadth of the game is still growing. Also, the balance WOTC struck between making Magic a collectible and making it a game has allowed it to reach different audiences. Competing card games lacked the depth that Magic has (Magic's comprehensive rules are enormous), and many weren't able to capitalize on early successes. I played the Young Jedi card game by Decipher, and it died out in my area because the card pool remained too small for too long. The second set was kind of bad. By the time Battle of Naboo (the third set) was released a year later, most people had lost interest. I owned a lot of cards for OverPower, which was a game based on Marvel Comics (and later DC Comics), but I never found a playgroup. Magic had a lot of competitors in the early days, but the games were either worse or the parent companies had problems.

a) Magic's art, particularly in the game's early years, was amazing and iconic. The company's shift to digital, mainly as a way to save money and speed up production, has resulted in a lot of lesser pieces. Many are even difficult to distinguish from one another when played on camera. This shift was probably inevitable, but I wish the art director(s) would relax and allow more artistic freedom and interpretation.

b) Being sold to Hasbro is probably at the root of the game's current problems, which mostly involve cost-cutting measures. WOTC is a cheapskate company now, and that didn't used to be true. I'm not sure it would be the case if WOTC wasn't a slave to Corporate America, but I'm fairly sure the company and the game are worse off than they would be otherwise. I remember going on tours of the Renton HQ back in 1995 and receiving free Revised Starter decks. And, yes, you could come back the next week for another tour and receive more cards. Obviously, this was partly promotional and wasn't going to last forever, but I don't think you could even get a tour of the HQ today if you paid someone. Everything is corporate to a fault now. Early large Magic events were juicy affairs, such as the $50K Type I event at Pro Tour New York in 1996 (http://www.vintagemagic.com/blog/old...it-to-the-zoo/). Prizes and EV are weaker today. The very popular Player Rewards program was eliminated, and the explanation was anything but detailed (https://magic.wizards.com/en/article...ued-2010-11-15). I don't do Magic Online, but I frequently hear complaints about prize payouts getting worse. And, of course, there's ...

c) Card stock. For much of the game's history, the card stock, ink, and printing procedures were high-quality. This was a fundamental value and something we could count on. Now the card stock is awful -- so bad that cards have been photographed curling or peeling shortly after leaving the pack.

d) The creation of alternative formats keeps the game fresh and gives value and purpose to cards that previously were chaff. A lot of EDH/Commander bombs were unplayable bulk rares prior to the creation of that format. At this point, Magic is large enough and old enough that it has a player base spanning multiple generations, and so WOTC's survival isn't even necessarily required for the game to continue on. Formats like 93-94/Old School, Canadian Highlander, Tiny Leaders, and Frontier don't have official WOTC backing and event support but have active communities. I fully expect to see more offshoots and variants in the future.

e) Broadcasting the Pro Tour and GPs on Twitch was a great move, and WOTC has improved coverage a great deal. This is maybe the biggest positive thing WOTC has done in the past few years.

f) Tweaking game rules has been positive and negative. On one hand, losing mana burn was nonsensical, but gaining the scry rule for mulligans was excellent. For high-level tournament play, I appreciate that penalties are reconsidered over time (e.g., you don't immediately lose the game now if you accidentally draw an extra card because two of your sleeves stuck together because your opponent shuffled your deck with his sticky hands). I feel like this area of the game is handled very well, with good transparency and explanation from WOTC, and WOTC has shown a willingness to roll back changes if people aren't receptive.

g) WOTC needs more resources in playtesting. Even for draft environments, cards are barely tested before they're OK'd. Many recent seasons of Standard have been defined by imbalance and instability. WOTC needs to get back to basics in terms of printing good answers to check good threats. WOTC needs to be more liberal with counterspells, land destruction, removal, and other elements that used to be commonplace in earlier eras. A vocal segment of players found these concepts unfun and complained enough that those things were systematically nerfed, and that was a prelude to the recent era of problems with Standard. The other big issue was story cards. In trying to push cards that fit the story for a set, WOTC turned a blind eye to power level, resulting in cards like Emrakul, the Promised End, which weren't properly balanced for the Standard environment they appeared in.

In general, most of these things can be traced back to money. Cutting corners and applying cost-cutting strategies hurts Magic overall, and investing in making Magic better helps the game. In every decision, WOTC should push back against the corporate tide demanding short-term profits at the expense of long-term health. Magic is one of the best games ever created and is a fantastic and enduring brand, but WOTC has made more bad decisions than good ones in the past decade, and that is concerning.

2. You'd need to talk with many current employees and former employees in order to form a clear picture of these things. In my view, the two major eras are before the sale to Hasbro and after. Also, different departments are run better or worse than others. I've heard the most strife from people who worked on the digital side.

3. I mentioned some of these games earlier, but there have been scores of them introduced over the decades. I'm sure some members here have played them and will have good perspectives, but it might be productive to pop in on boards dedicated to those games and ask similar questions. Or, if no such boards exist, make a Reddit thread.

4. Virtually everything I've heard about Arena has been negative, which doesn't bode well for WOTC, since Arena required a lot of money and resources to create. Personally, I've never been interested in Magic Online, since I've never been willing to pay real money for virtual objects that can't be insured or guaranteed. Lots of members here play Magic Online or have played it in the past and would have good feedback on this front.

1) Other than the stuff people have already said,

- WotC is pretty good at keeping the inevitable power creep in check, although the pendulum probably has swung back too far when cards like Llanowar Elves were considered overpowered for years while old spells get recycled with a +:2: slapped on its casting cost.
- Magic is a game with great strategic depth and replay value.

2) Where Wizards fails is being absolute cheapskates, paying way below industry standard wages and having a high rotation rate in employees to avoid further costs. This brings in less skilled people who are happy to get a job anyway or decline a higher-paid job due to their love of magic. We know very well from glassdoorreviews (and other articles from former employees) that WotC has an absolutely horrible working culture. The upper management has no idea what they're doing and they are afraid of change due to the high firing rate. Good, hard-working employees are discouraged, kept down or exploited. Raging nepotism is a blatant problem and if you aren't part of "the gang", you're pretty much fucked.
A strong SJW culture has also arisen in the last 1-2 years within the company, increasing friction in the playerbase because not everybody is happy with them shoving their agenda into the game instead of focussing on making a good game.

3) No comment

4) Magic has been running on fumes for a while now if you pay closer attention. The only reason why revenue hasn't dropped even earlier was because they keep pumping out more and more product each year to compensate for that.
As for Arena, I'm convinced it's going to bomb. They're just blatantly ripping off Heartstone, both in appearence/interface and the economy. The latter one is going to break their back. You can't just copy + paste Hearthstone's economy when MtG requires way more rares and mythics. Hearthstones economy was already heavily critizicized, yet they went and made something worse. Being cheapskates is going to be their downfall here, since they lack the vision, technical prowess and talent to make an actually good online product.