Wizards of the Coast, D&D and Magic: The Gathering - are they failing?

[Grunker]

Hey, it might become format defining. Sylvan Advocate is the defining 2-drop right now without a doubt. Who knows what'll happen once there's no more Collected Company. They are pushing Delirium.

Not sure what you mean by "too powerful" though. There will always be cards that are more efficient than others. Too powerful, for me, denotes two things in a TCG, both of which must be true: 1) By not playing the card, you are lowering your win rate by a significant margin, 2) The strategies that beat the card are significantly weaker than the card and are not viable.

In a TCG, there will always be a deck that wins most, and that deck will always have a best card. It's a question of scale. Most of the 2-drops I posted were "mistakes."

(Also, since we're ranting here, a good test for "is this card broken" is "will this card be a staple in Cube?" I suspect Grim Flayer will not make it into most.)

 

[Coma White]

I'm just stating that it's damn strong, and to me, a card that is broken.

Acknowledges his position is 100% opinion and based on how he feels rather than actual knowledge. Admits his lack on knowledge more or less disqualifies his opinion's validity in a serious discussion.

Proceeds to post walls of text on the subject anyway.

 

[Harg Harfardarssen]

Jesus dude, he's just using qualifying language about his opinions because he's being double teamed in an aggressive internet shouting match. He's completed the ceremonial ritual of discussion surrender. No need to keep being a dick about it.

 

[Stormcrowfleet]

Hey, it might become format defining. Sylvan Advocate is the defining 2-drop right now without a doubt. Who knows what'll happen once there's no more Collected Company. They are pushing Delirium.

Not sure what you mean by "too powerful" though. There will always be cards that are more efficient than others. Too powerful, for me, denotes two things in a TCG, both of which must be true: 1) By not playing the card, you are lowering your win rate by a significant margin, 2) The strategies that beat the card are significantly weaker than the card and are not viable.

In a TCG, there will always be a deck that wins most, and that deck will always have a best card. It's a question of scale. Most of the 2-drops I posted were "mistakes."

(Also, since we're ranting here, a good test for "is this card broken" is "will this card be a staple in Cube?" I suspect Grim Flayer will not make it into most.)

True. I wouldn't put it in my Cube. Some non-mistake card can still make it, like Lothleth Troll, since they give opportunity for combo/interaction within a deck. Grim Flayer doesn't have this, it's just a good 2 drop.

 

[Grunker]

To be fair, Tarmogoyf is a last pick in cube because synergy is often better than raw power.

 

[Coma White]

To be fair, Tarmogoyf is a last pick in cube because synergy is often better than raw power.

That never stops me from drafting 5-color Planeswalkers at every opportunity.

 

[Grunker]

To be fair, Tarmogoyf is a last pick in cube because synergy is often better than raw power.

That never stops me from drafting 5-color Planeswalkers at every opportunity.

I've been trying to make RG Bloodbraid-based midrange work since 2011 brother, I feel ya

 

[J1M]

Who said it had to be data? (Besides my jab at his laughable claim that he would give a lesson in statistics, of course.)

A descriptive fact is just anything derived from the actual game. Like "Delirium is a shit mechanic, here's why, and here's how that shows a game in decline." Delirium is a part of Magic, it's something derived from the actual game.

So no, I'm not being unreasonable. I'm asking that his arguments about why Magic is in decline be based on arguments about, you know, fucking Magic: the Gathering. And, well, also lolling at how many words you can spend on something without ever actually talking about it.

How about Magic Duels is shit compared to Hearthstone? Even though Hearthstone showed them exactly how to make said product? And they've had several previous attempts at it? Blizzard is eating Wizard's lunch and raking in money with a digital version which is after the same CCG dollars.

A digital version of Magic is Hasbro's wet dream. It costs Blizzard nothing to create a new pack of cards, a new player has to purchase everything because cards cannot be gifted or traded, and it is always possible to find someone to play with outside of a Friday Night Magic event.

Another company literally drew them a blueprint of how to make their game generate massive revenue, and they still fucked it up. That's why people watch Hearthstone qualifiers on Twitch, and you've never heard of an eSports broadcast for Magic: The Gathering.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Sure, Magic Duels is crap, but you also have to account for differences between the games that can never be reconciled. For example, just because the opponent has the chance to respond after every card you play instantly throws out about 90% of the Hearsthone players/watchers. It's worse than ropers in that regard.
Better presentation and overall speed would've helped, though.

 

[Coma White]

Honestly, Duels doesn't even count as Magic. Folks who are serious about Magic only buy it for whatever promo is being offered with whichever version that year.

 

[Grunker]

Who said it had to be data? (Besides my jab at his laughable claim that he would give a lesson in statistics, of course.)

A descriptive fact is just anything derived from the actual game. Like "Delirium is a shit mechanic, here's why, and here's how that shows a game in decline." Delirium is a part of Magic, it's something derived from the actual game.

So no, I'm not being unreasonable. I'm asking that his arguments about why Magic is in decline be based on arguments about, you know, fucking Magic: the Gathering. And, well, also lolling at how many words you can spend on something without ever actually talking about it.

How about Magic Duels is shit compared to Hearthstone? Even though Hearthstone showed them exactly how to make said product? And they've had several previous attempts at it? Blizzard is eating Wizard's lunch and raking in money with a digital version which is after the same CCG dollars.

A digital version of Magic is Hasbro's wet dream. It costs Blizzard nothing to create a new pack of cards, a new player has to purchase everything because cards cannot be gifted or traded, and it is always possible to find someone to play with outside of a Friday Night Magic event.

Another company literally drew them a blueprint of how to make their game generate massive revenue, and they still fucked it up. That's why people watch Hearthstone qualifiers on Twitch, and you've never heard of an eSports broadcast for Magic: The Gathering.

Magic: the Gathering Online is the most fucktastic cash cow this side of equator. To make a Duels game that competed with it would be folly.

What they should have done from a milking perspective, which might also be what you mean, is make Duels an even more streamlined version of the game that appeals even less to players like me. Take notes from Hearthstone as you say.

But the base Magic game/MTGO is basically to Hearthstone what Fallout is to Fallout 3. It might be "outdated", but fuck if it isn't a surperior game in almost every way.

 

[J1M]

Magic: the Gathering Online is the most fucktastic cash cow this side of equator. To make a Duels game that competed with it would be folly.

What they should have done from a milking perspective, which might also be what you mean, is make Duels an even more streamlined version of the game that appeals even less to players like me. Take notes from Hearthstone as you say.

But the base Magic game/MTGO is basically to Hearthstone what Fallout is to Fallout 3. It might be "outdated", but fuck if it isn't a surperior game in almost every way.

If you have specifics, I'd be interested in seeing those numbers. To the casual observer it looks like Magic Online is Blackberry and Hearthstone is Android. Sure, Wizards makes money, but the size of the market is growing much faster than relative growth, which over time leads to no longer being the market leader. Once that happens, the benefits of that position evaporate and market share recedes.

Ryan Dancey understood this, and that is why he pushed for the creation of the OGL for D&D.

 

[Grunker]

Numbers? You have some yourself or this just an internet argument?

Your logic is pretty faulty though. The average Hearthstone player has to put down way, waaaaaaaaaaay less money than the average MTGO player. MTGO players are adults with massive wallets and the game is expensive as fuck. Data analyst Lee Sharpe once said he was surprised at how much activity they got from places like Iraq and Dubai until he realized stationed troops had nothing else to do but play Magic. I'm rocking a limited rating of 1900 as of late which is above my normal maximum and far above the average. Yet I'm still not infinite; I'm still spending quite a lot of cash to play limited. At 2200, you start to brake even. At the normal average ~1400-1500, you're spending $10 per draft.

As far as numbers go, I actually do have some:

They recently DOUBLED the number of slots in MTGO Championship Qualifier. So that's a tournament where you have to earn 35 qualifier points to participate. That means only players who qualify are people who have won Swiss tournaments or seconded 8-4's 35 times. Maybe won a few 8-4s. And despite the doubling of slots, the tournament filled up 28 hours before the actual event.

MOCS Qualifiers are the top percentage of MTGO's player base. Playing in one takes an entire day off of your calendar. Every player has participated in at least around 35 drafts if they extremely good. When that shit gets filled up so quickly, thinking that MTGO doesn't turn a massive profit seems extremely dubious to me.

 

[Theldaran]

Don't give me shit. D&D died the moment Gygax stopped handling everything. Anything else is rubbish!!!1111!!!1