[Free Article] The Ages of Magic and the Future of the Game

[Delha]

If you had done so, there would be no reason for you to ask if anyone else was opposed to the idea of spending money on virtual cards. You'd know that multiple people here already agree.

Contributing to the thread's purpose, I am within my rights to voice my opinion about how MTGO is not a means that will retain me as a future player.  I am allowed to echo the opinions of other people.  I am also allowed to provide contrary opinions, that may spark discussion.

You're clearly not understanding my point. The conversation went something like this:
Guy 1: MTGO is a good option when you have limited time.
Guy 2: I don't like MTGO
Guy 3: I don't like MTGO
Me: Yeah, I'm not a fan of MTGO either.
You: Am I the only one here who doesn't like MTGO?

Can you see now why it looks like you didn't read the thread? I respond to all posters the same. If I agree, I say so. If I disagree, I say so. If their post has little content or flawed reasoning, I call them on it. It doesn't matter if your post count is five or five thousand. I respond to content and presentation. As stated in my last post, if you had just included some reasons why you dislike MTGO in the original post, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Also, to repeat: A big part of why I bashed your MTGO rant is because you made an aggresive, uninformed, and irrelevant attack on the analogy I made to Chess. I was irritated with you, which is why I took the tone I did.

Most of the discussion here has been intelligent, although I fail to see how Magic can be compared to Coke, Barbie or Chess.

That is because you're looking at Magic as a whole. We're not trying to compare the entire product, the analogies that we are making focus on very specific aspects of the objects in question. Coke is a consumable, Barbies are not. MtG falls in between because it is technically not consumable, but requires continual purchase as if it were.

Again, as per my last post, I'm not claiming that Chess is a better game than Magic. I'm saying that it is much easier to stop playing Chess for a few years and pick up where you left off than if you tried to do the same with Magic. If you think this is untrue, then say as much, and why. If you'd like further clarification on the analogies, I'll happily provide it. Stay on topic and civil, and I'll respond in kind.

Magic is a fairly unique product, with a short sales history.  Magic is charting new territory, where no other gaming genre has gone before.  I suspect that Wizards have been overwhelmed by the popularity and explosion of interest in Magic.  There is more pressure on Wizards to 'get it right', but what's right for some players isn't always right for others.

I don't agree with this, but even if I did, that doesn't matter. It's irrelevant to the Coke/Barbie or Magic/Chess comparisons being made.

Personally, I don't want to see Magic 'hit the heights' and then fade away.  A long-term, consistent product is far more desirable for me.

Neither do any of us. The entire point of this thread is discussing ways to ensure that MtG remains a long tem, consistent product.

[tezzajw]

Also, to repeat: A big part of why I bashed your MTGO rant is because you made an aggresive, uninformed, and irrelevant attack on the analogy I made to Chess.

My MTGO 'rant' was valid.  My 'rant' was shared by others.  The phrasing of my MTGO 'rant' was off-the-cuff and delivered light-heartedly.  I apologise, as it could have been stated better.  I knew others shared the opinion, which is why I light-heartedly typed 'Am I the only one...'.  My mistake.

The 'attack' on Chess was factual for the very reasons that I listed.  Chess requires far less skill, time, money and resources when compared to Magic. 

The 'attack' on Chess was not uninformed.  Presently, Chess is only worth playing because the full decision tree map has not yet been solved.  If the day arrives when Chess is fully mapped, then it will be a simple game to crack.  Imagine some day in the future, with the complete Chess.APP on the iPhone3000X, guiding you to the optimal play.  It could happen.  Remember, when players play a game, they do so to win.  Therefore, both players want to play optimally.  Presently, without a complete decision tree map, both players in Chess may play less than optimally and make mistakes.  If both players have access to the optimal plays (via computer) then the game will be redundant in the same way that Tic-Tac-Toe is.

Chess is a static game.  The same pieces are always used.  The initial board state is always the same.  Players (not luck) determine which branches of the decision tree will be visited.  Again, with a completely mapped decision tree, players of the future will not need to decide their play, as they will be able to use a computer to map the optimal path.  If/when Chess is ever cracked, then it will only be worth playing without computer assistance.  The entire cracked decision tree map for Chess could be hosted online, so all one will need is an internet connection to the hosting website.

Magic is a dynamic game.  The deck comprises different cards, chosen by the players.  Most cards are drawn randomly, without player choice.  Some in-game mechanics are based on random outcomes, using coin flips.  While players can influence their play, by making the 'best' sequence of moves, luck can still trump them.

Chess has no collectable aspect like Magic does.

For those reasons, Chess is an irrelevant analogy to Magic.

I can understand that Chess is steeped in tradition and some people may provide resistance, when the nature of the game is challenged.

I was irritated with you, which is why I took the tone I did.

Perhaps, when posting online, you should take a deep breath before you submit your post.  We're only discussing games here.  I don't see any reason to become irritated in such a discussion.

That is because you're looking at Magic as a whole.

The topic of the thread is looking at the future Magic.

Coke is a consumable, Barbies are not. MtG falls in between because it is technically not consumable, but requires continual purchase as if it were.

Magic sets a new trend, unlike Coke, Chess and Barbies.  Magic is a game.  Magic is also a collectable past time.  Magic can appeal to different people for different reasons.  The entire genre of CCGs is new, thanks to the popularity of Magic. 

I doubt that will I need to directly respond to your points any further.  I've been on enough forums to know when I might be drifting off-topic.  You can have the last words, as many times as you like.  I'll conclude my interest with you in this thread.

[Delha]

I doubt that will I need to directly respond to your points any further.  I've been on enough forums to know when I might be drifting off-topic.  You can have the last words, as many times as you like.  I'll conclude my interest with you in this thread.

I'll take you up on that. Let's see if you're capable of sticking to your guns.

Chess requires far less skill, time, money and resources when compared to Magic.

Nobody said that Chess is good and Magic is bad, or vice versa (until you did). I just said that if you play both, and put them down for a few years, Chess is easier to pick up again.

My entire point was that Magic is harder to start/restart than Chess because of the time and money commitment it demands. Ironically, you've repeated my claim almost to the letter. Unfortunately, you then used it as a jumping off point for people having iPhones decide their Chess moves for them. Here's a little secret for you: Technology already does lots of things better than humanly possible. That's why we limit or disallow the use of said technology in human competition.

If you're a troll, I salute you. If not, I despise you.

Not acceptable.  Verbal warning for violation of Rule III, Inflammatory Posting (flaming).  -DA

Edit: Offending text removed.

[TracerBullet]

Finally got around to reading it.  Two points -

1 - Stop using the SCG model.  It makes you sound like a homer.  You could simply be more artful in the way you refer to alternates to Wizards' supported PTQs etc....

2- You assume that Legacy GP's successes are due to the non-PTQ format of the tournaments without ever sufficiently proving this claim.  Not to say that I disagree with you, just to say that you overstated your case.  Legacy is a ridiculously balanced format, where no one player can claim to truly have the advantage.  Couple it with an inherent nostalgia in today's cultural zeitgeist, and you have the building blocks of the most popular MTG format ever.  I simply think you ascribe too much to the tournament support and structure, and not enough to the play format itself.

[Far]

I want to make two points that I think are valid here:

1) The vintage community in general seems to focus more on prize support than any other group of Magic players I've been around.  

I think this may be a case of mistaking cause for effect.   That is, does the Vintage community focus more on prize support because Vintage players -- as a species - care more about that, or is it because Vintage players are older, and older players care more about that?  I think it's the latter.
There is a market ga, and I try to marshal all of the available evidence to make this case, by comparing various data points.  

Vintage players discuss prize pools more because prize pools typically need to be more dynamic. Players in other formats tend to be quite content with large piles of boosters from the newest set: sets that may at best contain 3 cards (often times common nonetheless) relevant cards to the vintage metagame. Not only do I often find myself giving away my entire deck when I play ROE Draft (or leaving it on the table--which I consider giving it to the masses), I am not really satisfied playing with thousands of dollars worth of deck for a chance to win a shot at a $40 Gideon.

Playing for cash is still a questionable thing for me, since spending 6 hours of utmost focus devoted to MTG pays out far less than half-assing my job for the afternoon, but, bartenders are a lot more open to cash than walking up to them with a binder and asking if they have 'trade.'

[Cyberpunker]

Speaking of bartenders, I personally would rather get a 2-3 bottles of wine or a case of beer rather than 12-15 booster packs. Even 2-3 bottles of whiskey will do.  

Honestly though, I really become disappointed with the prize if its boosters. I rather get individual cards because yeah boosters are virutally useless to a person playing Eternal Formats only. Sure you may pop a fetch, but you probably won't and you probably will end up recycling most of your prizes. I usually keep the lands and tokens though.

[Methuselahn]

Yea so, I didn't read the premium article cause I stopped my subscription a couple years ago.  I stopped it because I stopped playing Vintage.   I stopped playing Vintage because tournaments completely died out.  Tournaments completeley died out because the game is just too inaccessable.  Price of Magic too high, rewards are garbage, and Wotc offers nothing for support.

Vintage magic has no value to WotC, no matter what they say.  The longtime promise to not reprint power cards is the deathknell for Vintage.  It's ridiculous because reprinting Old Cards will not have any impact on the value of all those alphas and betas, really.  I'm sure reprinting those old cards would be legally hairy so why not just abandon it and focus new customers on obtainable cards.

You know, If I didn't sell all my cards to fund an entire Christmas, a hot new quad-core system, and a downpayment on a car I'd probably start playing again if this game actually had tens of thousands times more players (like the serious games out there) and a huge community to back it.   The game is still really fun, but the pool of players, interest and support is microscopic.

Sorry I didn't actually read the rest of this thread, but there ya go, input from someone who quit and why.

[Cyberpunker]

Yea so, I didn't read the premium article cause I stopped my subscription a couple years ago.  I stopped it because I stopped playing Vintage.   I stopped playing Vintage because tournaments completely died out.  Tournaments completeley died out because the game is just too inaccessable.  Price of Magic too high, rewards are garbage, and Wotc offers nothing for support.

Vintage magic has no value to WotC, no matter what they say.  The longtime promise to not reprint power cards is the deathknell for Vintage.  It's ridiculous because reprinting Old Cards will not have any impact on the value of all those alphas and betas, really.  I'm sure reprinting those old cards would be legally hairy so why not just abandon it and focus new customers on obtainable cards.

You know, If I didn't sell all my cards to fund an entire Christmas, a hot new quad-core system, and a downpayment on a car I'd probably start playing again if this game actually had tens of thousands times more players (like the serious games out there) and a huge community to back it.   The game is still really fun, but the pool of players, interest and support is microscopic.

Sorry I didn't actually read the rest of this thread, but there ya go, input from someone who quit and why.

Vintage tournaments do run in the hundreds in Europe still.

[Killane]

Yea so, I didn't read the premium article cause I stopped my subscription a couple years ago.  I stopped it because I stopped playing Vintage.   I stopped playing Vintage because tournaments completely died out.  Tournaments completeley died out because the game is just too inaccessable.  Price of Magic too high, rewards are garbage, and Wotc offers nothing for support.

Vintage magic has no value to WotC, no matter what they say.  The longtime promise to not reprint power cards is the deathknell for Vintage.  It's ridiculous because reprinting Old Cards will not have any impact on the value of all those alphas and betas, really.  I'm sure reprinting those old cards would be legally hairy so why not just abandon it and focus new customers on obtainable cards.

You know, If I didn't sell all my cards to fund an entire Christmas, a hot new quad-core system, and a downpayment on a car I'd probably start playing again if this game actually had tens of thousands times more players (like the serious games out there) and a huge community to back it.   The game is still really fun, but the pool of players, interest and support is microscopic.

Sorry I didn't actually read the rest of this thread, but there ya go, input from someone who quit and why.

Vintage tournaments do run in the hundreds in Europe still.

Must you rub it in

[DubDub]

For the record, SCG's premium time is down to a month, so this article should be free before the end of the week.  I for one am looking forward to reading it.

[Methuselahn]

Vintage tournaments do run in the hundreds in Europe still.

'Hundreds'   Awww, how cute.

hee hee

[DubDub]

As I mentioned, this article is now free.  I enjoyed the read.