Looks like someone just finished there first year Econ 101 class. Thanks for explaining supply and demand...I didnt get it until you put it in MTGO terms. Sarcasm.
Micro-economics, like a closed secondary market (MODO) is pretty well understood and an article written to that effect really doesn't relate to modern American politics.
The overall economic infeasability of your MODO investment retaining much value would be a better topic to cover. The WoTC draft machine, a.k.a Magic Online is remarkably efficient at flooding the market with cards because of the overly egalitarian 4-3-2-2 queues.
If all drafts were 8-4-0-0 fewer players would drive the secondary market and demand would be higher across the board. It might even be worth buying booster packs JUST to crack them. Rare drafting would be more popular and there would be more reason to trade casually for deck-building purposes. There also might be fewer drafts running, which would help the community focus on casual, multiplayer and PRE play.
There would be a substantial reduction in supply and digital prices might start to approach paper ones, which would be good for the secondary market vendors like MTGOTraders and their unnamed competitors.
Also, its considered poor journalistic style to have a long-winded and ultimately irrelevant lead-in paragraph.
Liberals believe in laissez-faire economics - strict free markets with little to no interference from the state. Liberals also believe in upholding certain unalienable rights, including the right to free speech, to practice religion, and to own private property. In short, liberalism is about the individual and his or her rights.
Oh gosh there is a liberal aritcle up on my own website! Funny read even though I am a conservative and disagree with the above paragraph as far as liberalism goes. Conservatives are just as bad these days as we are no longer for small government anymore and are just as corrupt. Obama is just another Nixon/Clinton as far as i'm concerned and his recent move to withdraw from public financing just goes to prove it. I wish Colin Powel had run I would of voted for him in a heartbeat. Anyways good article anyways and please don't attack dragonmage just because you diagree with him.
Just wanted to say I enjoyed the article and am looking forward to more! I would love to see an economic rebuttal of Hammy's Wizards vs Spike article. Also on the different demand aspects of the different psychogenic profiles, and how they contribute to card prices.
"Yes, folks, I will freely and unabashedly confess to being a liberal. I think that Barack Obama is the coolest thing on the planet; it’s simply tragic that my spellchecker declines to recognize his first name without underlining it with a squiggly red line."
I thought only morons are for larger goverment/higher taxes and affirmative action. I'm pretty sure you never excelled in economics or common sense(thats why you're a liberal). Its completly liberal of you to complain spellchecker doesnt recognize hussien's name. In case you didnt realize hussien's name isnt in the dictionary(because its a muslim name). Try watching something other than MSNBC(thats in the tank for obama), like most of the media. I really implore you to read some conservative/republican books to atleast see both points of view, such as: Liberal Facism by Jonah Goldberg.
The end of magic thing was mostly based on the comments not the article.
I think you might be reading too much into the casual PEs. They are there because leagues are not ready to go. Doubt we'll see them once leagues come back.
Dunno, I could be wrong. Seems to me though that MTGO has so many issues right now it is hard to draw parallels to paper magic stuff.
Actually, the reason I didn't add Mythics and Lands per pack to the article is because I don't see that as anything hurting the Spikes (the thrust of this article was based around that). Since we haven't seen the actual impact of Mythic rares yet I'm not going to pass any jugement about them yet. :)
While it may be aimed at making MTG more casual friendly I don't see it as a cost to spikes to do so.
Eh, I dunno. They said exactly the same thing about OLS, the last "tribal" block - too kiddie, too timmy, etc. These things ebb and flow, each block WoTC builds will appeal to a slightly different demographic. A "newbie block" coming after a block that was a giant in-joke fanservice to longtime players doesn't seem all that unreasonable.
And really, there's nothing more amusing than a "Spike" obsessing over how the "look" of the cards has become too "kiddie." I'm sorry, MtGO art has always been infantile and unsophisticated, just infantile and unsophisticated in different ways. It's not like giant grotesquely muscular demon with a huge flaming sword is any less risible than prancing elves and fairies. They're both adolescent wish fulfillment fantasies, just in different ways. Personally, I've always found the flavor side of MtG hugely embarassing (have you ever tried to actually read one of those MtG novels?), no matter what the specific theme du jour was.
The only thing I have to say about it, is that I came away from the article with the idea you weren't making any statement or argument other than "watch out!" While I understand what you are getting at, alot of the casual readers may not. Just my 2 mana.
Oh, and anon, what is the statement about basic lands in packs and mythic rares? I haven't heard anything at all about this, and only even knew anything about mythic rares because of the inculsion in the Magic Card Editor. Can you clue me in or at least direct me to something I can read about it? Thanks in advance.
I think a lot of the changes we've seen lately are at least partially tied to making things more 'casual friendly'.
I don't think enticing casual players to play in tournaments is a bad thing. It is in fact a very good thing if it can be done.
I do have concerns about what has been given up to make this happen. But that's not to say that it will be a bad thing overall, just something that concerns me.
If all you got out of this article was "It's the end of magic!", I'd like to ask that you read it again. That's not even close to the point I was going for, nor was it ever even mentioned that these things are killing Magic, nor did I say that these are bad things for the long term health of the game. I do see a cause for concern about the changes to tournaments, and the impacts that that will have.
MTGO is part of MTG. If MTG is trying to recruit players and start up the Wizards Play Network at the cost of a Pro Tour. Not to mention that the guy in charge of ALL of North America Magic the Gathering tournaments is our very own Scott Larabee. The guy behind the recent changes to the Intentional Draws. And the guy who approved the Casual PE setup. I think it's safe to believe that there's not pressure on Worth/MTGO to follow the path that paper MTG is taking right now.
I don't know about the timing of the article. Personally I don't think that most of the MTGO stuff you talk about is related to the changes in paper/DCI stuff.
Walker i have to agree w/ evu. You are much better then you let yourself on to be. Luck is part of the game but you consistently break in to the money whenever you deign to play a tourny. In all seriousness i consider you to be one of the better classic players out there and rue the match ups when i draw in to you for a round. But not to over inflate your ego there is always room to improve as you said you would like to get "better" and you probaly know where your weakness are in any given format you participate in. So yea let loose of the humble ness just a bit as mind games can lose you matches just as much as random luck or skill vs skill. Keep on trucking there walker.
I think you give yourself too little credit in the skill department; you always seem to me to be a capable and thoughtful player. In any case, the advice in this article is very good. Much -- probably the majority -- of the work that goes into winning a tournament takes place outside of the actual games.
Excellent article. I was suprised you didn't find the announcement about basic lands in packs and mythic rares to be part of this, but I certainly think that WOTC is going after a new demographic and flushing another down the drain. I'm also really surprised that they think that new players will be so much more lucrative than dedicated spikes.
It seems to me that I spend much more on this game that either a casual player or a new player would since serious tournament play in block and t2 is going to require lots of playsets of rares from multiple sets if you want to be able to field all the decks in the metagame. I wish I could say that I'll quit, but i know it's not the case yet as I'm hopelessly addicted. I suppose I just have to hope it doesn't get too much worse
As a side note, I've noticed v3 having a lot more issues with difficulty making/joining games in the tournament practice areas and others. I'm not sure if this signals things to come or not, but certainly one has to wonder about where wizards priorities lie.
They are definitly losing the old players from mtgo (i don play paper, so idk bout that). I understand the need for more players, but the way the game has alway gotten new players is by the old players teaching them. When the old players dont play anymore the game is dead.
I want one copy of each of the legends, like Oona, Queen of the Fae, because Elder Dragon Highlander – and multiplayer as a whole – will eventually return. I’m in no rush, however. And while I may eventually buy those cards, I hope I open Oona. She’s a bomb in limited, especially sealed.
Is this a joke? I do know that not alot of ppl plays multiplayer or EDH anymore but to say it's not online?
Awesome article Hammy, I appreciate all the hard work and thought you put into MTGO.
I've been playing online for years and years now, like many others, and I went thru the school of "casual noob" to a spike. I rose myself from a random noob to a leader of multiplayer's top clan. I noticed something was really different with magic in lorwyn. It was wayyy too f'n timmy-ish.
At the local cardshop, it sold by the dozens and brought alot of new players in. While online it changed up our multiplayer metagame. It wasn't until V3 that really killed it for me. I havent played more then 20 games online on V3 i hate it so much. And the new sets suck soo much, and now I realize it's like you said, they're trying to sacrifice spike's for more new players.
I'm afriad that WOTC won't realize that Lor/Mor/Sha is like a passing fad, and all those new players that they brought in wont end up liking magic, or get sick of it and find a new game like wow, and all the spikes that spent so much damn money on the game are off playing other games like wow now too. Cause WOTC stuck a knife in their back.
Per Tournament: If I have money involved (a.e. a PE), I'll usually spend 5ish hours that week at least if I'm running a deck that is new to me or trying to build a deck (It can get to 10+ if I build a deck seriously). If it's more of a casual event (PDC and 8mans and whatnot), then I'll typically practice a couple hours, but not as focused (and it may be 5+ decks that I'm playing with to just get a feel for them, rather than trying to master them).
I have a friend-list full of people, and MOST of them are willing to test their preferred format at any time. If all else fails, I'll just make a game in the TP room to kill time while I wait for someone to get on. Good playtest partners are such a huge asset.
I liked the no t8 PE I was in where after six rounds of swiss people with 12 points had slots #7-17. Silly as all hell hope WOTC changes things back to matching v2&paper.
Looks like someone just finished there first year Econ 101 class. Thanks for explaining supply and demand...I didnt get it until you put it in MTGO terms. Sarcasm.
Micro-economics, like a closed secondary market (MODO) is pretty well understood and an article written to that effect really doesn't relate to modern American politics.
The overall economic infeasability of your MODO investment retaining much value would be a better topic to cover. The WoTC draft machine, a.k.a Magic Online is remarkably efficient at flooding the market with cards because of the overly egalitarian 4-3-2-2 queues.
If all drafts were 8-4-0-0 fewer players would drive the secondary market and demand would be higher across the board. It might even be worth buying booster packs JUST to crack them. Rare drafting would be more popular and there would be more reason to trade casually for deck-building purposes. There also might be fewer drafts running, which would help the community focus on casual, multiplayer and PRE play.
There would be a substantial reduction in supply and digital prices might start to approach paper ones, which would be good for the secondary market vendors like MTGOTraders and their unnamed competitors.
Also, its considered poor journalistic style to have a long-winded and ultimately irrelevant lead-in paragraph.
just food for thought.
Ah, my bad IA4l! I thought you were talking about the article. :)
Liberals believe in laissez-faire economics - strict free markets with little to no interference from the state. Liberals also believe in upholding certain unalienable rights, including the right to free speech, to practice religion, and to own private property. In short, liberalism is about the individual and his or her rights.
Oh gosh there is a liberal aritcle up on my own website! Funny read even though I am a conservative and disagree with the above paragraph as far as liberalism goes. Conservatives are just as bad these days as we are no longer for small government anymore and are just as corrupt. Obama is just another Nixon/Clinton as far as i'm concerned and his recent move to withdraw from public financing just goes to prove it. I wish Colin Powel had run I would of voted for him in a heartbeat. Anyways good article anyways and please don't attack dragonmage just because you diagree with him.
Just wanted to say I enjoyed the article and am looking forward to more! I would love to see an economic rebuttal of Hammy's Wizards vs Spike article. Also on the different demand aspects of the different psychogenic profiles, and how they contribute to card prices.
You amuse me. Try reading the whole introduction before you go all Bill O'Reilly on me for a change, yes?
"Yes, folks, I will freely and unabashedly confess to being a liberal. I think that Barack Obama is the coolest thing on the planet; it’s simply tragic that my spellchecker declines to recognize his first name without underlining it with a squiggly red line."
I thought only morons are for larger goverment/higher taxes and affirmative action. I'm pretty sure you never excelled in economics or common sense(thats why you're a liberal). Its completly liberal of you to complain spellchecker doesnt recognize hussien's name. In case you didnt realize hussien's name isnt in the dictionary(because its a muslim name). Try watching something other than MSNBC(thats in the tank for obama), like most of the media. I really implore you to read some conservative/republican books to atleast see both points of view, such as: Liberal Facism by Jonah Goldberg.
The end of magic thing was mostly based on the comments not the article.
I think you might be reading too much into the casual PEs. They are there because leagues are not ready to go. Doubt we'll see them once leagues come back.
Dunno, I could be wrong. Seems to me though that MTGO has so many issues right now it is hard to draw parallels to paper magic stuff.
This can be an Economy 101 first term paper graded with a C- ;) You forgot to add APA stle references buddy... Fun to read anyways.
http://www.wizards.com/leaving.asp?url=/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mr334...
"The year of livng Changerously"
Actually, the reason I didn't add Mythics and Lands per pack to the article is because I don't see that as anything hurting the Spikes (the thrust of this article was based around that). Since we haven't seen the actual impact of Mythic rares yet I'm not going to pass any jugement about them yet. :)
While it may be aimed at making MTG more casual friendly I don't see it as a cost to spikes to do so.
Just my thoughts, of course. :)
Eh, I dunno. They said exactly the same thing about OLS, the last "tribal" block - too kiddie, too timmy, etc. These things ebb and flow, each block WoTC builds will appeal to a slightly different demographic. A "newbie block" coming after a block that was a giant in-joke fanservice to longtime players doesn't seem all that unreasonable.
And really, there's nothing more amusing than a "Spike" obsessing over how the "look" of the cards has become too "kiddie." I'm sorry, MtGO art has always been infantile and unsophisticated, just infantile and unsophisticated in different ways. It's not like giant grotesquely muscular demon with a huge flaming sword is any less risible than prancing elves and fairies. They're both adolescent wish fulfillment fantasies, just in different ways. Personally, I've always found the flavor side of MtG hugely embarassing (have you ever tried to actually read one of those MtG novels?), no matter what the specific theme du jour was.
The only thing I have to say about it, is that I came away from the article with the idea you weren't making any statement or argument other than "watch out!" While I understand what you are getting at, alot of the casual readers may not. Just my 2 mana.
Oh, and anon, what is the statement about basic lands in packs and mythic rares? I haven't heard anything at all about this, and only even knew anything about mythic rares because of the inculsion in the Magic Card Editor. Can you clue me in or at least direct me to something I can read about it? Thanks in advance.
I think a lot of the changes we've seen lately are at least partially tied to making things more 'casual friendly'.
I don't think enticing casual players to play in tournaments is a bad thing. It is in fact a very good thing if it can be done.
I do have concerns about what has been given up to make this happen. But that's not to say that it will be a bad thing overall, just something that concerns me.
If all you got out of this article was "It's the end of magic!", I'd like to ask that you read it again. That's not even close to the point I was going for, nor was it ever even mentioned that these things are killing Magic, nor did I say that these are bad things for the long term health of the game. I do see a cause for concern about the changes to tournaments, and the impacts that that will have.
MTGO is part of MTG. If MTG is trying to recruit players and start up the Wizards Play Network at the cost of a Pro Tour. Not to mention that the guy in charge of ALL of North America Magic the Gathering tournaments is our very own Scott Larabee. The guy behind the recent changes to the Intentional Draws. And the guy who approved the Casual PE setup. I think it's safe to believe that there's not pressure on Worth/MTGO to follow the path that paper MTG is taking right now.
Well, thank you guys. I appreciate the positive feedback (but I'll stay humble)!
ITS THE END OF MAGICS!!!>!!!
I don't know about the timing of the article. Personally I don't think that most of the MTGO stuff you talk about is related to the changes in paper/DCI stuff.
Walker i have to agree w/ evu. You are much better then you let yourself on to be. Luck is part of the game but you consistently break in to the money whenever you deign to play a tourny. In all seriousness i consider you to be one of the better classic players out there and rue the match ups when i draw in to you for a round. But not to over inflate your ego there is always room to improve as you said you would like to get "better" and you probaly know where your weakness are in any given format you participate in. So yea let loose of the humble ness just a bit as mind games can lose you matches just as much as random luck or skill vs skill. Keep on trucking there walker.
I think you give yourself too little credit in the skill department; you always seem to me to be a capable and thoughtful player. In any case, the advice in this article is very good. Much -- probably the majority -- of the work that goes into winning a tournament takes place outside of the actual games.
Excellent article. I was suprised you didn't find the announcement about basic lands in packs and mythic rares to be part of this, but I certainly think that WOTC is going after a new demographic and flushing another down the drain. I'm also really surprised that they think that new players will be so much more lucrative than dedicated spikes.
It seems to me that I spend much more on this game that either a casual player or a new player would since serious tournament play in block and t2 is going to require lots of playsets of rares from multiple sets if you want to be able to field all the decks in the metagame. I wish I could say that I'll quit, but i know it's not the case yet as I'm hopelessly addicted. I suppose I just have to hope it doesn't get too much worse
As a side note, I've noticed v3 having a lot more issues with difficulty making/joining games in the tournament practice areas and others. I'm not sure if this signals things to come or not, but certainly one has to wonder about where wizards priorities lie.
Not really. This article appears to have gotten lost in the server migration. It was submitted a while ago.
They are definitly losing the old players from mtgo (i don play paper, so idk bout that). I understand the need for more players, but the way the game has alway gotten new players is by the old players teaching them. When the old players dont play anymore the game is dead.
The very, very first impression that struck me when I saw Lorwyn was this:
"Saturday Morning Cartoons."
For the first time, I'm beginning to believe that Wizard's days may be numbered.
Awesome article Hammy, I appreciate all the hard work and thought you put into MTGO.
I've been playing online for years and years now, like many others, and I went thru the school of "casual noob" to a spike. I rose myself from a random noob to a leader of multiplayer's top clan. I noticed something was really different with magic in lorwyn. It was wayyy too f'n timmy-ish.
At the local cardshop, it sold by the dozens and brought alot of new players in. While online it changed up our multiplayer metagame. It wasn't until V3 that really killed it for me. I havent played more then 20 games online on V3 i hate it so much. And the new sets suck soo much, and now I realize it's like you said, they're trying to sacrifice spike's for more new players.
I'm afriad that WOTC won't realize that Lor/Mor/Sha is like a passing fad, and all those new players that they brought in wont end up liking magic, or get sick of it and find a new game like wow, and all the spikes that spent so much damn money on the game are off playing other games like wow now too. Cause WOTC stuck a knife in their back.
Per Tournament: If I have money involved (a.e. a PE), I'll usually spend 5ish hours that week at least if I'm running a deck that is new to me or trying to build a deck (It can get to 10+ if I build a deck seriously). If it's more of a casual event (PDC and 8mans and whatnot), then I'll typically practice a couple hours, but not as focused (and it may be 5+ decks that I'm playing with to just get a feel for them, rather than trying to master them).
I have a friend-list full of people, and MOST of them are willing to test their preferred format at any time. If all else fails, I'll just make a game in the TP room to kill time while I wait for someone to get on. Good playtest partners are such a huge asset.
I liked the no t8 PE I was in where after six rounds of swiss people with 12 points had slots #7-17. Silly as all hell hope WOTC changes things back to matching v2&paper.