Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought that Overwatch was born from the leftovers of Project Titan?
Indeed, they took some of the ideas of Project Titan (the world setting, and the art style, most likely) and built out characters that encompassed what they kind of wanted to do with the game in general.
I'd actually like to have seen what Titan was before they started converting it to Overwatch.
Because like it or not MTG isn't the industry standard anymore. So "but hearthstone" is exactly what it means, blizzard is making bank with it and it's highly likely someone at Hasbro wants a share of that pie that's much larger than Duels.I feel like every single argument from fans saying they know what's best for WOTC and Hasbro starts with "...but Hearthstone." Argumentum ad Hearthstone just doesn't work - MTG isn't Hearthstone. Trying to convert a version of MTG that is on parity with the paper game while utilizing a Hearthstone model doesn't make a lick of sense. It's like trying look left and right at the same time.
so what should we take from this?
should i sell my mtgo collection to the highest bidder?
The stuff about streaming revenue is also mostly just made up. There's no evidence to support that Magic Next is designed with that in mind; it's just people knowing what's best for WOTC and therefore ascribing those philosophies as actual-existing things without basis.
Because like it or not MTG isn't the industry standard anymore. So "but hearthstone" is exactly what it means, blizzard is making bank with it and it's highly likely someone at Hasbro wants a share of that pie that's much larger than Duels.
I'm back to playing a ton of hearthstone since MODO is just too expensive in addition to paper and Duels is shit.
Apple is making bank with phones, that doesn't mean WOTC is working on a Magic Phone.
The similarities between Hearthstone and MTG are frequently only superficial.
Yeah, but hasbro is a publicly traded company so the shareholders see a digital card game that's making serious bank and they want in, even if all they have in common is that they are card games.
I was in the process of writing a lengthy reply but it's just not worth it.Apple is making bank with phones, that doesn't mean WOTC is working on a Magic Phone.
The similarities between Hearthstone and MTG are frequently only superficial.
I was in the process of writing a lengthy reply but it's just not worth it.
Because you're being intentionally obtuse.Reasonable minds can disagree. Its a message board thread that's about this topic, I don't get why avoiding the debate is better than having it.
You mean, not agreeing with your argument.Because you're being intentionally obtuse.
No I mean equalizing WotC following Blizzard to WotC following Apple's leaf.You mean, not agreeing with your argument.
The dichotomy was intentional. It's because even in this thread, people don't seem to understand that Hearthstone and Magic aren't 1:1 direct competitors because the difference in their business models is huge. Magic isn't to Hearthstone what Android is to iOS.No I mean equalizing WotC following Blizzard to WotC following Apple's leaf.
You can't see it, but Hearthstone has 57k viewers whilst Magic has about 5k. And this is just me on a vertical monitor setup, you can't even see it on a regular monitor.
I'm not at all. Your argument is completely speculative and makes almost no sense from a logical standpoint beyond "well WOTC wants money." There's practically no evidence whatsoever that MTG is specifically targeting streaming and/or the general Hearthstone market (i.e. other than the few things they have in common), much less the ultimate conclusion that this will lead to MTGO and everyone's collections being deleted. It's just wild mass guessing.
The problem is that getting from the speculative statement that the digital initiative is, in fact, a direct Hearthstone competitor that will also include the deletion of all collections simply has no basis in evidence or even logic unless you jump to conclusions repeatedly.
Wizards has somehow navigated many years with MTGO and it still remains the premier way to play a proper game of digital game of Magic.
I never argued anything about online collections except that if they converted it for whatever it is they are making that there can't be trading.The dichotomy was intentional. It's because even in this thread, people don't seem to understand that Hearthstone and Magic aren't 1:1 direct competitors because the difference in their business models is huge.
The problem is that getting from the speculative statement that the digital initiative is, in fact, a direct Hearthstone competitor that will also include the deletion of all collections simply has no basis in evidence or even logic without jumping to several conclusions.
I love this deck, also they have blood soaked champ in there.
Wizards is lucky to have the physical game cornered.
Is the games/comic store market doing well? I was under the impression things generally look kinda dire.
They've slowly been going that direction and in China already are.The biggest logistical hurdle is that there's no real benefit of alienating existing players to chase a hypothetically larger market when there's no guarantee that market exists.
It reminds of the "WoW is going F2P" stuff from a few years ago. It's just speculation.
Not sure where Seth better known as Saffron olive got his data from but he said that the fall set of the year will always be the next selling set ever but that the growth rates have sunk drastically to just a few %.Paper magic is bigger than it's ever been, according to WOTC/MaRo. BFZ brought in a fuckton of new people with the Expeditions (that lottery aspect), and sales have been up and up for a long time.
The biggest logistical hurdle is that there's no real benefit of alienating existing players to chase a hypothetically larger market when there's no guarantee that market exists.
It reminds of the "WoW is going F2P" stuff from a few years ago. It's just speculation.
Not sure where Seth better known as Saffron olive got his data from but he said that the fall set of the year will always be the next selling set ever but that the growth rates have sunk drastically to just a few %.
The other side to your argument is that WOTC will do something entirely different or stay the course in what is otherwise an abysmal online presence (where you can reach millions more than paper magic).
The driving force of any company is growth. How can we get better, bigger than before? How can we encourage new sales, new interest?
There's already a lot of dissatifaction with MTGO and Magic as a whole online. People want to get invested, but as you can see already from streams of the paper game, it's not enough and/or interesting to watch without a digital interface to explain what's going on.
Speaking in relation to the "Deletion" of MTGO's collections, I'd hazard a guess that bleeding out users is the best and most relaxed way of making the transition easier; if it was a mass deletion and such it would be much more outrageous and warranting public apologies, etc. As it stands right now, the MTGO userbase is most likely made of up just hardcore MTG players (as the graph states) and isn't the "fun" side of the game that they would like to portray.
Alongside Familien, you're being obtuse because OF COURSE there's no extra data to go on besides speculation (and trends in the space); WOTC and Hasbro are keeping this shit close to the vest as they always have done for the longest time. They love their secrets.
It's only this way because it's the only program that can automate functions of the game without needing much interaction besides pressing the OK button. If there were a better version that superceded MTGO's actions most people would play that (even if it were a free game).
The best nearest client IMO is Cockatrice which allows you to just set the phases and requires both players to remember rules.
They've slowly been going that direction and in China already are.
You can play the game till lvl 20 for free the expansions are given away for free a year later, you can buy game time with gold, you can buy lvl boosts. Maybe some other stuff I don't remember.
Not sure where Seth better known as Saffron olive got his data from but he said that the fall set of the year will always be the next selling set ever but that the growth rates have sunk drastically to just a few %.
This is just assumption-assumption-conclusion backed by the vague principle (however true) that WOTC likes money. I have no idea how you figure making everyone buy all their cards over again would somehow translate to an increased userbase for WOTC, or that the Hearthstone playerbase could or would translate to MTGO. The existence of a dramatically larger playerbase that spends more money than the average entrenched MTGO player (which, as kirblar used to note was relatively speaking a LOT) is pure speculation. Hearthstone was literally designed from the ground-up to capture that audience. That is not to say there aren't aspects of Hearthstone that can be applied to Magic. There are. But the basic concept of the game is incompatible.
You are talking about the kind of gamble that could literally put WOTC out of business. Seriously: why would WOTC maintain the Reserved List, but then also delete all of the players cards? There's just no logic involved in deleting everyone's stuff and the basic online terminal to play the game in a similar form to paper with a substantially similar system.
I'm not trying to harp on you specifically, I just think your reasoning makes no logical or practical sense beyond "WOTC is bad at stuff."
I feel like every single argument from fans saying they know what's best for WOTC and Hasbro starts with "...but Hearthstone."
It's only this way because it's the only program that can automate functions of the game without needing much interaction besides pressing the OK button. If there were a better version that superceded MTGO's actions most people would play that (even if it were a free game).
The best nearest client IMO is Cockatrice which allows you to just set the phases and requires both players to remember rules.
I agree that arguments purely of the form "MTG should do X because Hearthstone does X" are deeply flawed -- like I certainly don't think they should switch to an all errata all the time methodology like HS has, and stuff like the Treasure Chests today that just emulate HS directly without understanding the reasons why HS does stuff one way are embarrassing.
But the reality is that WotC went from the pre-eminent brand in their market to a shitty also-ran 100% by failing to take Hearthstone seriously or to have a different compelling vision for a digital product that could compete with it. If they want to be successful digitally (which they do and should) they need to do it with something that doesn't actually look that much like MTGO in its current form.
The stuff about streaming revenue is also mostly just made up. There's no evidence to support that Magic Next is designed with that in mind; it's just people knowing what's best for WOTC and therefore ascribing those philosophies as actual-existing things without basis.
I don't understand why you guys just keep repeating "publicly traded company" as though it has some kind of meaning.
There's already a lot of dissatifaction with MTGO and Magic as a whole online.
Not sure where Seth better known as Saffron olive got his data from but he said that the fall set of the year will always be the next selling set ever but that the growth rates have sunk drastically to just a few %.
I have no idea how you figure making everyone buy all their cards over again would somehow translate to an increased userbase for WOTC, or that the Hearthstone playerbase could or would translate to MTGO.
If you can add another 1m users from that 12m by launching a new product, while only burning 250k of your existing userbase, that's an enormous boost to your business.
creating a new client with a good streaming interface could add a lot more player interest.
Yesss you explained it exactly as I imagined it
This is a big one. The interface needs to look like it's fucking a slot machine going off with bells and whistles attracting people going "oh that looks fun!"
Like combat. Quick transitions to actual combat (using 3d models or something) or something that evokes more of a "WOW, look at that!" feel would go a long way.
Like when vehicles hit the battlefield, they "drive onto it" or "fly in from above" and land, hovering or resting as if they really were vehicles.
There's so much room for more imaginative gameplay.
Yesss you explained it exactly as I imagined it
This is a big one. The interface needs to look like it's fucking a slot machine going off with bells and whistles attracting people going "oh that looks fun!"
Like combat. Quick transitions to actual combat (using 3d models or something) or something that evokes more of a "WOW, look at that!" feel would go a long way.
Like when vehicles hit the battlefield, they "drive onto it" or "fly in from above" and land, hovering or resting as if they really were vehicles.
There's so much room for more imaginative gameplay.
It's awesome that the intensity increases with power.The card bashing animations in Hearthstone work well enough. They're quick and clear.
Not really. Wizards is not doing a good job internationally at least not in europe. This is entirely anecdotally since I wouldn't have a clue where to look up stats but most cities from medium to humongous have only a few LGS (mine has 2 1 tiny and 1 rather small), there's no major online sellers. There's only magiccardmarket which is just a platform for private and business sellers, the concept of buylist is entirely foreign to me.Yeah, because they absorbed a giant new growth market. Magic has something like 10x as many players now as it did for most of the 2000s, it's natural for that growth to taper off at this point. Plenty of people in that expanded market don't play MTGO though, since clearly that hasn't had the same type of userbase growth.
I don't know why you say this. Hasbro even made a Powerpoint of what they see as Magic's brand strategy going forward that includes their plan for MDN to sunset MODO/Duels and their view of eSports and online viewership as one of the key future pillars of the brand: http://www.purplepawn.com/2015/11/magic-digital-next-in-development-by-hasbro/
It's relevant here only inasmuch as Hasbro reveals more about their medium-to-long-term strategy publicly than a privately-held company typically would because it wants its shareholders to get excited.
Right, I don't think there's an equivalent of this for IsHearthstoneStillBad.
Yeah, because they absorbed a giant new growth market. Magic has something like 10x as many players now as it did for most of the 2000s, it's natural for that growth to taper off at this point. Plenty of people in that expanded market don't play MTGO though, since clearly that hasn't had the same type of userbase growth.
I don't think you shouldn't assume either. Think about it this way: out of the 12 million Magic players worldwide, some small number (let's call it 1m) actually play Magic Online. If you can add another 1m users from that 12m by launching a new product, while only burning 250k of your existing userbase, that's an enormous boost to your business.
The way to do this isn't to do exactly what HS is doing (because Magic can never be as good at being Hearthstone as Hearthstone is); it's to look at more general areas in which HS is successful and find ways that Magic can improve. Like: HS gets a ton of promotion from streaming, while MTGO is ugly and hard to stream well; creating a new client with a good streaming interface could add a lot more player interest. HS is a game you can download for free and play infinite games, plus earn cards slowly over time; a core Magic product with an account shared across devices (like MTGO) that had a model of this type (like Duels) could pick up a ton of new players just by avoiding upfront expenditures. Hearthstone cards are cheap and feel like good value while MTGO cards are a far worse value than paper ones; eliminate redemption and you can suddenly change your pricing model to solve that. And so on, and so forth.
This is potentially illegal and WOTC has made it clear they are not going to assign value to specific cards in any context.See I think this is part of the disconnect. I think this is a much better idea than anything they've been doing in the past and I honestly don't highly prioritize whether people's MTGO collections get nuked.
My assertion would be that people on MTGO mostly draft (where your collection doesn't matter), collect for redemption (so they've already taken most of their value out), or grinding Standard (so most of their cards stop having any value after every rotation.) They could probably get away with giving people starting currency based on a very vague algorithm for "valuing" their MODO collections and cover a big portion of the user base.
I agree that arguments purely of the form "MTG should do X because Hearthstone does X" are deeply flawed -- like I certainly don't think they should switch to an all errata all the time methodology like HS has, and stuff like the Treasure Chests today that just emulate HS directly without understanding the reasons why HS does stuff one way are embarrassing.
But the reality is that WotC went from the pre-eminent brand in their market to a shitty also-ran 100% by failing to take Hearthstone seriously or to have a different compelling vision for a digital product that could compete with it. If they want to be successful digitally (which they do and should) they need to do it with something that doesn't actually look that much like MTGO in its current form.
Yesss you explained it exactly as I imagined it
This is a big one. The interface needs to look like it's fucking a slot machine going off with bells and whistles attracting people going "oh that looks fun!"
Like combat. Quick transitions to actual combat (using 3d models or something) or something that evokes more of a "WOW, look at that!" feel would go a long way.
Like when vehicles hit the battlefield, they "drive onto it" or "fly in from above" and land, hovering or resting as if they really were vehicles.
There's so much room for more imaginative gameplay.
This is an interesting problem. Why does Europe not have a game store culture the way the US has?Not really. Wizards is not doing a good job internationally at least not in europe. This is entirely anecdotally since I wouldn't have a clue where to look up stats but most cities from medium to humongous have only a few LGS (mine has 2 1 tiny and 1 rather small), there's no major online sellers. There's only magiccardmarket which is just a platform for private and business sellers, the concept of buylist is entirely foreign to me.
I don't think anyone doubted the power of Verdurous Gearhulk. At its worst, it's an 8/8 Trample for 5 mana, which is already absolutely ridiculous.