Tolarian Community College Review -- MtG:PQ

jackvett

Video can be found here

It's a high-level synopsis by a very casual player, but as a dedicated player I agreed with many of his points.

At the end of the day though, with 23,000 views and a very popular channel his message will surely get out there. I'm interested if we're going to get any official response, since the video calls out those responsible for setting the economics of the game for being motivated primarily by greed.

It directly references and links to Dr. Richard Garfield's critique of skinnerbox practices used by gaming companies, and sets the crosshairs on D3/Hibernum for creating a game that functions primarily as a cash grab, and second as a MtG/Match-3 game.

Also some throwaway points about PW rotating out of the store, events being the only break in the tedium, and mechanics not operating logically (madness) but that gets eclipsed

A link to Garfield's Facebook post if you missed it the first time around

yunnnn

jackvett wrote:

Video can be found here

It's a high-level synopsis by a very casual player, but as a dedicated player I agreed with many of his points.

At the end of the day though, with 23,000 views and a very popular channel his message will surely get out there. I'm interested if we're going to get any official response, since the video calls out those responsible for setting the economics of the game for being motivated primarily by greed.

It directly references and links to Dr. Richard Garfield's critique of skinnerbox practices used by gaming companies, and sets the crosshairs on D3/Hibernum for creating a game that functions primarily as a cash grab, and second as a MtG/Match-3 game.

Also some throwaway points about PW rotating out of the store, events being the only break in the tedium, and mechanics not operating logically (madness) but that gets eclipsed

A link to Garfield's Facebook post if you missed it the first time around

Thanks for posting the links! I agree to all the points made in the video, and it was the source of inspiration for my post yesterday:
viewtopic.php?f=31&t=54974

I think the main reason that I haven't abandoned this game is that the core game concept isn't bad, and the game is not knee deep in Skinnerville territory. The game doesn't really force you to pay anything, and can be played for free quite effectively (I argue that it's the most fun way to play it).

However, there are a couple of issues which are incredibly detrimental to the IAP experience, and are really a slap in the face to anyone who feels nice enough to spend money.

The IAP in this game is fundamentally unfun:
[list=4][*]Bugs for individual cards need to be aggressively fixed. IAP feels disgusting when we pay for cards that will crash the game.[/*]
[*]The game's IAP feels incredibly expensive with respect to the quantity of dupes. Dupes provide no game progression, and are incredibly unfun. Spending 20$ or 100$ on all dupes and no progression = most players will never IAP again.[/*]
[*]The 30$ "Pay2win" money gates for certain cards. Once the exclusives get pushed into the set, they are nearly impossible to obtain. Being able to buy cards to get way ahead in the game is fundamentally unfun.[/*]
[*]Event stability. It's really hard to ask us to pay money to make decks to compete in events, only to lose to server hiccups.[/*][/list]

All of the issues above create a negative stimulus for spending money in this game, and discourage players from future IAPing. This game's operators should realize that the satisfaction level of IAP is what fundamentally drives it.


TL;DR: We're all sitting here with big wallets full of money, but the game doesn't make it appealing to spend it. The article and video is not meant to shoot down the game, but rather explain how a positive game experience will cause players to naturally spend money and support you.

Make a good game with a positive experience, as well as a positive IAP experience, and money will naturally come to you. And if this isn't done, the game will just lose players who think the game is trying to graft from them.

octal9

yunnnn wrote:

IAP feels disgusting when we pay for cards that will crash the game.

My butthole clenches a little every time I'm up against a red planeswalker with my Ulrich/Geier combo.

jetnoctis

yunnnn wrote:

jackvett wrote:

Video can be found here

It's a high-level synopsis by a very casual player, but as a dedicated player I agreed with many of his points.

At the end of the day though, with 23,000 views and a very popular channel his message will surely get out there. I'm interested if we're going to get any official response, since the video calls out those responsible for setting the economics of the game for being motivated primarily by greed.

It directly references and links to Dr. Richard Garfield's critique of skinnerbox practices used by gaming companies, and sets the crosshairs on D3/Hibernum for creating a game that functions primarily as a cash grab, and second as a MtG/Match-3 game.

Also some throwaway points about PW rotating out of the store, events being the only break in the tedium, and mechanics not operating logically (madness) but that gets eclipsed

A link to Garfield's Facebook post if you missed it the first time around

Thanks for posting the links! I agree to all the points made in the video, and it was the source of inspiration for my post yesterday:
viewtopic.php?f=31&t=54974

I think the main reason that I haven't abandoned this game is that the core game concept isn't bad, and the game is not knee deep in Skinnerville territory. The game doesn't really force you to pay anything, and can be played for free quite effectively (I argue that it's the most fun way to play it).

However, there are a couple of issues which are incredibly detrimental to the IAP experience, and are really a slap in the face to anyone who feels nice enough to spend money.

The IAP in this game is fundamentally unfun:
[list=4][*]Bugs for individual cards need to be aggressively fixed. IAP feels disgusting when we pay for cards that will crash the game.[/*]
[*]The game's IAP feels incredibly expensive with respect to the quantity of dupes. Dupes provide no game progression, and are incredibly unfun. Spending 20$ or 100$ on all dupes and no progression = most players will never IAP again.[/*]
[*]The 30$ "Pay2win" money gates for certain cards. Once the exclusives get pushed into the set, they are nearly impossible to obtain. Being able to buy cards to get way ahead in the game is fundamentally unfun.[/*]
[*]Event stability. It's really hard to ask us to pay money to make decks to compete in events, only to lose to server hiccups.[/*][/list]

All of the issues above create a negative stimulus for spending money in this game, and discourage players from future IAPing. This game's operators should realize that the satisfaction level of IAP is what fundamentally drives it.


TL;DR: We're all sitting here with big wallets full of money, but the game doesn't make it appealing to spend it. The article and video is not meant to shoot down the game, but rather explain how a positive game experience will cause players to naturally spend money and support you.

Make a good game with a positive experience, as well as a positive IAP experience, and money will naturally come to you. And if this isn't done, the game will just lose players who think the game is trying to graft from them.

Here, here! I've been *itching* to spend money on this game for ages but I can't justify doing so due to the current model!

Tilikum

They need to pump some of that Ulrich / Olivia money into the infrastructure of the game. Rudimentary stuff like fixing bugs and enabling menus to run more smoothly. I think this game has the potential to really take off if they just took a couple steps backwards first.

wink

I worry a lot about the Pay to Win nature of the exclusive cards. When Olivia came out, I refused to buy on principle as it seemed so brokenly OP that it would hurt the game and make it less fun for everyone.

When Ulrich came out, I was sorely tempted because he looked really fun. But I balked at the price. Also it was when the game was super unstable, and I didn't want to "reward" Hibernum with my money when the game was in such a bad state that we couldn't even play it.

Emrakul came out, and I kinda felt the same way about her as I felt as Olivia, but less so as she is less obviously broken.

Now Gisela is available, and I feel the need to buy her just to keep up with other players. I can't compete with the Olivia/Ulrich/Emrakul decks out there, and it is really demoralizing and makes me resent the game and/or the skinnerware nature of the IAP. It makes me angry that I'm in a place where I feel like it isn't even pay-to-win anymore so much as it is pay-to-keep-up. Like I can't even maintain my place on the treadmill and am constantly falling behind if I don't pony up the money. I don't even feel like Gisela will be fun to play with (like I thought about Ulrich), but I feel compelled to buy her *anyway*. That is not a good feeling.

THEMAGICkMAN

honestly i think this review will bring a bunch of temporary F2Players who will leave after a short time. this game is just to difficult to succeed in at a high level for free, especially in a high level coalition. although i might be an exception to that, I have stopped playing for multiple reasons, I might come back, who knows. but still. this game is very unfriendly to F2Players wanting to play at a high level, its possible, as i have proven, but it isnt easy. and the fact that D3 is sponsoring multiple YouTubers (TCC and Desolator Magic) to give a highly influenced opinion of the game in the case of Desolator Magic, rather than spend this money on things to help the game in a bigger way. in addition to that some of the information in these videos was flat out untrue. at least D3 is doing something though right?