A Plea to Oktagon and D3

13

Comments

  • Thésée
    Thésée Posts: 239 Tile Toppler
    Ohboy said:
    babar3355 said:

    That's actually quite beautiful.  Original?

    I wish. It's the first part of the poem . The whole thing is beautiful. I heard it once recited on TV as a kid and it's stuck with me.

    http://www.potw.org/archive/potw52.html

    The author's sister, Christina Rosetti,wrote a famous poem about goblins :-)

    “We must not look at goblin men,
    We must not buy their fruits:
    Who knows upon what soil they fed
    Their hungry thirsty roots?”

    https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44996/goblin-market


  • Theros
    Theros Posts: 490 Mover and Shaker
    @Ohboy you misunderstood me and your argument is also not valid. Whosoever spends the money and put effort (hard work) into the game should easily get a complete collection. It makes sense business wise since this game periodically releases new content. Your argument that no one will spend when a collection is complete is therefor not valid my friend. P2P who put in hard works should also get easy collection for hard work. F2P players are after all  vital a the game.
    On the contrary, people will be discouraged to spend if they can not get what they want or there is a likelihood of getting of dupes.

    It's true that D3 gave so much at some point that some people feel entitled now. In response D3 exaggerated in nerf up to being as low as going from 3 to 1 card in free booster.  Their action was both damage control and greed (more greed). But that's bad management and has nothing to do or unrelated to  set collections.
  • babar3355
    babar3355 Posts: 1,128 Chairperson of the Boards

    Ultimately, I think we disagree mostly around the economics of the game.  I think we both think drop rates could be better.  We disagree a bit on whether it would be a positive or negative to have the possibility of collecting an entire set. We disagree a little on the structuring of prizes and the necessity to have worthwhile prizes (I say a little because I don't think the prizes should be mythics for a few and garbage for the masses.  I think everyone should get better prizes.. "pull the masses up rather than dragging the elites down").  Other than that we tend to agree on most things around ELO systems, card balance, and most other issues.

    But the "vehement" disagreement centers around our starkly different perceptions of the economy. 

    I believe your view is that they were creating tons of content and giving it away for free which led to a greatly hampered or even negative revenue stream.  They were forced to cut back on rewards and prizes in order to right the ship and stay in business.  In that view, they are the hapless party who wants to give us stuff but is forced to stop doing so because they are in jeopardy of going bankrupt.

    My view is that they were making lots of money but thought if they turned off the flow of quality prizes, players would be willing to spend far more money to keep getting new cards. They were willing to lose lots of players in order to get more outsized profits from the whales in the community. In this view, they are the greedy corporate executives who put a quarterly profit line ahead of the health of the game.

    We don't really know for sure which is the correct view. We do know that their gross revenue has plummeted in recent months, but perhaps that is due to the Hibernum closure and no Ixalan release.  Anecdotally, I know that every player I have talked to has spent less money on the game post prize nerfs. 

    Anyway, you see disbursements of prizes as a reduction in capital. I totally and completely reject that narrative.  There are tons of hugely successful games that are completely F2P and give away all of the playable content.  Take DotA 2 for instance which earns $18,000,000 in profits per month and is 100% F2P.  They haven't had to start charging to use new heroes because they "blew through their capital".  

    The only relevant question is "How do we maximize the long term profitability of the game?"  The solution to this question will ensure a happy and engaged community and clearly a profitable game.  But I just contend that being generous with prizes, creating additional non-card content, increasing drop rates and allowing players to more quickly build powerful collections will lead to this outcome. 

    Whether they print 1000 Olivia's or 100,000 is only important in that 100,000 suggests a larger player base.  If the poor drop rates are causing newer players to quit the game and their only focus is on whales that will spend $10,000/mo then the game will never last.  It is a very short-sighted business model.

    So, no... it is not obvious to me that they "have very little capital left to give out".  They could send every player in the game a random mythic and I do not think that would decrease their profits at all.  Ironically, a little generosity might encourage some reciprocity.

    I also find it a bit offensive that you think the player base deserves to get punished.  I am the customer.  If they made mistakes that skewed my view of the economy then that is on them.  Not me.

    It is equally glaringly obvious to me that everything above is true and I am equally frustrated that you don't see it that way. Although, I think we can both be more civil to each other and recognize that we just have different perceptions and aren't bad people.

    And finally, I have occasionally lashed out on the forums about the poor management of D3.  I do not want them to lose customer, but simply want to encourage them to effect change. If players agree with me and decide to quit, that is a shame.


  • Mainloop25
    Mainloop25 Posts: 1,959 Chairperson of the Boards
    Ohboy said:
    Mainloop25 said:
    How could you run out of cards to chase when new sets come out regularly? As long as the carrot isn't dangled too low, I don't see that being a big problem. 

    Deja vu

     I have been here before, 
     But when or how I cannot tell: 
     I know the grass beyond the door, 
     The sweet, keen smell, 
     The sighing sound, the lights around the shore.




    You'll have to explain the reference. If this was an actual response to my quote, it went over my head. 
  • babar3355
    babar3355 Posts: 1,128 Chairperson of the Boards
    Thésée said:
    Ohboy said:
    babar3355 said:

    That's actually quite beautiful.  Original?

    I wish. It's the first part of the poem . The whole thing is beautiful. I heard it once recited on TV as a kid and it's stuck with me.

    http://www.potw.org/archive/potw52.html

    The author's sister, Christina Rosetti,wrote a famous poem about goblins :-)

    “We must not look at goblin men,
    We must not buy their fruits:
    Who knows upon what soil they fed
    Their hungry thirsty roots?”

    https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44996/goblin-market


    Lol... But don't you want some tasty GoblinPile fruits?
  • Theros
    Theros Posts: 490 Mover and Shaker
    babar3355 said:

    Ultimately, I think we disagree mostly around the economics of the game.  I think we both think drop rates could be better.  We disagree a bit on whether it would be a positive or negative to have the possibility of collecting an entire set. We disagree a little on the structuring of prizes and the necessity to have worthwhile prizes (I say a little because I don't think the prizes should be mythics for a few and garbage for the masses.  I think everyone should get better prizes.. "pull the masses up rather than dragging the elites down").  Other than that we tend to agree on most things around ELO systems, card balance, and most other issues.

    But the "vehement" disagreement centers around our starkly different perceptions of the economy. 

    I believe your view is that they were creating tons of content and giving it away for free which led to a greatly hampered or even negative revenue stream.  They were forced to cut back on rewards and prizes in order to right the ship and stay in business.  In that view, they are the hapless party who wants to give us stuff but is forced to stop doing so because they are in jeopardy of going bankrupt.

    My view is that they were making lots of money but thought if they turned off the flow of quality prizes, players would be willing to spend far more money to keep getting new cards. They were willing to lose lots of players in order to get more outsized profits from the whales in the community. In this view, they are the greedy corporate executives who put a quarterly profit line ahead of the health of the game.

    We don't really know for sure which is the correct view. We do know that their gross revenue has plummeted in recent months, but perhaps that is due to the Hibernum closure and no Ixalan release.  Anecdotally, I know that every player I have talked to has spent less money on the game post prize nerfs. 

    Anyway, you see disbursements of prizes as a reduction in capital. I totally and completely reject that narrative.  There are tons of hugely successful games that are completely F2P and give away all of the playable content.  Take DotA 2 for instance which earns $18,000,000 in profits per month and is 100% F2P.  They haven't had to start charging to use new heroes because they "blew through their capital".  

    The only relevant question is "How do we maximize the long term profitability of the game?"  The solution to this question will ensure a happy and engaged community and clearly a profitable game.  But I just contend that being generous with prizes, creating additional non-card content, increasing drop rates and allowing players to more quickly build powerful collections will lead to this outcome. 

    Whether they print 1000 Olivia's or 100,000 is only important in that 100,000 suggests a larger player base.  If the poor drop rates are causing newer players to quit the game and their only focus is on whales that will spend $10,000/mo then the game will never last.  It is a very short-sighted business model.

    So, no... it is not obvious to me that they "have very little capital left to give out".  They could send every player in the game a random mythic and I do not think that would decrease their profits at all.  Ironically, a little generosity might encourage some reciprocity.

    I also find it a bit offensive that you think the player base deserves to get punished.  I am the customer.  If they made mistakes that skewed my view of the economy then that is on them.  Not me.

    It is equally glaringly obvious to me that everything above is true and I am equally frustrated that you don't see it that way. Although, I think we can both be more civil to each other and recognize that we just have different perceptions and aren't bad people.

    And finally, I have occasionally lashed out on the forums about the poor management of D3.  I do not want them to lose customer, but simply want to encourage them to effect change. If players agree with me and decide to quit, that is a shame.


    You made some good point; this is exactly what I think.

    Basically there are two arguments being made in here:
    1) Full collection is bad for the economy. People in favor of such that argument think that people wont spend if they have a full collection. Which is not true because of periodic new content. Many games do not see full set as economically negative.

    2) Full collection is bad because because some player will be unbeatable, no creativity in making decks and lack of joy of chasing cards.
    This is also incorrect. A properly balanced game is more about strategy and the more your collection is complete, the more ideas you put into play and the more creativity and fun. 
    Many games rely on creativity and do not make collection hard. 
    D3 making collection hard is purely economic and nothing to do with game balance, creativity and fun. This is what people fail to understand
  • James13
    James13 Posts: 665 Critical Contributor
    edited November 2017
    When I collect everything in a game, wether it be Pokemon or cards or imaginary achievement "trophies" or whatever, tends to be the time in which I move onto the next thing to complete.  Or if a game is still fun to play, maybe a scattered few minutes every other weekend or something, but with a sense that it's fully and utterly played out already and I should probably do something new.

    That's it.  The sense of maybe getting something new are what keep me playing here.  And while it gives that fun little rush to get something I don't want that chase gone.  I probably wouldn't even bother playing Nodes of Power if I already had From Beyond and Desolation Twin.  In a way, it's the not having things that keeps the game fresh for me.  The perpetual hunt.

    Doesn't have to be exactly the same for anyone, but I do generally believe having all your desires fulfilled is generally a bad thing from a creativity and enjoyment standpoint.  That's all.
  • luckyvulpi
    luckyvulpi Posts: 40 Just Dropped In
    One of us should ask Oktagon if they had taken the time to look through this game's patch history and the community's reaction to those changes... and then ask what they think of the game's current economical status (droprates, prizes, monthly/daily rewards ect.)

    I'm optimistic enough to believe that Oktagon can learn from Hibernum's mistakes.  They have already promised to communicate with us monthly and have changed the node cool down which shows they're willing to listen to us, so maybe it's time to stop looking into the past to ask 'what if?' and start looking into the future and asking 'what will?'

    Though if Oktagon drops the ball on communication in only the 2nd month, I'll be much less optimistic that things will change.
  • Gunmix25
    Gunmix25 Posts: 1,442 Chairperson of the Boards
    luckyvulpi said:

    Though if Oktagon drops the ball on communication in only the 2nd month, I'll be much less optimistic that things will change.

    It's been already stated why they haven't been communicating much as of right now... When they have something concrete to communicate... then they will. Otherwise anything they attempt to communicate based on something that may or may not be relevant would only serve to further annoy the player base. Especially so if continued changes to what they spoke about happens and thusly would only serve to confuse players as to where Oktagon is at in production and development. 

    In short, if they've got nothing nice to say about anything regarding the game because it's not working... then they don't talk about it until they do.

    IMHO they did read the past threads and are VERY aware of the constant theme of backlash from the gaming community when Hibernium said one thing and ended up changing it later on without any notice.

    Smart of Oktagon if you ask me.

  • luckyvulpi
    luckyvulpi Posts: 40 Just Dropped In
    @gunmix2
    I don't know what you're talking about, but when i said communication I was referring to the monthly Q/A sessions that were promised to happen every month.

    Communication doesn't always have to be an announcement of new content or patch you know.
  • Kinesia
    Kinesia Posts: 1,621 Chairperson of the Boards
    I agree that a full collection should be possible, that the company should work out how much that should cost.

    But _all_ of this is reliant on making every card balanced for it's mana cost, mythics shouldn't be more powerful for cost (at least not much). This is a fundamental lesson from paper magic and it's sorely needed here. All the common and uncommon cares need to be usable then and _only_ then can small collections compete with big collections.

    Big collections should have more _options_ not more _power_.
  • bk1234
    bk1234 Posts: 2,924 Chairperson of the Boards
    I would rather communication be meaningful -- if there isn't much to say, I don't want to see posts full of stuff that goes nowhere. Right now we are all just in wait and see mode, however, I find it encouraging how many players are trying to stay optimistic now that we know more about where the transition stands. 
  • luckyvulpi
    luckyvulpi Posts: 40 Just Dropped In
    @bken1234
    I think we're thinking of two different types of communication.  The Communication you're probably thinking of is 1 way communication where they say something, we listen and that's it.  If there was an announcement and all it said was that booster crafting is still not finished or something meaningless, I'd be kinda mad too.

    The communication I'd like to see more of is 2 way communication where we'd say something and they respond and vise versa.  This is most typically in the form of a Q/A thread where we would bring up questions and concerns and they would address them.  This does a lot to strengthen the trust between the community and then because it shows they listen to us and care and is a lot better than some messenger boy promising they'll tell the creators something then promptly never hearing anything from them again.  Ideally I would like 2 way communication to reach a point where it is meaningless since there isnt any feature delayed until X date, and the players are generally happy with the game and the Q/A is filled with lighthearted questions and suggestions for the game like 'who's your favorite planeswalker' or 'create inverse enrage' but we're definitely not at that point yet.  Reducing communication just because they don't anything meaningful to say while we have something meaningful to say doesn't help us reach that goal.
  • span_argoman
    span_argoman Posts: 751 Critical Contributor
    Some quick comments on this topic since I haven't found the time to give a proper reply.

    https://searchman.com/android/app/us/com.d3p.olympic/en/d3-go/magic-puzzle-quest/?d=android
    If you look at the graph from 01 Nov 2016 till the point that it was announced that Hibernum closed down (17 Aug 2017), while there is a slightly decreasing trend, the app rankings are still fairly stable. The app's rankings pretty much started crashing after the announcement that Hibernum's studio had closed down.

    The sharpest drop in the graph started 26 Nov 2016 and ended on 10 Dec 2016. What was happening in the game during this period? This was the tail-end of EM. This was months before austerity measures kicked in. The revenues picked back up once KLD released on 08 Dec 2016.

    What explanation might fit for why app revenues dropped drastically while the game was still in the era of abundance? Would it make sense for the developers to do something to avoid this from happening again in the future? I don't think the greedy developers narrative works very well with this timeline but correct me if I'm wrong.

    I'll try to comment in greater detail on the comparisons with other games (hopefully relatively) soon. But basically cherrypicking the top few games that can succeed by selling frivolous stuff (versus the many others, successful or not, which don't or can't) without factoring in why they are able to imo does not provide a practical example for MtGPQ to follow.
  • tfg76
    tfg76 Posts: 258 Mover and Shaker
    With perfect collections there's no real goals left.  Rankings and booster collections become meaningless.  The heart and soul of the game and similar collectible games is in the chase.  Further, imperfect collections breed creativity in using what you have.

    I think this is untrue to some extent. To me, the fun in playing any video game is to master progressively harder challenges. To be honest, I don´t really care about getting a perfect collection, but I do care about getting the cards that will make it possible for me to win more and reach the next "level".

    I, too, care about "unlocking" all the content, but to me that means finishing all the challenges (for competitive events, that means a perfect record). At the moment, the game is getting stale because I´ve basically done that. Once new content becomes available (new events), the game is more fun. If there were higher tiers of competition, that would make it more fun too. If I had a perfect collection, the game would only be more fun if there were new puzzles to figure out (meaning how to build and play decks to meet the objectives). But it could still be fun.

    When playing MTG, I basically did have a perfect collection (or at least had access to all cards when playing tournaments). Playing at the Pro Tour was still exciting because it was interesting to try to understand what other people would be playing, what would be the perfect deck, and so on.
  • blacklotus
    blacklotus Posts: 589 Critical Contributor
    @Kinesia i totally agree with you. The negative vibe i get from opening those 2-hour single card freebies result in me to totally not bother to login to open the pack if there is no game charges i need to clear.

  • TomB
    TomB Posts: 269 Mover and Shaker
    edited November 2017
    meh, I still log in whenever I can for my 2-hour dupe, but then, I've started holding onto my mana crystals in anticipation of the new set partly because I don't want to feel stupid blowing them on a whole bunch of dupes from the current, kinda lame set. Methinks you may have a point there Kinesia... :)
  • TheDragonHermit
    TheDragonHermit Posts: 465 Mover and Shaker
    I am about 100 crystals away from multiple pre release goal of 1250, 600 for the two premium pack and a chromic special and 650 just in case they release a green/black walker to scoop it up as soon as it hits the vault. As far as the 2hr booster goes, they buried the change deep within the upcoming features list, and posed it as a way to get more cards, which you can, technically, if you never sleep there was much griping and pointing out the flaws then too, but noone to listen to it, besides maybe @Brigby.

Categories