Enough with the Kvetching!!

andrewvanmarle

Mburn7 said:

If you've been playing a year and own every card in the game the game is poorly designed.  

If there are dozens of people with perfect scores in events the game is poorly designed.
If you can generate $10-20 in in-game currency every week, the game is poorly designed.

d A year? why a year???  If you can own every card without spending an exorbitant amount of money before the new wave of content arrives , that can create problems (of the player becoming bored)

the other two: perfect scores dont matter in the least. and generating ingame currency is good if it entices players to spend. nothing simpler than that 

FindingHeart8

Kinesia said:

Ok, What is "flag" on posts meant to do? I thought it was for flagging things as offensive to be moderated, but the flagged things in this post aren't like that at all. Is someone just being spiteful or does it have a different purpose?

that's what I thought too (moderating offensive posts).  I'm not sure if there's anything here worthy of flagging if that's true.  Some of us may be disagreeing, but I thought the conversation has been fairly civil overall.

FindingHeart8

Toodles said:

Frankly, I don't care what f2p players say or want. They are a leech on the system and the only thing they offer are a slightly wider variety of opposing decks. Spend some money so the game can continue to grow and improve.

 In fact, when you make an in game cash purchase you should receive a discount on packs and booster crafting for a set amount of time based on your purchase. And maybe gain increased rewards during the same 'post purchase' time frame. 

Great way to use your first post on these threads Toodles.

You're entitled to your opinion, but the marketing departments of most successful game apps disagree with you.

Free to play players are a resource of free marketing for a game.  They play it, they enjoy it, they might spend money, they might tell their friends, their friends join and spend money.  Even Wizards of the Coast gives out free basic mtg decks to new players to get them to play the card game.  Yeah the decks are really bad, but you can still have some fun with them and it was *free*.

You can't hold up a game on whales alone.  Yeah maybe the ones that are already in will stay and continue to spend to stay on the top, but that's a heavy entry barrier for new players.

James13

FindingHeart8 said:

You can't hold up a game on whales alone.  Yeah maybe the ones that are already in will stay and continue to spend to stay on the top, but that's a heavy entry barrier for new players.

Really?  I've always, always heard exactly the opposite of what you said.  These games exist solely because of whales.  I think you're underestimating what a "real" whale spends...

Late edit:  I think I was misreading something.  People seem to be talking about game player base whereas I read something as "games cannot be (financially) supported by whales alone".

EldrosKandar

James13 said:

FindingHeart8 said:

You can't hold up a game on whales alone.  Yeah maybe the ones that are already in will stay and continue to spend to stay on the top, but that's a heavy entry barrier for new players.

Really?  I've always, always heard exactly the opposite of what you said.  These games exist solely because of whales.  I think you're underestimating what a "real" whale spends...

I may be mistaken, but if it were only the whales, it would be a pretty inbred environment, without much diversity. A bigger player base is always healthier for a game.

span_argoman

EldrosKandar said:

James13 said:

FindingHeart8 said:

You can't hold up a game on whales alone.  Yeah maybe the ones that are already in will stay and continue to spend to stay on the top, but that's a heavy entry barrier for new players.

Really?  I've always, always heard exactly the opposite of what you said.  These games exist solely because of whales.  I think you're underestimating what a "real" whale spends...

I may be mistaken, but if it were only the whales, it would be a pretty inbred environment, without much diversity. A bigger player base is always healthier for a game.

I think James was referring to the game's revenues when talking about whales.

And if the articles Big Ticket Spending And Other Myths About Mobile Game Whales and Mobile Gaming and the 1.9% are right, then the top 10% of players provide like 70 to 75% of an app's revenue. And the top ~2% provide like 50% of an app's revenue.

On the other hand, I think FindingHeart is talking about whether the marketing and overall focus of the game should be catered to whales. And he has a good point that free-to-player players serve as a free marketing tool. This helps to bring in other players, some of whom might be willing to spend some money on the game.

Your point on free-to-player players boosting the player community is also valid. I'm sure that many of the MtGPQ videos, coalition support structures, player guides & resources, and passionate constructive discussion were contributed not only by whales but also by free-to-play players.

So yeah while whales are an important part of the mobile gaming ecosystem and we should acknowledge their importance, they shouldn't be the sole focus of the developers.

FindingHeart8

span_argoman said:

EldrosKandar said:

James13 said:

FindingHeart8 said:

You can't hold up a game on whales alone.  Yeah maybe the ones that are already in will stay and continue to spend to stay on the top, but that's a heavy entry barrier for new players.

Really?  I've always, always heard exactly the opposite of what you said.  These games exist solely because of whales.  I think you're underestimating what a "real" whale spends...

I may be mistaken, but if it were only the whales, it would be a pretty inbred environment, without much diversity. A bigger player base is always healthier for a game.

I think James was referring to the game's revenues when talking about whales.

And if the articles Big Ticket Spending And Other Myths About Mobile Game Whales and Mobile Gaming and the 1.9% are right, then the top 10% of players provide like 70 to 75% of an app's revenue. And the top ~2% provide like 50% of an app's revenue.

On the other hand, I think FindingHeart is talking about whether the marketing and overall focus of the game should be catered to whales. And he has a good point that free-to-player players serve as a free marketing tool. This helps to bring in other players, some of whom might be willing to spend some money on the game.

Your point on free-to-player players boosting the player community is also valid. I'm sure that many of the MtGPQ videos, coalition support structures, player guides & resources, and passionate constructive discussion were contributed not only by whales but also by free-to-play players.

So yeah while whales are an important part of the mobile gaming ecosystem and we should acknowledge their importance, they shouldn't be the sole focus of the developers.

First of all, props to you @span_argoman for trying to look at this from an objective light, and overall I agree with your conclusion

I am, however, skeptical of the quotes you are using from your sources that supports focusing games for whales.  Optimove tracked 235 gamers and makes no mention if it was a random sample, so we have no way of confirming how this incredibly small sample relates to the actual gamer population.  The top 10% quote came from Tapjoy, formerly Offerpal, a company that received considerable attention as a business built on scamming its consumer base, at best..they are a highly questionable source.

I would also point out in the 2nd source you used that a good chunk of the top performing apps listed do cater significantly to their f2p users (ex: Niantic, Pandora, Supercell).

I contribute a great deal of money to the Wizards/D3 franchises and have contributed to Octagon; while I'm fine with whales having a bit of an edge and being able to climb the mountain a bit more smoothly, so to speak.  But I maintain that no game should be built around whale elitism.

FindingHeart8

An interesting article I stumbled across about a game that seems to share a path with Octagon and mtgpq.  Not using this as evidence, but moreso an interesting read

https://www.polygon.com/2018/1/2/16830328/warframe-free-to-play-f2p-platinum

Kinesia

This conversation has moved on, but this article is about the original topic and is something to think about while composing notes to the company!

(Warning: the article contains tweets developers really receive daily and is therefore NSFW in terms of words, but it's relevant to this game and this audience and all the support staff here and the developers.)
https://medium.com/@morganjaffit/the-cost-of-doing-business-c09cc5cc8728

Mburn7

Kinesia said:

This conversation has moved on, but this article is about the original topic and is something to think about while composing notes to the company!

(Warning: the article contains tweets developers really receive daily and is therefore NSFW in terms of words, but it's relevant to this game and this audience and all the support staff here and the developers.)
https://medium.com/@morganjaffit/the-cost-of-doing-business-c09cc5cc8728

Fascinating article.  This is exactly what I'm talking about too.  Although the language here is generally better, the sentiment is the same.  I do not wish to alienate the devs with unnecessary and antagonistic criticism.  I have no problem with respectful discourse, but some of the things being said lately are just over done and pointless.

Snappyturtle

FindingHeart8 said:

An interesting article I stumbled across about a game that seems to share a path with Octagon and mtgpq.  Not using this as evidence, but moreso an interesting read

https://www.polygon.com/2018/1/2/16830328/warframe-free-to-play-f2p-platinum

As an avid Warframe player myself(being a part of the community for 4 years since before the Steam and platform launch), I can't see the same model being used here for mtgpq. At its core, the market is aimed at reducing time-walls in crafting items. Not fixing any RNG mechanics in the game. Secondly, the platinum bought with real world currency is often used for cosmetics and non-playing mechanics.

There is also what goes against the mentality that this thread is based on. In Warframe the players are handed everything. And I mean everything. Up to the point where the items can be traded in bulk for small amounts that give a better investment than the loss regularly.

Even then, it gives options on how to reduce RNG unlike the same type of card packs with the only difference is the quantity obtained.

FindingHeart8

Snappyturtle said:

FindingHeart8 said:

An interesting article I stumbled across about a game that seems to share a path with Octagon and mtgpq.  Not using this as evidence, but moreso an interesting read

https://www.polygon.com/2018/1/2/16830328/warframe-free-to-play-f2p-platinum

As an avid Warframe player myself(being a part of the community for 4 years since before the Steam and platform launch), I can't see the same model being used here for mtgpq. At its core, the market is aimed at reducing time-walls in crafting items. Not fixing any RNG mechanics in the game. Secondly, the platinum bought with real world currency is often used for cosmetics and non-playing mechanics.

There is also what goes against the mentality that this thread is based on. In Warframe the players are handed everything. And I mean everything. Up to the point where the items can be traded in bulk for small amounts that give a better investment than the loss regularly.

Even then, it gives options on how to reduce RNG unlike the same type of card packs with the only difference is the quantity obtained.

Good to know!  Like I said, it was something I stumbled across that I was just throwing out for additional discussion

andrewvanmarle

FindingHeart8 said:

There's nothing more discouraging to players to find out that no matter how hard you grind, no matter how great your strategy, that you'll never be able to compete with the whales.  That's the economy man, we already have a 1% that gets everything we don't with ease.   We play games like these to escape that reality, not have an alternate digital version shoved in our faces.

bah that is total ****. There is nothing so discouraging than realising you will never complete a collection, ever.
This is a game not communism,  don't'go waving about the 1% who dont do anything and get everything. Whales spend money they earned, nothing more nothing less.  
And competition has less to do with having every card the opponent has and more with knowing your PW, building a good deck with what you have, playing well and yes, spending a buck here and there speeds that up. (which is the business model of this game)

and F2P players dont get to complain.

and whales are completely beatable. just be smart, figure out what to expect and sideboard.

ILikePancakes

F2P are necessary for the game--eliminate them and there aren't many decks left to play against. 

Lots of players, whether paying or not, is a good thing. Variety is good.

FindingHeart8

andrewvanmarle said:

FindingHeart8 said:

There's nothing more discouraging to players to find out that no matter how hard you grind, no matter how great your strategy, that you'll never be able to compete with the whales.  That's the economy man, we already have a 1% that gets everything we don't with ease.   We play games like these to escape that reality, not have an alternate digital version shoved in our faces.

bah that is total tinykitty. There is nothing so discouraging than realising you will never complete a collection, ever.
This is a game not communism,  don't'go waving about the 1% who dont do anything and get everything. Whales spend money they earned, nothing more nothing less.  
And competition has less to do with having every card the opponent has and more with knowing your PW, building a good deck with what you have, playing well and yes, spending a buck here and there speeds that up. (which is the business model of this game)

and F2P players dont get to complain.

and whales are completely beatable. just be smart, figure out what to expect and sideboard.

lol communism, you're funny.  I don't know what game you've been playing, but MTGPQ doesn't allow rematches or sideboards.

As I've said earlier, I'm not against spending money in general.  The designers needs revenue, and the spenders are necessary for that.  There's nothing wrong with spending some cash to grab some more packs, or to get that last card you've been needing for your deck; totally fine with that, it's your money your choice.  Congrats on your purchase, I hope you enjoy it.

What I take issue is is when excessive money is used as a substitute for game strategy and skill.  Heavy spenders now have the ability to buy their way to almost every card in this game.  If they don't know how to use them optimally...check the threads or ask others about how to use the cards to make the most viscous decks, and coast their way to the top, as typical with most pay-to-win games.

Each F2P player has a right to complain, as each of them has the potential to be a player who makes purchases (and hey maybe even a whale if they have enough extra cash).  If nothing else, they're a source of free marketing for the game, to potentially bring in even more whales.  And you make a game that alienates them to the point of leaving...we'll see how long that game lasts in the long run.

I'm a hardcore whale in regards to the mtg card game, but there's nothing I admire more then the nonwhale players who spend what they can, and with the limited resources they have, like chess, use pure strategy to better their decks.  They may lose a lot, but they refine their decks and get better.  In my opinion, they are the essence of mtg, and deserve our respect.

andrewvanmarle

You sideboard by looking at the Pw you will pkay against, giving you ample information, and adding a card or two that foils the most probable strategies. If i play against dovin ill add support killers etc


F2players get to complain, after they spend, not out of potential. 


And that whale that bought his way into having every card? He is the one paying the game everyone else is playing. 

I agree though that this  game could do more to help new players, but not by making sure to alienate the ones that actually finance the game. 

morgue427

we have all seen script kitties who have the cards and then just make the current meta and win most of the battles and that is good enough for him, true player find out how to make it just a bit better each game using what they have. yes spending to help with that helps but the ones that do that are not whales they buy the cards that they know will help them not just one of everything.

FindingHeart8

andrewvanmarle said:

You sideboard by looking at the Pw you will pkay against, giving you ample information, and adding a card or two that foils the most probable strategies. If i play against dovin ill add support killers etc


F2players get to complain, after they spend, not out of potential. 


And that whale that bought his way into having every card? He is the one paying the game everyone else is playing. 

I agree though that this  game could do more to help new players, but not by making sure to alienate the ones that actually finance the game. 

meh.  I might switch planeswalkers if I think it would be a more fun match, but my general rule-to-self is that each of my decks should be able to hold their ground against almost any opponent without adjustments (unless there are extra objectives but I usually have a secondary deck ready for that anyways).

I don't think there's any risk here of alienating whales, with this current game model you can easily buy your way to the top if you've got the cash to spare, and it's only gotten easier with booster crafting.  I'd debate that there's never been a better time to be a whale in this game than right now.  I'm more worried about the new players or players who just can't afford to keep up with the thousands of dollars whales have invested in this game, and what that might do for player retention.

I understand sticking up for the little guys isn't a popular position on these threads.  But the most successful businesses (app business and just the overall MNCs) climbed their way to success by catering to your everyday consumer, not exclusively the rich.

Kinesia

See, I think this game ends up in a slightly weird position compared to others... Because my wife and I play a lot but our 2 kids also play. We spend a little bit and both kids have considered buying little things with their birthday money...
The thing is that this is a good longterm position for the company, because since we are together we have more loyalty to it than other games and there's a very high possibility at least one of the kids will play for the rest of their life....
But right _now_ the kids are mostly F2P, almost completely, but we are a package deal and we need support for play at ALL levels.

(And I already know I'm not alone in terms of families playing.)

andrewvanmarle

FindingHeart8 said:

I understand sticking up for the little guys isn't a popular position on these threads.  But the most successful businesses (app business and just the overall MNCs) climbed their way to success by catering to your everyday consumer, not exclusively the rich.

Instead of making this a discussion of the rich versus the poor and your obvious distaste to one group over the other  lets look at the issue from another perspective.

You have powerful players and weaker players. How they got to be in either group isn't'relevant, what is relevant is that you want -both- groups to have an enjoyable experience.

trying to make te two compete against one another isn't enjoyable for both, too hard versus too easy.

the solution is to devise a way to separate the groups.


trying to compare the collections and the speed they are completed doesnt work either: late/end game players and whales seek to complete collections while early game players seek powerful additions to their decks.

help the starting players with a boost that helps with cards but goes down in a while while not begrudging the end gamers to completing their collection (preferably after the next set hits the game)

Sounds reasonable?