Comparing Business Models of Paper MtG to MtGPQ

Ohboy said:

I'm concerned about the no duplicates in crafting bit ending up being too generous. Would be disastrous if history repeated itself and they ended up cutting back later and triggering another round of austerity measures.

Hope they were thoroughly briefed on the mistakes of the past.

Maybe Oktagon has learned that restricting the possibility  of completing a colletion does not harm the long term viability of the game, since there is a constant influx of new content, and that (as long as cards are well balanced) it doesn't impact gameplay either.

(if both statements above were untrue, then paper mtg would be dead a loooong time ago)

Ohboy, you know you are not taking into account the difference in drop rates paper vs pq , the fact that wizards does not get money from the secondary market and the likely hood that the conversion rate will be rather steep.

yes we get a few free commons a day; how many do you imagine you'd need to get a single mythic?

PQ earns money from this system because you'll be incentivesed to buy boosters even though you have most cards, right now the sales peter off once the dupe rate increases.

Ohboy said:

I'll remind you we don't just get Commons everyday.

We get events that give us currency to buy packs. We get rares from those events. We get jewels to buy mythics.

Maybe I'm misreading your intent, but isn't it asking for a less steep conversion? Seeing as a steeper conversion is directly correlated with an increase in difficulty to complete a collection. 

Those are two different but related things. A steep conversion doesn't make completing a collection any harder, just makes it take longer. This would increase the anticipation of completion, make targeting (if targeting is going to be a thing) require more strategy, and if done well, can hold off completion of a set untill they are well into the next one for most players.

The problems with trying to compare paper MTG with PQ are numerous.  But it all begins with the fact that you get cards in app for no physical commitment whatsoever.  You can "buy" packs in game without ever paying a dime.  Just your in-app currency you didn't have to pay for.  You get thousands of crystals every month if you are reasonably active for no money whatsoever.

Meanwhile you did have to pay physical money for the one MTG paper pack.

I'm aware of several players who have fairly full collections (Say, 30% of mythics, and maybe a handful of rares missing; and a ton of dupes waiting) who have put zero money toward the app.  Just time commitment which is worthless as far as the people paying the bills for running and making the app are concerned.

Games like this exist because they incentivize paying as a tradeoff for the grind/long collection haul in some way.  For example, you could pay money to get Bolas NOW instead of waiting a few weeks and spending your grinded currency for him.  A decent way to go about paying the bills.

In paper, you can pay real money to get a full collection of cards.  Since the in-game currency is completely free to earn, and you get cards for logging in and participating in events for free, using just crystals and cards here as a point of comparison isn't really an apples-to-apples point of comparison.

All in all, i think this game stands to earn -more- from collectability than paper magic: here even a targeted crafted mythic will send money into the pockets of D3 while the secondary market doesnt earn money for Wizards.


Yes there are difference between paper and PQ, but those are described above and they balance out i believe.

I'm sure this has been brought up but this is soooo Apples and Oranges.  Just not in the same ballpark for discussion.

The biggest difference I see when it relates to duplicates...

In the digital game I only have to have 1 CARD - Mythic/Masterpiece for example... to what potentially works out to an unlimited supply of that card within my deck.  While it is harder to get the card in question... Once I have it... It can be 'abused.'

In paper... You may have up to 4 copies.  (Assuming it isn't limited by whatever ruling).  I would have to physically seek out 4 copies of that card in order to have them in my deck.  I couldn't just say... HEY!  I've got 1 and that is all that matters!! It means I can PRETEND I have 3 more in my deck!!

So in relation to collecting...  I don't have to have 4 copies in MTGPQ... Just ONE... So every duplicate Common or MP becomes frustrating because when it comes to deck building they have the same value!

In paper... I can trade, sell, buy... whatever I need to do to get the cards I want/need to build my deck.  Getting duplicates of higher value cards means I can use its value to obtain something else...  
( I can even PROXY or Test the cards I don't have in a simulated deck to be sure I want to SEEK out the cards!)

We can't do these in MTGPQ...

This doesn't change my feeling (and experience) that the drop rate is abysmal and a complete mystery in MTGPQ to the point that it appears to be coded to prevent the ability to obtain certain cards if either you have certain other cards or have a certain percentage of cards...

I know new accounts that have 2 or Masterpieces that haven't spent a dime or purchased a pack and seemingly pulled them from just their daily/weekly rewards...  Meanwhile, I have played and paid extensively yet I haven't seen a SINGLE Masterpiece YET... Even from drawing from using the Pink Crystals...


Back to my point... Comparing the collectability of the two just isn't on the same page, book, or even library...  It's two completely different languages on two completely different continents in comparison.

... end soapbox discussion...

I really think one of the great problems of this game is surviving through the start of the game. This game is really difficult for new players.

New players that doesn't have any link to MTG or is part of an alliance will have a lot of difficult to win and will probably uninstall this game pretty soon.

They need to sort out a way to make this starting path a lot easier. This is the only way this game can survive. 

span_argoman said:

wereotter said:

James13 said:

In paper, you can pay real money to get a full collection of cards.  Since the in-game currency is completely free to earn, and you get cards for logging in and participating in events for free, using just crystals and cards here as a point of comparison isn't really an apples-to-apples point of comparison.

This is true, but if you're collecting a full set of cards in paper magic, you're unlikely to spend the money to get it by opening packs and instead maybe buy a few packs and then just buy whatever you're missing from the secondary market from other players who didn't want it or got duplicates, or from vendors who exist solely to open packs and sell off the singles.

My comparison was only made as this game verses Wizards specifically. But if you could trade off singles, I would fully expect that people would potentially sell their digital duplicates online, and that people would start up accounts just to get cards to sell, which would make it little different from the paper game.

You do realise that those second-hand cards you bought off the secondary market were at one point cards which the seller (or someone they in turn bought the card from) bought directly from Wizards of the Coast right?

Every. Single. Paper MTG card. Earns Wizards of the Coast money because someone had to buy it from them first.

Whether you as a single Magic player bought it off someone else and for whatever price (if you didn't buy directly from Wizards) is irrelevant to Wizards. They've already made their money selling the cards to the firsthand buyers.

On the other hand, MtGPQ has a whole bunch of cards in which the developers have earned no cash from at all.

Like cards from the Free Boosters. Cards opened from Daily Rewards, Event Progression and Reward Packs and/or Guaranteed Rares. Cards opened using Crystals and Jewels earned from Events, Story and Daily Rewards.

Paper MTG's model is a model where every player has to chip in some money just in order to play. So the costs are spread over a wider base and hence become cheaper per player.

On the other hand, MtGPQ competes in an environment where the users are accustomed to having an array of free games to play on their mobile phone. That forces their hand in having to make the basic game experience free just to be able to attract a decent player base.

We can't just cry out at MtGPQ for not following paper MTG on one aspect without factoring how different the two actually are.

Well said, thats something I've struggled to convey in the past.
However, Magic Duels somehow did everything better; as a F2P game with PVP, PVE, customization, Story Mode AND sensible in-app prices.
Personally I can't wait for Duels to come back after Christmas. The only reason I ever wasted so much money on MTGPQ is because Android hasn't seen the Duels app since 2013. 

The comments on this thread have highlighted some issues about the current F2P economy which make me acutely uncomfortable about committing much more time to the game.