SeFRo's article on Starcity
- Thread starter Spiderman
- Start date
N
Notepad
Guest
Wow! Cool to know ya liked the article, Spidey! 
I'm always glad to see positive feedback on my stuff. This one though is a co-author work between a friend of mine, Jonas Kernaghan, and myself.
Yeah EQ is a monthly fee. I wasn't counting the cost for the software (Everquest can be $10 for the basic game, $30 for the game with two xpaks, or another $30 for the Luclin xpak, while MTGO can be free or $15). Its a hard comparison because MTGO comes with a certificate if you buy the software, and EQ comes with one month playtime free when you buy any version.
I counted one month of payment on EQ for the comparison with the same cost on MTGO. From a newbie's point of view, is it more worthwhile to spend $13 to try out one month of EQ, or spend $13 to try out starting on MTGO with a deck and pack? Killing the gnolls of Blackburrow (my favorite hobby, being a Human Ranger and all) and getting pretty good sounds way better than getting stomped on MTGO for having a weak collection.
I'm always glad to see positive feedback on my stuff. This one though is a co-author work between a friend of mine, Jonas Kernaghan, and myself. Yeah EQ is a monthly fee. I wasn't counting the cost for the software (Everquest can be $10 for the basic game, $30 for the game with two xpaks, or another $30 for the Luclin xpak, while MTGO can be free or $15). Its a hard comparison because MTGO comes with a certificate if you buy the software, and EQ comes with one month playtime free when you buy any version.
I counted one month of payment on EQ for the comparison with the same cost on MTGO. From a newbie's point of view, is it more worthwhile to spend $13 to try out one month of EQ, or spend $13 to try out starting on MTGO with a deck and pack? Killing the gnolls of Blackburrow (my favorite hobby, being a Human Ranger and all) and getting pretty good sounds way better than getting stomped on MTGO for having a weak collection.
True, if you're comparing it by a monthly cost (although if one were really anal about it, you'd probably want to compare actual online times for each too).
But is there or would there be a point where you have a decent collection of cards, either buying or drafting or trading and that might be less than your total outlay of Everquest at that point? In other words, if you expect to get 6 months of Everquest play, would that same money benefit you from Magic, albeit it's more upfront?
But is there or would there be a point where you have a decent collection of cards, either buying or drafting or trading and that might be less than your total outlay of Everquest at that point? In other words, if you expect to get 6 months of Everquest play, would that same money benefit you from Magic, albeit it's more upfront?
N
Notepad
Guest
Yes, good point indeed. I think there's a large $100+ payment for EQ if you want to play for a year. Compared to the same amount up front for MTGO, you certainly get more bang for your buck on MTGO because its right away.
However, the whole reason we wrote that article is because that's just not right. Soaking a ton of money into a game just to get good at it seems crazy. Then again, so does the time it takes to camp on EQ.
The one thing that brought this up was both Jonas' and my own experience with frustrated new or returning players, who had spent more than an experimental amount but still didn't have the power and strategy down, and got romped.
Just an experimental amount on a MMOG is enough to get you around, as long as you spend time on character development. That whole time leveling up is usually a lot of fun. Not so for learning the ropes in the casual room on MTGO.
However, the whole reason we wrote that article is because that's just not right. Soaking a ton of money into a game just to get good at it seems crazy. Then again, so does the time it takes to camp on EQ.
The one thing that brought this up was both Jonas' and my own experience with frustrated new or returning players, who had spent more than an experimental amount but still didn't have the power and strategy down, and got romped.
Just an experimental amount on a MMOG is enough to get you around, as long as you spend time on character development. That whole time leveling up is usually a lot of fun. Not so for learning the ropes in the casual room on MTGO.
I
Istanbul
Guest
It never ceases to amaze me how many people whine about having to dump a lot of money into MTGO to become competetive.
Did you have to dump a lot of money into MTG to become competetive? Of course you did.
Magic Online is precisely what it says. Magic: The Gathering, translated to an Online environment. And just like its RL counterpart, a substantial investment is involved. (Stop and think of how much money you've spent on RL Magic.)
Did you have to dump a lot of money into MTG to become competetive? Of course you did.
Magic Online is precisely what it says. Magic: The Gathering, translated to an Online environment. And just like its RL counterpart, a substantial investment is involved. (Stop and think of how much money you've spent on RL Magic.)
G
Gizmo
Guest
That IS the distinction to be made here.
Do you regularly play MTG?
Yes?
Then you dont want MTGO. You want Apprentice.
Do you struggle to find players for MTG?
Yes?
The you want MTGO instead.
Personally I already have MTG, and so my interest in MTGO is a little less than zero.
Do you regularly play MTG?
Yes?
Then you dont want MTGO. You want Apprentice.
Do you struggle to find players for MTG?
Yes?
The you want MTGO instead.
Personally I already have MTG, and so my interest in MTGO is a little less than zero.
I
Istanbul
Guest
Take a picture, folks...I agree with Gizmo.
I believe that one generally plays MTGO or MTG. Not both.
I believe that one generally plays MTGO or MTG. Not both.
I thought Apprentice was a "competing" product with "less" features (i.e. no enforcing of the rules on its own). In other words, if you need players, you can find them on Apprentice as well as MTGO. Except the former's free.
I agree though, so really what the article is saying: are newbies in MTGO treated the same way as if they were learning in real life? Or is their learning curve/money outlay higher? 'Cause let's face it, MTGO is not being marketed solely to "experienced" players; WOTC would like to broaden their base with it. So while buying a lot of packs to get competitive is certainly something WOTC likes to see, it's going to have the same turnoff as buying lots of packs in real life for a new person jumping in.
I agree though, so really what the article is saying: are newbies in MTGO treated the same way as if they were learning in real life? Or is their learning curve/money outlay higher? 'Cause let's face it, MTGO is not being marketed solely to "experienced" players; WOTC would like to broaden their base with it. So while buying a lot of packs to get competitive is certainly something WOTC likes to see, it's going to have the same turnoff as buying lots of packs in real life for a new person jumping in.
R
rkoelsch
Guest
I really don't think that MTGO and Apprentice are really competing for the same customers. Originally Apprentice was alone anyone who wanted to play had to use it more or less. then the magic encyclopedia came along and that woo'd a few away from apprentice but it is a very poor piece of software. Then MTGO came along and those that had been playing apprentice because it was the only way they could play got a wonderful new toy. But I think serious players still will use apprentice for deck testing and those who think that WOTC is a greedy scum sucking capitalist and don't want to pay will play apprentice as well. but those that don't have anyone near to play can now play MTGO which is more enjoyable than apprentice. Having played both I can see the advantages of both but I will be uninstalling apprentice and only playing MTGO.
G
Gizmo
Guest
Apprentice and MTGO have almost nothing in common. Netdraft and MTGO are competing, perhaps. Heres the difference between MTGO and Apprentice...
I want to playtest with my Psychatog deck:
Apprentice cost: $0
MTGO cost: $200
Im not sure I want to play Psychatog, so I want to practice with Hunting Grounds as well:
Apprentice cost: $0
MTGO cost: another $200
Repeat ad nauseum. MTGO was not really designed to be a tool for serious constructed players, and that was precisely was Apprentice is best at.
I want to playtest with my Psychatog deck:
Apprentice cost: $0
MTGO cost: $200
Im not sure I want to play Psychatog, so I want to practice with Hunting Grounds as well:
Apprentice cost: $0
MTGO cost: another $200
Repeat ad nauseum. MTGO was not really designed to be a tool for serious constructed players, and that was precisely was Apprentice is best at.
I mean, I (think) get what you're saying above, but that's not quite what you said a couple of posts ago. There it was an issue of finding opponents and it seemed that if you're having trouble, you play MTGO. But you should be able to find opponents with Apprentice also (and having access to all of the cards should help in that respect, being able to play whatever deck you want). That's what I was questioning.
Unless my question seemed to lead down the path above and that's how you got there
Unless my question seemed to lead down the path above and that's how you got there
R
rkoelsch
Guest
It really is a matter of preference. MTGO has a much cleaner appearance and keeps everything in order. If all you want to do is play some magic and really aren't super picky about what cards you use then MTGO is what you should use. I consider it like being in a sealed deck league. As Sefro has pointed out there are some that have spent $1,000 on it and of course they have the better decks. But it is like that in RL. That is the way I am going to approach it. I may buy some packs but most of my cards will be from drafts.
N
Notepad
Guest
Geez, who knew this would have sparked to much discussion?
On the general comparison of MTGO with Apprentice (or even M:IE), the thing that really helps MTGO is the clean interface and nearly flawless existence of the rules. Also helping out MTGO is the fact that you own your own collection. It seems funny, in a way, to spend real money on a virtual collection of cards and feel it matters as much as a physical collection. It is happening, however. I think its the same line of thinking that makes all those items and stats on one's Everquest character matter, despite just being a virtual collection of sorts.
That's my own personal enjoyment out of MTGO. I like having a collection online that I can play with. Access to all the cards would be interesting, but that would be like playing a hacked version of a game with God Mode and Inifinite Ammo options set. It is rocking at first, but it gets hella stale fast. There's a fun value in "earning" one's own place with one's own goods.
I'm thinking of making this the topic of the next Rant Arena, so if some of these setences or themes appear again, you saw 'em here first.
Hey, Istanbul, I'm not whining about the money issue in the way you see it. I even stated in the article that real like Magic has the same equation of: Money=Power. However, there is more help and guidance to real life players, especially those with small collections. In my personal experience, beginners get treated much better IRL than on MTGO (the whole gist of the article ). On MTGO, a beginner needs to just keep shelling out money to get their experience, really. I'm noticing a lot of these players either don't know about strategy sites, or don't have the time to go scouring through them all for deckbuilding/casual advice. That is why their only real means of improving is to just keep spending. That is where the unfairness of the money=power equation comes in.
On the general comparison of MTGO with Apprentice (or even M:IE), the thing that really helps MTGO is the clean interface and nearly flawless existence of the rules. Also helping out MTGO is the fact that you own your own collection. It seems funny, in a way, to spend real money on a virtual collection of cards and feel it matters as much as a physical collection. It is happening, however. I think its the same line of thinking that makes all those items and stats on one's Everquest character matter, despite just being a virtual collection of sorts.
That's my own personal enjoyment out of MTGO. I like having a collection online that I can play with. Access to all the cards would be interesting, but that would be like playing a hacked version of a game with God Mode and Inifinite Ammo options set. It is rocking at first, but it gets hella stale fast. There's a fun value in "earning" one's own place with one's own goods.
I'm thinking of making this the topic of the next Rant Arena, so if some of these setences or themes appear again, you saw 'em here first.
Hey, Istanbul, I'm not whining about the money issue in the way you see it. I even stated in the article that real like Magic has the same equation of: Money=Power. However, there is more help and guidance to real life players, especially those with small collections. In my personal experience, beginners get treated much better IRL than on MTGO (the whole gist of the article
). On MTGO, a beginner needs to just keep shelling out money to get their experience, really. I'm noticing a lot of these players either don't know about strategy sites, or don't have the time to go scouring through them all for deckbuilding/casual advice. That is why their only real means of improving is to just keep spending. That is where the unfairness of the money=power equation comes in.
R
rkoelsch
Guest
I think a true test of the system will happen in November. Anyone who has bought invasion block cards will have them rotated into extended. then what will the people that are testing type 2 decks do when they play someone who has invasion in their deck?
N
Notepad
Guest
That's an easy answer, rkoelsch: They won't meet. In the gaming rooms, when you make a game there is a setup system where you choose the format and structure of the game or match you're creating. Same with challenges. Those who wish to join or accept your challenge will see this info and know whether or not they can play against you. If their deck is incompatable, the game gives you a nice notice you can't go in.
So, in November, when IPA rotates out, there should be an "Extended" option just under the "Standard" field option. It will be as simple as choosing to make it into a Precon deck game or an open game.
So, in November, when IPA rotates out, there should be an "Extended" option just under the "Standard" field option. It will be as simple as choosing to make it into a Precon deck game or an open game.