No.421259 [View All]
So I am thinking of making a card game like magic but before I invest I want to know what to avoid.
Any anons that used to play magic, what did you like or dislike about it?
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421359
>>421356
>No it's not.
Have you got any idea of how expensive and risky it is for a company to run a TCG game?
Initial costs that are not salvageable when it fails, lots of designing and playtesting, hiring artists to make the art of the cards, logistics of distribution, PR.
Sure once you get to WotC levels this gets less expensive and risky but the price is still there.
>The secondary market is the reason that hebrews like you need to "curb the cost" in the first place.
Paying €100 for a booster box and still not getting the cards you need is the reason why I need to curb the cost and why the secondary market is necessary.
A secondary market is inherent to a good-running and healthy TCG.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421360
>>421359
>Have you got any idea of how expensive and risky it is for a company to run a TCG game?
Reality disagrees with all of your hypothetical bullshit about what you think about costs. Feel free to go on about how it's impossible while games exist that use this exact business model.
>Paying €100 for a booster box and still not getting the cards you need is the reason why I need to curb the cost and why the secondary market is necessary.
This is what is known as a "feedback loop". Card value drives itself, enhanced by its rarity.
You just don't seem to get it, do you? You're the cause of your own problems, not to mention the cause of problems for everyone else. I want to play a fucking card game. If I wanted to play the stock market and make investments and resell things, I would do exactly that. God knows it would be far more rewarding, and probably less expensive than CCG bullshit.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421373
>>421330
What game on the planet needs a secondary market to function? Why does resell value impact the enjoyment of the game at all? We're talking about buying card games because we think they're fun. Nobody sinks money into a board game or to start a wargaming collection because they plan on turning it over for a profit in a few months. This isn't a stock market.
The problem here is these blind boosters. There's no cost that should be curbed, the cost shouldn't even exist in the first place. No one should have to shell out €100 and not get what they need. Where I'm from, we call that "gambling". Card games need to be treated like board games. Everyone who buys a board game knows exactly what they're getting out of it; there's no randomness, no chance of earning back your money. But the consumer always knows exactly what they're getting.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421375
>>421360
>Reality disagrees with all of your hypothetical bullshit about what you think about costs.
<Zero arguments whatsoever
Ok.
>If I wanted to play the stock market and make investments and resell things, I would do exactly that.
Nobody said anything about investing, I'm talking about being able to sell the stuff you bought back for a reasonable amount to sustain the hobby.
No investing, not even profit, just at least 50-80% of the original value would be a lot.
>>421373
>What game on the planet needs a secondary market to function?
It's in the name itself: TRADING card game.
It's built around "trade card X for card Y", and of course one can switch X or Y out for money.
>Nobody sinks money into a board game or to start a wargaming collection because they plan on turning it over for a profit in a few months. This isn't a stock market.
Are you people even reading my posts?
Nobody is talking about investing, I'm only talking about the product retaining a certain amount of the money you spend so that the hobby doesn't get as expensive.
It's the same as being able to sell your ship models for wargames, but then with cards.
>The problem here is these blind boosters.
Well, something we can agree on then.
I have no idea what else to use for a TCG however, because everybody getting what they want takes out the T and and turns it into a C.
It would also mess with the whole drafting part (MtG comes into mind), one could argue (and I think WotC does exactly that against gambling allegations) that boosters are only meant to be drafted and not to be sold separately.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421377
>>421360
>Reality disagrees with all of your hypothetical bullshit about what you think about costs.
So, let me get this straight, you're disagreeing with anon's point that there's costs for building, testing, promoting, and distributing a game?
You seem legitimately retarded, and I can only imagine the sheer autism whenever you try to go into a card shop.
>"Hey, this card looks like it could go into my deck. I'll take it!"
<"Great, that'll be $5."
>"Five dollars!?! You mean it isn't free? What the fuck dude, all it is is a piece of cardboard! Stop trying to Jew me!"
<"Well, I need to run a business, and if you really didn't see any value in it, you could literally just go out and buy cardboard."
>"But I don't want cardboard, I want this card for my deck!"
<thinkingemoji.png
Personally I'm tired of seeing the retarded "it's just cardboard and ink" non-argument since you can pretty much use that for any other collectable. vintage toys are just plastic/metal and paint. Stamps are just paper, ink, and adhesive. Records are just vinyl.
>>421373
>Nobody sinks money into a board game
Board games are standalone product. For most of them, there isn't an active market looking for each of their components because there's no higher level of play for them. If I go out and buy Clue, it's going to have the same components as earlier runs of Clue, and there isn't going to be a Clue 2 that I can be more competitive with by using the Clue 1 pieces.
>to start a wargaming collection
<Wargaming is cheap
AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA
>No one should have to shell out €100 and not get what they need.
If you're going out and shelling for a booster box, you should have the components needed to trade for the other pieces you need.
The problem isn't boosters, the problem is chase cards - cards that artificially inflate the value of a set with such a contrast to the lower end of the spectrum that players aren't guaranteed to make even on their collection's value, and offer such a discrepancy that they make trading unfeasible.
Want an example? Look at the RtR block for Magic. Right now on Amazon, an RtR pack goes for about $5, which isn't too bad because it contains a lot of cards like Chromatic Lantern and the shocklands. Gatecrash goes for about $4, the baseline, since it has the shocklands but not much else. Meanwhile, Dragon's Maze goes for about $5.25, not because of any high-value lands, not because of a strong run, but because of Voice of Resurgence and Ral. Two fucking cards, and that's on the tamer side of examples Magic gives whenever we've had shit like Masters 25.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421378
>>421377
>So, let me get this straight, you're disagreeing with anon's point that there's costs for building, testing, promoting, and distributing a game?
No, CCG dicksucker. I'm disagreeing with anon's point that LCGs can't exist..
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421379
>>421378
You said you wanted to play with a lower up-front cost, I argued that since stuff costs money, and people need to eat, cards can only be so cheap and a lot cheaper than MtG is not going to happen.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421380
>>421379
>I argued that since stuff costs money, and people need to eat, cards can only be so cheap and a lot cheaper than MtG is not going to happen.
And you were wrong. Three of every single card for six years for less than the cost of most competitive Modern Magic decks is certainly a much lower cost.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421385
>>421380
>>I argued that since stuff costs money, and people need to eat, cards can only be so cheap
>And you were wrong
So, with regards to my comment, you really are disagreeing with the other anon that games cost money to make?
Are you retarded or 12?
>Three of every single card for six years for less than the cost of most competitive Modern Magic decks is certainly a much lower cost.
What the fuck are you even babbling about? Are you trying to say that three copies of a single card being available upfront would cost less? To whom, the consumer or the game maker? Because if it's the game maker, you're wrong in that the costs for art, promotion, printing etc wouldn't change, and if you think it would cost less for the player, then that's only going to be true if the product isn't worth buying (FoW's MoA) or it's going to be ridiculously expensive because players know what they're going to be buying, leading to a shortage of product until you overprint (MtG's Hazoret Challenger deck or FtV line).
If you would be buying three of every single card in a fixed product, that would mean that for two players. who want to build decks would need to buy the encompassing sealed product. For 90% of players, this would give them a huge bulk of cards that they are both never going to use and never going to trade away (since everyone else has a complete collection). The only way these players would be happy would be to sell cards to the players who can't afford the massive upfront cost of the entire set, except you've set up a model where the value of a collection is capped, so the cards themselves don't have any value, so LGSs can't sustain a profit selling singles back to the playerbase. So, what you have left is a game that costs about $100 to play, with absolutely no stores dedicated to selling product, with an awkward product line with no avenue for players to make single-digit purchases.
Goddamn, you have zero idea what you are talking about.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421395
>>421385
>So, with regards to my comment, you really are disagreeing with the other anon that games cost money to make?
No, I disagree at a fundamental level with
>that's very unrealistic considering profit marges on the things.
Everything that was said follows that, too bad you weren't following along.
>blah blah resale magic dens stores dedicated to shitty aftermarkets
I dunno man, Netrunner was doing just fine and would've continued doing just fine were it not for WotC killing it off.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421398
>>421380
>And you were wrong. Three of every single card for six years for less than the cost of most competitive Modern Magic decks is certainly a much lower cost.
I don't know in what world you live in, or if you even read my posts, or if you're deliberately being retarded, but cards cost money.
Selling booster packs cheaper than €2,25 to retail and less than €3,50 to actual costumers is almost impossible unless you want to sell shit quality cards even worse than MtG.
What do you want to sell cards for, €1 per booster? Get a grip.
>>421395
>I dunno man, Netrunner was doing just fine and would've continued doing just fine were it not for WotC killing it off.
Huh, seems like Netrunners wasn't doing so fine financially-wise...I wonder how that would come?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421401
>>421398
>Huh, seems like Netrunners wasn't doing so fine financially-wise...I wonder how that would come?
Because Wizards of the Coast pulled its license, and Fantasy Flight Games was forced to stop selling it. The game itself was doing perfectly well and was successful enough to be settling into a long term plan, with a new lead designer brought in, revised core set, cycling just kicking off and so on. It's a perfectly viable and possible business model, it's the best thing possible for the consumer, and it's the best thing possible for the quality of the game itself.
In other words, you're wrong. Fuck CCGs and their out of date, anti-consumer business model.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421403
>>421401
>In other words, you're wrong.
Yet the business decisions of WotC say otherwise.
Sure, it might have made a profit, but probably not enough for them.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421404
>>421403
WotC wasn't selling Netrunner, they were licensing the IP to Fantasy Flight. They revoked the license to kill their competitor.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421405
>>421404
>They revoked the license to kill their competitor.
Kind of a smart move, but it raises the question why WotC didn't sell it in the first place.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421406
>>421404
What competitor? WotC weren't selling Netrunner and they were getting money from the license.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421408
>>421406
I take that Fantasy Flight was also concurrence of them and putting them into a tighter spot by revoking the license of Netrunners could help rooting them out.
Question is how much of an effect this would have on the long term.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421413
>>421405
>why WotC didn't sell it in the first place.
Why would they? Their entire business model is based around creating one product (Magic) that every kind of player buys. Johnny/Timmy/Spike and Melvin/Vorthos are marketing terms after all.
Why create 2 products when you can have them all buy 1? This is also why so much of every set is made for limited.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421418
Would it be possible to build an entire card game around the concept of using your life as the main resource to make plays? I'm thinking about something necromancy themed.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421419
>>421418
Concept sounds good, but I don't know how you would balance that.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421424
>>421289
>MLP, but I have no idea how [it plays]
It's not that interesting. Instead of reducing your opponent's life to 0 or something similar, both players try to count to X as quickly as possible, and all the cards either let you count more quickly or spend points to do some minor effects. There's very little interaction, which is great if you're an 11-year-old girl but quite poor otherwise.
At least it had some cool characters like Nightmare Star.
>>421302
Another thing about FoW that harmed it was the continual mismanagement of player trust and design space. What little I know about the pro scene involves fraudulent judge calls, possible collusion and cronyism, and large stretches of radio silence from the designers. The most recent development, around four to six months ago, was the firing of the two community managers who were the one source of information for fans of the game.
>>421328
>it isn't pay2win after a certain threshold
>therefore it's not pay2win!
<being this disingenuous
Don't pretend the cost of buying singles on the fluctuating secondary market isn't a progress barrier just as effective as buying them from a static publisher's store. I'd be willing to pay a few dollars more per card or paying higher entry costs to justify the cost of printing them and commissioning good art and to ensure the company stayed afloat, but you're a true kike if you think the healthiest way to extract that money is to involve a hundred secondary retailers and to generate an economy around the potential value of any given booster pack.
>>421319
>>421330
>>421352
>jewing players is bad, but if you don't jew them then they won't play
>whoa, dude, i was talking about getting money back, not getting money back
You need to read more than the first four words of each sentence to post on this board. Piss off.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421427
>>421418
Now this is an interesting idea, because my experience in MTG and YGO tells me that paying life is almost always an inherently broken thing to do because it circumvents the established resource systems for those games (or the other restrictions, in YGO's case). If it were the primary method of playing cards, though, then obviously that would go out the window. There are a couple hitches which I can foresee causing problems:
>if both players pay from the same resource all the time, the game becomes samey
It'd be like Hearthstone or Shadowverse without the class-specific cards, which would make already generic games even more painfully generic.
>if the win condition involves reducing your opponent's life points to 0, then the game would be one-dimensional
Alternate win conditions would need to be hard-designed into the game rules to prevent aggro from being the only strategy. Perhaps players could amass occult talismans to perform The Ultimate Ritual and win the game.
>if you can't get life back, then one player can become locked out early on if he can't answer the board
If you can gain life, then what's the difference between:
<play card > do effect
<play card > gain life > pay life > do effect
besides the second one being needlessly complicated?
Perhaps these problems could be circumvented if you had multiple "life" resources to pay, like giving up organs or bones or something. That way, you could establish different types of undead requiring different reagents (Frankenstein's monsters vs skeletons vs ghosts vs vampires), but which would all still come from the same pool of viscera. You'd also need to have some way of recouping these resources, or limiting the way they're spent in a single turn. Life doesn't "refresh" each turn the way lands/mana crystal do in other games.
I'm very interested in this concept as a whole, though. It has much opportunity for flavourful cards and mechanics, and a dark tone like this isn't very prevalent in modern fantasy. Keep us posted if you brew anything.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421428
Specifically about MtG. And more specifically, MtG of days gone by.
>likes
ability to stuff a deck into a pocket of a bag, and go
multiple deck archetypes
interesting art, and inspiration, from japanese to slavic
as casual or competitive as you want
combos are a feature, not a bug, that can be stopped by control
ranges from dead simple, to incredibly complex
mix of poker and chess - hidden information, chance, but paired with tactics, strategy
multiple game formats
easy to build around themes, either mechanical or flavor
<dislikes
artificial scarcity and rarity
shit art and card design
hamfisted politics
dumbing down of cards, mechanics, because of online
shit card quality
Specifically about other card games, analog or digital.
>likes
fun to play
loses due to choices made, same with wins
alternative win conditions
<dislikes
money sink when other games, including vidya, are better value
more hamfisted politics
inability to project a metagame
old decks nerfed, new cards with power creep to force buy ins
not enough variety in decks, or in players piloting them
or I straight up hate the average player
censorship
At this point, I play Gwent for my card game fix. Or a board game with "deck building" mechanics. Still own MtG decks, because fuck it, sunk cost, and they have sentimental value now.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421431
>>421418
Isn't that basically all of Decipher's old games where your deck is your life?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421441
>>421427
What if there were separate life pools, for example "mind", "body" and "soul" that could each be tapped into for different flavourful effects, but you only have to deplete one to win the game? You could even have cards that, for instance, transferred life from one pool to another, sacrificing "soul" power to restore the "body". This could also tie into a bit of a rock-paper-scissors system, if even more variety works well for the game.
My initial idea for life gain for the game was for players to gain varying amounts whenever they destroy an opponent's card, but that still runs into the problem of a player being potentially unable to answer the board at times. Either that, or life was only used for summoning, but one could use various artefacts or potions to perform other effects that couldn't be used to win the game in and of themselves, and had to support what was summoned.
This is an idea I've been sat on for a while but I've never really talked to anyone about. I've designed custom Magic and Yugioh cards for a while now, and I really want to take this further. I feel like it's an idea where flavourfully the focus can be the players too, rather than Yugioh's lack of consistent flavour in general, or Magic's new direction of printed planeswalkers being the real heroes of the story, and the players just seem to watch things happen between them. Plus I like the dark tone for it I've built up in my head.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421445
>>421424
>Don't pretend the cost of buying singles on the fluctuating secondary market isn't a progress barrier just as effective as buying them from a static publisher's store.
Holy shit anon, I don't even know where to start with this, it's so stupid.
How about with fact that model would only work with small games where shortage of firsthand singles isn't feasible, or that you're now suggesting a model where bad cards are priced equally with good ones (remember all of those reasons WotC can't formally acknowledge the secondary market?). Pic very related.
<But Netrunner...
...Is a meme. If it ran a production line as large as MtG, every single chase card would immediately be out of stock on the first-party site, so effectively nothing changed.
>>therefore it's not pay2win!
><being this disingenuous
<Not knowing what pay2win means
Take a look at the top 8 for the Guilds of Ravnica Pro Tour, go look at the price of the decks, and double check where they place on the ladder.
Sinking more money into the game will not make you a better player. It will not make you a better deckbuilder. After you reach the threshold where you can afford every card you want to run, it will not make your cards more powerful.
<But it's still pay2win because it's expensive
TCGs are a luxury product.
>but you're a true kike if you think the healthiest way to extract that money is to involve a hundred secondary retailers
<If I say "kike" enough, that will make people think I know economics
Anon, stop being retarded. If you don't have a market of people who want to play your cards after they've rotated out, that means that your product beforehand was actual shit.
>You need to read more than the first four words of each sentence to post on this board. Piss off.
Maybe you want to take your own advice? You're the one thinking the third post you quoted was written by the first, and wondering why they're making two different arguments. Instead of addressing either post's core arguments, you took a 50/50 shot at the "/tg/ is one anon" meme. I wouldn't be lingering on this for so long, but this is just a microcosm for how little thought you're putting behind your shite.
And for all of this shit of "reading past the first four words," you're the one who isn't saying anything other than "waaah, I don't like paying for hobbies, and you disagree you're a Jew!"
Grow up, Brony.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421450
>>421445
You're entire argument is
>without $20 chase cards a game will fail
Netrunner proved you wrong. Netrunner also didn't NEED sets as large as Magic because it didn't waste 80% of each set on limited chaff.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421452
>>421450
>Netrunner proved you wrong.
Kind of weird that your biggest argument is a dead game.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421454
>>421452
>Kind of weird that your biggest argument is a dead game.
It's a pretty solid argument considering that its death was unrelated to its success or failure as a product. WotC kills the game, WotC fans proceed to use its death to "prove" that it did poorly. How incestuous.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421455
>>421454
>It's a pretty solid argument considering that its death was unrelated to its success or failure as a product
WotC felt sure enough to cut off a relatively passive source of income.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421456
>>421455
Because they were a competitor you cocksucker. Each dollar spent on literally any other card game is a dollar not being spent on Magic.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421457
>>421455
>WotC felt sure enough to cut off a relatively passive source of income.
Yeah. They felt sure that they were in hot water at the time for all the fucking pedophiles they keep in their ranks and cover for. Asmodee was continuing to grow as a company that was in competition to Wizards of the Coast and Hasbro. Hasbro took them down a peg in that market, because they could.
It also has the added bonus of making retards like you think things like "Oh, looks like LCGs can't be successful! Back to my lootboxes!"
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421459
>>421268
Pretty much this. The gameplay is superb. The shekel-grubbing is absolute cancer.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421461
>>421459
>The gameplay is superb.
>my dudes fight your dudes topdecking garbage from 25 years ago
>superb
The shekel-grubbing is a limiting factor on the quality of the gameplay too, the only reason Magic is still relevant is its own inertia.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421466
>>421455
>>421454
>>421457
Do we know the real reason why the contract between FFG and WotC ended?
I once heard this theory. FFG is owned by Asmodee, who is in turn owned by Eurazeo, a private equity firm; it's because of Eurazeo that Asmodee has been gobbling up a bunch of smaller companies, including FFG. The intent is that Eurazeo may be planning to flip Asmodee for a profit, as private equity firms tend to do. They made the final decision to terminate the contract with WotC because they want to maximize profit and were afraid they wouldn't be able to justify the expenses of paying rent on the Netrunner IP to potential buyers. At least I'm pretty sure that's how it goes; I guess I'm not too knowledgeable on these things yet.
WotC sitting on an IP just so that that no one else can use it is more likely; they do have a history of pulling that kind of shit. Just something to think about.
I feel like we should have a dedicated LCG thread for this.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421469
>>421466
> They made the final decision to terminate the contract with WotC because they want to maximize profit and were afraid they wouldn't be able to justify the expenses of paying rent on the Netrunner IP to potential buyers.
Honestly, I think that's unlikely, at least under normal circumstances. With that renewal coming up, if it were truly planned to ditch the contract there's no way they would have wasted the effort on all of the planning, PR, and production that went into what basically amounts to version 2 of the game with the balancing changes. That's in addition to hiring a new lead designer and everything.
Really, I see only two possible reasons for what happened.
1) Hasbro demanded significantly more money for the license, but wound up looking for too large a bite of the profits.
2) Hasbro demanded an exorbitant amount for licensing, or simply outright refused to renew the licensing.
(((Eurazeo)))'s involvement is certainly unwelcome and causing lots of bad things for the board game industry, but the plan for Netrunner specifically was unfolding in a very long-term way, so it seems incredibly unlikely to me that the cancellation was planned by FFG or their investors in any way.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421471
>>421469
Then I guess it would mean that the decision to terminate would have to have been quick and sudden enough that FFG didn't really have time to react. But I can't think of a logical reason for why an investor would ever make a move like that, so you're probably right.
>1) Hasbro demanded significantly more money for the license, but wound up looking for too large a bite of the profits.
>2) Hasbro demanded an exorbitant amount for licensing, or simply outright refused to renew the licensing.
This only affirms just how successful Netrunner really was. Would Hasbro have felt justified in doing either of those things if Netrunner wasn't making any money?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421478
>>421456
You do realize that they got money from Netrunners too, right?
>>421457
>It also has the added bonus of making retards like you think things like "Oh, looks like LCGs can't be successful! Back to my lootboxes!"
This was never an argument of mine, I just argued that cards cost money.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421501
>>421450
If your game is selling to a global audience, and not one of your cards is worth $20, you have a shit product because nobody wants it.
I don't understand how you have such a problem understanding this.
<But Netrunner
Is a meme. I have literally never seen it during the boon you keep wanting to say happened to it, and I've seen shops selling boosters for a TCG based off of some Korean browser game with loli battleships.
<But that's not the point! The point is that if WotC didn't kill it, it would be successful!
"If it didn't get killed by competition, it would be alive!"
Besides not understanding how competition works, you're special pleading. Why didn't WotC kill off FoW completely then before MoA, Cardfight, Weiss Schwarz?
You don't have to go to the Jewing WotC does (as I said before, you hypocrite), but churning out a product that doesn't give any value in collecting means there isn't going to be an incentive to collect, which is the last thing you want in a TCG.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421503
>>421501
>If your game is selling to a global audience, and not one of your cards is worth $20, you have a shit product because nobody wants it.
If every card in the game has a hard cap on its value of $15, and is readily accessible without rarities or secondhand markets, you aren't even playing the same game. And besides, if you still insist on going the kiked route of "muh aftermarket", alt-art promo cards were valued over $20.
> I have literally never seen it
Every games store, Magic shithole, and even comics shop sold it around here, along with every major board game retailer online.
>"If it didn't get killed by competition, it would be alive!"
>Besides not understanding how competition works, you're special pleading. Why didn't WotC kill off FoW completely then before MoA, Cardfight, Weiss Schwarz?
Because Wizards of the Coast doesn't own those games? Because Wizards of the Coast isn't licensing them to their respective publishers and can't issue a legally binding order for them to halt all production and sales by a given date? You seem to be having some severe trouble with the concept of licensing here. It's like asking why Decipher stopped producing the Star Wars CCG despite it being successful enough to have a 6 year run and an active following, it's because they simply were no longer allowed.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421509
It's so sad. Netrunner seemed like such a perfect game. I read the rulebook and everything made so much sense mechanically and thematically. It was designed without booster lootbox packs. And it's basically dead now. I don't know if it's worth learning and playing.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421510
>>421509
>I don't know if it's worth learning and playing.
I think it is, but you'd have to find a community to play it with.
Heck, you have to find the cards to begin with.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421517
>>421510
>>421509
Yeah, finding the cards is difficult now. You'd have an easy enough time playing online with something like jinteki.net or Tabletop Simulator, but the actual cards will be very difficult to find, especially the last cycle and doubly so for the final deluxe expansion. They only managed to get one print run out of the last mid-sized box before the cutoff date.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421578
People use them as either money laundering points or "investments".
Fuck you and everything you stand for if you turn a card game into some sort of financial thing.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421600
I hate the planes walkers and things like. Basically , "meta" cards that are different and have different rules than the core cards.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421635
waste of cash. same as warhammer.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421643
>>421259
Trading card games are skinner boxes with the goal of getting people addicted. They are lootboxes before lootboxes were a thing in video games.
Its the most unhealthy hobby inside /tg/.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421681
As someone who plays YGO
>no set rotation
>wide variety of tier 2-3 decks
>Fair-ish meta, most tier 1 decks involve back and forth interaction
<shortprints and few reprints of good stuff
<banlist can be stupid
<irl cards are expensive
<meta has been repetive the last few formats
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421687
Cost, power creep, and gimmicky set effects that never return.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.421689
>>421259
I like that its run by SJWS and tits are not allowed in their religion. but they will convert you to being gay as hard as they can.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.