Add decks from old Duels to Duels 2014

87 posts / 0 new
Last post
This was brought up in another thread but I think it should be a thread of it own. It is also why I am not posting this on the "Duels 2014 Deck requests" thread.

I think that Wizards should add all the olds decks from all the old Duels games in the next xpac. This would allow us to play the decks we loved back in the day again. This feat should not be super hard as the programing is mostly done for the cards.

Also I think we have enough cards from all Duels games combined that we can now have completely "open" deck building like in the Yu-Gu-Oh game on Live Arcade. This would solve the random deck (open builds) and provide many more options for players.

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

As stated approximately 9,001 times before, this or anything even remotely like it would be a suicidal move from a business perspective. The ultimate goal of DotP is to entice you onto Magic Online or paper Magic, where WotC can make far, far more off each person than they do here. Adding anything even remotely approaching true deck construction would remove 90% of most peoples' motivation to ever move on to a more profitable way of playing the game. Heck, even bumping up to 30/40 unlocks to the point where several decks can be built two different ways is allowing a lot more freedom than they ought to from a strict business perspective.

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

I can see this point of view but luckily I am only talking as a player and not Wizard of the Coast  This is what a player of Duels would like. I also dont think this would effect if people will play MTGO or the paper Magic. Even full deck edit does not change this as this game version are not even in the same ballpark as Paper or MTGO. Not saying that a few people will stop with just Duel but I am sure it would not stop the masses.

edited to add another point of view. Take it from this business owner.

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

I can see this point of view but luckily I am only talking as a player and not Wizard of the Coast  This is what a player of Duels would like. 



If you actually saw this point of view, you would no longer want this because it would make the franchise miserably unprofitable and deny any future versions. Take it from a business owner; if you ever see this happening without a tremendous price tag attached, it's because Wizards is cashing out. It's akin to what reprinting the Power Nine would be in paper.

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

wow, thanks whoever read my post in crosswinds thread.
but you got some of the facts wrong.


first:
have a dlc for all previous dotp decks.
they can break it up into each dlc that the previous games had, thus charging the same for the dlc as they did before.


second:
use existng deck building as in dotp 2013, i.e. removing any card you want from the deck.

third:
this has to do with the first. if you bought dotp, dotp 2012, dotp 2013 and all the expansions for both games, you should get to download the dlc for those games for free to use for dotp 2014. this would encourage players to spend the money on previous versions and their dlc knowing it would carry over in the next game. thus making wotc more money and keeping the players happy.


fourth:
with this, there would be no reason for a true deck building editor in the game, and the decks can still be balanced.


now that being said, this raises some issues in 2 headed giant games where turbo mill will probably take over since you will have 4 decks to use together. but you can't forget we had an elf deck in 2012 and the original dotp. also we had a quasi goblin deck in 2012 with the dragon deck.
i think we would be okay. 

now for the business minded fools who spam remarks about consumers and standpoints on taking players from other games. this would generate more money and encourage players to buy all the dlc for each game since they know it would be used in later versions. Not only that but when was the last time you had an online match with dotp or dotp 2012 in the last year? those games are dead to the online community. i would presume that no one will buy them again. now if they did this i bet everyone would purchase them just for the opportunity to use the decks in the next game. win win for both the players and wotc. they get their money and we get a game that will last for years to come since every year we get a new version to the existing one but carry over all the decks from previous versions.  now who would need a deck builder if we had 60+ preconstructed decks to choose from?

  
i did have a second idea, but it pushes the bounderies of the deck building that wotc said they would never impliment.


so picture this......

instead of every deck having a list of cards to unlock, they should have just a big list of cards to unlock.
these cards can be added to any deck.

so they should give us 5 mono colored decks, and 5 themed decks for the primary game.

and a master unlock list of 400/300 cards.
now for the balancing part. you cannot mix cards from one deck to another.
the only cards you can add t a deck are the unlocks, so this will balance the game.
this will let players turn any of the mono colored decks into 2, 3, 4 or 5 colored decks, based on the unlocks in the list.

lastly and this should have been done in the beginning. we should be allowed to run 4 copies of any card allowed for a deck. they have given a few decks 4 ofs but other decks they didn't. did everyone see  celestial light and the 4 ofs in that deck? it was the best deck until they errated serra ascendant.  
 
i do realize that this would taylor to advanced players more than new players, but it would be the perfect introductory to paper and mtgonline since it would be a great learning tool for deck building.  
I don't think they will ever include all the previous decks in one game. We do not really need all the different versions of the red burn or green stompy deck with mostly the same cards in them, especially if some are obsoleted with a more powerful version. We also don't necessarily want beknighted to be in every game from now on either.

They should pick out a bunch of decks that are different than ones in the current versions, and release them as retro deck packs to fill the time between deck pack 3 and the new game where they have no new dlc to sell. They can include more than 2 per pack or add new cards to them so they all have 40 in order to make it seem like a better value with some newness.

I agree it would be nice to have a magic game like the yugioh games with thousands of cards and full deck editing. That they kept making gba, ds and psp games every year with almost all the cards suggests that maybe games like that don't hurt the real card game as much as one would expect. Unfortunatly they seem to not be making new ones for 3ds or vita so maybe they changed their mind about that.

"this has to do with the first. if you bought dotp, dotp 2012, dotp 2013 and all the expansions for both games, you should get to download the dlc for those games for free to use for dotp 2014."

They can do this on steam, but mircrosoft and sony might not be nice enough to let them. They are very controlling, can set the price for everything on their store, and are not a fan of free dlc. They might not even let download games detect what other games that profile owns do any console games do that right now?
I strongly believe the final DLC for each Duels game should import decks from previous versions. Whether these were hand picked to try to offer some form of balance, or just a blanket coverage to allow more random match ups I don't think would matter too much as I would personally enjoy the challenge of either.
I feel this would offer tremendous value to both me the consumer as I would receive 10-20 decks for the price of one game; and also for Wizards/Stainless as they will receive an income for something they will have to do very little work on and presumably have already made a profit on.
This would greatly increase the life of the game, encouraging many to play on when the game dies in Feb-March time, which is surely in everyone's best interests.

As for more expansive deck building options I would also greatly support this idea. I would gladly pay full retail price for a game which featured this, followed by ongoing card packs to supplement via DLC in line with paper releases. From a personal standpoint this would do nothing to affect Wizards other businesses as I have, due to various factors, absolutely zero intention of ever moving on to paper Magic or MTGO.

These are the only ways that Wizards will ever make any more money from me, and I believe many others, and they are being very shortsighted by not at least looking into the viability of these options.
 the new version? Should each C0D game come with all the map packs from previous games free too?



yes please, thank you gods oF COD! Also I would still buy the next COD game.

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

Steve, I don't see how adding old decks would in any way mean there would be less incentive for me to buy a new game come June time. I would still want the new decks offered along with crucially (hopefully?!) any improvements that have been made to the game in that time. Would you have continued playing a "super version" of 2012 knowing you were missing out on manual mana tapping or a proper end step? I for sure wouldn't.

As for your assertion that Wizards are making $100 from everyone who is not you or me where is the data to support that? I for one have never seen any survey or market research to determine how many Duels players go on to the more advanced products, or have any intention to do so. This is all I am asking for is some valid data to be collected from us, the Duels users, to determine its feasibility.
i believe cod did have a promo that included maps from previous cod games when both mw3 and bo2 came out. it was incentive to online players to buy. since the maps were the most played in multiplayer.

also the average mtgonline player only joins with the introductory membership and as soon as they realize the cost of playing they don't play it anymore. they actually have a bigger online community playing dotp on all platforms combined than new players starting mtgonline each year.

and yes with cross buy and cross system, psn has incorporated this. you buy a game for ps3 and if it is also for psvita you get it for free. same for the games dlc. so reach up and pull that foot out of your mouth and please do research before you make a statement without checking facts.
 
also psn does keep track of purchase history. this would not be an issue. if it was an issue i bet almost every player would still buy all the dlc from previous games again just to use the decks in the current version.

and i would like to see beknighted try to be top dog against 2013. almost all the decks have something to take it out even if it went indestructible. it would be awesome to cast periah after you made all your creatures indestructible. i would just sit there and laugh as you had to play out the game until u milled or took unblockable damage. or a kicked ror on the knight, or a gravepact, or bounce. also a 9999/9999 trample creature would laugh as it killed you.

beknighted was only good for the lack of cards able to deal with it in 2012. 2013 would eat it for breakfast and not think twice about it.
If implemented, classic decks would have to be sequestered to their own game mode.  Also, I wouldn't mind paying for them as DLC.  Maybe I'm rare in that regard, but the thought of playing the best and most fun of the older games together would be worth a reasonable price to me.
A couple 'Classic DotP' deck packs would be a great idea, especially for the months leading up to DotP'14. For us iPad players, it'd be awesome to experience the decks we've only heard others talk about. And WotC would get some more cash from the deck packs sold. It's a win-win.

I'm also still heavily for the full deck building option. Not only do I think it wouldn't impact paper magic or MTGO in any serious way, I think it could also be an amazing source of additional revenue for the game. People pay crazy amounts for deck packs, why wouldn't they pay crazy amounts to unlock card packs? Or hell, maybe even individual cards, if they're powerful enough. There's plenty o' money to be had, as long as people are even marginally creative with it.
This would greatly increase the life of the game, encouraging many to play on when the game dies in Feb-March time, which is surely in everyone's best interests... I have, due to various factors, absolutely zero intention of ever moving on to paper Magic or MTGO.


Your best interests are not "everyone's" best interests. Why would they compete with themselves by giving people less and less incentive every year to buy the new version? Should each C0D game come with all the map packs from previous games free too? You state again and again how youa re not the target market, but then expect to have the game tailored to you, and confuse your personal desires with what (wrongly) makes good business.

These are the only ways that Wizards will ever make any more money from me, and I believe many others, and they are being very shortsighted by not at least looking into the viability of these options.


They would rather make money from people trading up to MTGO or Paper than locking them into a smaller revenue stream here. For every dollar they lose on players like you or me with this buisness model, they make $100 for every player who does move on. In the long run it is more profitable and keeps the core business healthier. It's is the opposite of shortisightedness.



What Stevo is saying is it's plain you know nothing about business. Which is fine, most consumers don't. It's not that Wizards hasn't considered the viability of your option, it's that your option isn't viable. They've considered it and rejected it. Given the spending habits of the average paper/MTGO player, Wizards only need 5-10% of DotP players to "trade-up" in order to be raking in money hand over fist. Your personal refusal to trade-up means nothing to them. If you get even one person playing DotP who wasn't before, you have about an even chance of introducing a player who will trade-up, because Magic is unique and addicting. If that person goes to paper or MODO for even one year, chances are Wizards made more off that one person than they'd lose from you never buying DotP again for 20 years.

This is why DotP will never have custom deckbuilding, except MAYBE with a very limited card pool but there's no incentive for them to do that. Once you're allowed custom decks, then this begins to compete with MODO and paper, because it devalues an aspect of those versions. Once they begin competing with themselves, they lose money. That's stupid.

Nor, if they're smart, will they try mixing decks between years - one of the most powerful draws of the DotP franchise Wizards has at their fingertips is the ability to make custom formats in future years to make DotP fresh and exciting to people who've played it for years. They can make a removal-heavy format year and encourage control decks, or a slow, removal-light format a la Rise of the Eldrazi limited. Plus, some decks would be terrible in the same year; Ancient Depths would have ruined most any mill deck in the format with it last year. Scalpelexis, Jace's Phantasm, Mind Control, and Telemin Performance would be Dream Puppets' only realistic outs against AD. It can't win with mill against legendary Eldrazi unless both of them are in play or in the AD player's hand. The Scalp and Phantom may have to get past Simic Sky Swallower. Performance or Mind Control hitting Kozi or Ula are about the only chances of realistic victory, and AD has 3x Aether Mutation to put the kibosh on that. AD was already a strong deck without it sharing a format with a deck it would pretty close to autowin against.

So however much you (or even I) might enjoy the idea of throwing GG up against Beknighted or something to that effect, it would be a terrible idea for Wizards and a waste of time and effort to put together, given as many people are likely to hate the idea as love it. The best you could hope for is a modding community that could cobble together a cross-year format. Even that would be an immense project requiring a lot of effort and resources for little payoff except knowing they made a few select people happy - and it would be very easy for such a mod to be horribly buggy. Getting Magic rules to work in the minds of rational human beings is trying enough; getting them to work under computer code logic is nearly damn miraculous. That's why when I proposed decks for 2014 I was careful to mostly stick to things they've done before or that I know wouldn't be too difficult. I avoided using Enigma Sphinx in my Esper deck because I didn't know if they had or would want to code in the ability to set a card to a specific place in a deck. Knowing now it's in Mana Mastery, I may even go back and change that post. The only things I used that I don't recall them doing before (and I didn't play '09) was cumulative upkeep, Cloudposts and a Mirari's Wake in a deck that doesn't have a 100% guaranteed way to make sure no mana was ever left floating, and a couple of minor abilities I'm convinced it wouldn't be difficult to code (like Amplify on Kilnmouth Dragon) or that work similarly to things they've already implemented.

Tl;dr: No. That would be bad for them.

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

I also think that it is very unlikely dotp will ever have custom deck editing anytime soon. I don't think retro deck dlc would be as bad idea as you declare though. Just don't include decks that would be bad together in the same year in the retro dlc. (Or edit them a bit to be nice to eachother by replacing the eldrazi with similar bombs that don't shuffle.) There is enough choice that there will be decks that won't ruin the format if added.

Also I haven't used it but a modding scene for dotp does exist. But if coding new cards is as difficult as you say thats why selling old cards they don't have to code again can be so profitable! Why do you want wizards to sell less dlc per game as opposed to more dlc per game for less average cost per dlc pack. Sounds like you want them to make less money.
I also think that it is very unlikely dotp will ever have custom deck editing anytime soon. I don't think retro deck dlc would be as bad idea as you declare though. Just don't include decks that would be bad together in the same year in the retro dlc. (Or edit them a bit to be nice to eachother by replacing the eldrazi with similar bombs that don't shuffle.) There is enough choice that there will be decks that won't ruin the format if added.

Also I haven't used it but a modding scene for dotp does exist. But if coding new cards is as difficult as you say thats why selling old cards they don't have to code again can be so profitable! Why do you want wizards to sell less dlc per game as opposed to more dlc per game for less average cost per dlc pack. Sounds like you want them to make less money.



You...you understand that business is what I do for a living, yes? Taxes, in particular, and other numbers relating to business practise. You're effectively arguing Catholicism with the Pope here.

So far as DLC, you're seeing it purely in terms of "more options." From Wizards' perspective, they see it in having to pay Stainless to do the work, the various maintainers of the platforms that DotP runs on to put out the content, possibly some money on marketing and advertising, and other expenses. Further, they have to compare that to the likelihood of it turning a profit in some way, and public image. Too much DLC and they look greedy, particularly in the eyes of completionists who "must" have every DLC released. Nevermind that Stainless also has other projects they are no doubt working on; they are not Wizards' monkey boys to be whipped to work whenever they please. They have to be convinced it's worth their time, money, and effort. Further, they are probably the people who absorb the greatest loss (proportionally speaking) if they produce something which doesn't sell well.

I assure you, Wizards has no less than three or four people who crunch numbers on stuff like this every day to decide what would and would not be profitable. Those people can't make very large errors in judgment or they would be out of jobs. Wizards knows what they are doing, whether or not you like every decision they make. By even being on this board, you're already a minority. Your views most likely do not coincide with the majority of their market. I guarantee they have numbers available for how many purchases are made of every deck pack, unlock, or other product they supply. Fewer things in business are easier to keep track of than sales of virtual goods.

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

I also think that it is very unlikely dotp will ever have custom deck editing anytime soon. I don't think retro deck dlc would be as bad idea as you declare though. Just don't include decks that would be bad together in the same year in the retro dlc. (Or edit them a bit to be nice to eachother by replacing the eldrazi with similar bombs that don't shuffle.) There is enough choice that there will be decks that won't ruin the format if added.

Also I haven't used it but a modding scene for dotp does exist. But if coding new cards is as difficult as you say thats why selling old cards they don't have to code again can be so profitable! Why do you want wizards to sell less dlc per game as opposed to more dlc per game for less average cost per dlc pack. Sounds like you want them to make less money.



You...you understand that business is what I do for a living, yes? Taxes, in particular, and other numbers relating to business practise. You're effectively arguing Catholicism with the Pope here.

So far as DLC, you're seeing it purely in terms of "more options." From Wizards' perspective, they see it in having to pay Stainless to do the work, the various maintainers of the platforms that DotP runs on to put out the content, possibly some money on marketing and advertising, and other expenses. Further, they have to compare that to the likelihood of it turning a profit in some way, and public image. Too much DLC and they look greedy, particularly in the eyes of completionists who "must" have every DLC released. Nevermind that Stainless also has other projects they are no doubt working on; they are not Wizards' monkey boys to be whipped to work whenever they please. They have to be convinced it's worth their time, money, and effort. Further, they are probably the people who absorb the greatest loss (proportionally speaking) if they produce something which doesn't sell well.

I assure you, Wizards has no less than three or four people who crunch numbers on stuff like this every day to decide what would and would not be profitable. Those people can't make very large errors in judgment or they would be out of jobs. Wizards knows what they are doing, whether or not you like every decision they make. By even being on this board, you're already a minority. Your views most likely do not coincide with the majority of their market. I guarantee they have numbers available for how many purchases are made of every deck pack, unlock, or other product they supply. Fewer things in business are easier to keep track of than sales of virtual goods.



You make a good arguement especially if they cant get any more work time out of stainless. But I feel like you could say they same thing about every single decision every single big company in the world has decided to do or not do. I do not believe that every single company in the world has made perfect buisness decisions or none would ever go out of buisness or change their strategy ever. It is very possible for big companies to not be using the most profitable strategy, therefore it is possible that wizards is wrong that no retro dlc is less profitable than having retro dlc despite their 4 number crunchers. I'm not saying it definitly is just throwing my support in for the idea because thats what discussion forums are for.

if you are right that these forums are a minority of the market that do not coincide with the majority, what is your expert buisness opinion on the profitability of hiring a comunity manager to post on these forums who claims to send feedback back to the developers.



There is a way to have full customization without hurting MTGO or paper magic at all. Simply have full customization, but limit the number of cards in the game. Just have 2-3 normal blocks + a core set, the blocks don't even have to be next to each other, so no need to fear having a repeat of a previous standard format. It would still make DotP unique compared to the other MtG products available.

Duels of the Planeswalkers deck builds and analysis: http://megamaster125.angelfire.com/dotp

 

Another one of my websites: http://megamaster125.angelfire.com/rationalchristianity/

 

I am Blue/White

Full customization will never, ever happen.  It would compete with paper Magic and MODO far too much, especially considering how well-priced the cards and decks are in the Duels games.  The closest we might ever see (and it's still pushing it) would be totally random decks in a limited game mode with them.  Such a mode wouldn't compete with anything in the Limited or Constructed actual Magic formats, but it would still give a way to see and play fresh decks, so long as one couldn't save them.  Whatever we get in Duels needs to be good enough to keep us hooked, but not enough so that it competes with "real" Magic.  

Adding old decks to the games, though, would make economic sense for Wizards and Stainless, at least when handled properly.  For one, the overwhelming majority of their work is already done, considering that the programmers have just been adding to a database and tweaking it, instead of writing the game from scratch every iteration.  From a development cost versus reward standpoint, this makes total sense.

Some players really dislike some of the old decks, and just bringing the most powerful back into the fold might cause some frustration.  For this reason, any classic decks should be allowed only in a variation of multiplayer, and not everywhere in the game.  You'd have to play Duels 2014 Campaign modes with only Duels 2014 decks as well.  On the other hand, just being able to fully edit decklists, manually choose what lands tap for mana, and have proper pre-combat and end steps would put a new spin on the older decks already, along with being able to play them against the current crop.

The decks shouldn't be free, either; the new decks we get in the core should be fresh, because that's why we buy the core games.  As an expanded mode, though (as in one that gives you the option to play against opponents who can use those classic decks, as opposed to the standard multiplayer where you can't), I'd be willing to pay for such a thing, and I think many others would too.

They could be priced less than any actual deck packs, since they wouldn't be able to be played ubiquitously like the actual decks of that version of Duels, and that would make them not seem like ways to just fleece people from their money.  Another possibility is to have them be full-price unless you own the version of the game they came from, in which case you'd get some discount.
Without reading through the entire thread... I think this would be a great idea, and well received by pretty much everybody, but I don't think it'll ever happen. First of all it would make the previous games pretty much obsolete, moreso than they already are. Second it would probably be too much 'freedom' for Wizards to be comfortable with, I think they would be a bit scared to lose some of their paper business. Even though I don't think the latter would actually happen, that's probably the main reason they don't do it. I mean the Yu-Gi-Oh XBLA game has complete customization, and I don't think that had any negative impact on the paper game, I don't think it would happen with Magic either, there are a LOT of loyal paper magic players.
First all you business people who keep saying it is less profitable dont know what you are talking about. You do not have any numbers to base this on. You do not know the growth rate or the up-sale numbers for this game. You dont know how strong the game is on every platform and you dont know how well the dlc we get does overall. You can say this will lose money but you have not numbers or grounds to bases this on. Yes I do run a business and yes I understand how this process works but without the data you can not provide any outlook of profitability. 

No matter how much you want to think it will lose money or how much you think it will stop conversions, you just dont know and so everything you have said is just wrong or without bases. I am willing to bet that even if they offered retro DLC pack in 2013 that you would still buy 2014, 2015, 2016, and the dlc for them games but hey we dont have the numbers to prove it any which way. Like I said when I created this post. This is what I would like, not what would make the most money.

I mean the Yu-Gi-Oh XBLA game has complete customization, and I don't think that had any negative impact on the paper game

 

Exactly 

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

First all you business people who keep saying it is less profitable dont know what you are talking about. You do not have any numbers to base this on. You do not know the growth rate or the up-sale numbers for this game. You dont know how strong the game is on every platform and you dont know how well the dlc we get does overall. You can say this will lose money but you have not numbers or grounds to bases this on. Yes I do run a business and yes I understand how this process works but without the data you can not provide any outlook of profitability. 

No matter how much you want to think it will lose money or how much you think it will stop conversions, you just dont know and so everything you have said is just wrong or without bases. I am willing to bet that even if they offered retro DLC pack in 2013 that you would still buy 2014, 2015, 2016, and the dlc for them games but hey we dont have the numbers to prove it any which way. Like I said when I created this post. This is what I would like, not what would make the most money.

I mean the Yu-Gi-Oh XBLA game has complete customization, and I don't think that had any negative impact on the paper game

 

Exactly 

No, I don't have access to exact numbers, but I do have access to the entire history of Magic and how Wizards functions as a company, having played since Beta. I know what market analyists do and most of how they do it. I know the sorts of things companies like Wizards base decisions on. I can't guarantee it would be a losing proposition for them, no. But I can safely and accurately say that based on things that Wizards has said about various things they've tried and how they've impacted the game that this would be a moderate to high risk, low to moderate reward thing for them to do for this particular product.

Now in another product like Microprose's Magic: the Gathering, they could indeed allow full customisation with a limited card pool from a certain time frame without any risk to any of their other products. Again, I also said it's the one thing they might do here; allow full customisation, but only from a pool of a 500-1,000 cards. It's the retro DLCs and full customisation with a large card pool that would be almost nil chances of happening.

Actually every couple of years I do make a post somewhere trying to get them to release another product like MMTG with a Shandalar-like campaign mode, because that's some of the most fun I've ever had with a digital version of the game. It keeps not happening, sadly. 

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

well just read all the responses from my comments.
first of all it seems that you somehow combined both a full deck building function and adding decks from past games together. that is not what was said. this thread is all about adding old dotp decks to the current games as extra dlc content that can be paid for. thus generating more revenue for stainless and wotc with no effort or extra work since it is already done. no risk of it not selling since it requires no work to do. as thus no business risk of losing profit.

second of all it was posted that some sort of tax preparer ( i am thinking the wierd people you see at h&r block) is ranting off business plans and formulas and what he thinks ( as it is just his personal opinion) that wotc would do or not do based on some type of revenue loss this would generate. someone already called him out on this already, as he had no numbers to back up his staement. he then ranted of that he played since beta and knows wotc and their business plans by heart. that is like me saying i know what god would do. lol, i read the bible since i was a kid, so ask yourself what would jesus do? i know. lol

so here are the facts:

1. all that would need to be done to previous versions dlc is reformatting to use in new versions.
    no extra work or multitude of work hours for stainless to do. they could possibly just release an update 
    that lets the dotp to recognize past dlc. could be that simple.
2. eldrazi would not be that big of a problem. you state that mill would have no chance since it won't be able  
    to mill ancient depths. how do you explain celestial light then. it has 3 beacon of life, 1 serra avatar, 2      
    white sun's zeniths. bof, od, cl, all have cards that cannot be milled and they are in the same game as
    dream puppets. 
3. the old versions of dotp are already dead. no one buys them, and dotp 2013 was dead for months now.
    this would be good for both stainless and wotc. it would generate more sales for less effort and
    get a second use out of previous products that they could sell again. anytime a business can
    sell the same product more than once is always double profit no matter how you look at it.                



 
well just read all the responses from my comments.
first of all it seems that you somehow combined both a full deck building function and adding decks from past games together. that is not what was said. this thread is all about adding old dotp decks to the current games as extra dlc content that can be paid for. thus generating more revenue for stainless and wotc with no effort or extra work since it is already done. no risk of it not selling since it requires no work to do. as thus no business risk of losing profit.

second of all it was posted that some sort of tax preparer ( i am thinking the wierd people you see at h&r block) is ranting off business plans and formulas and what he thinks ( as it is just his personal opinion) that wotc would do or not do based on some type of revenue loss this would generate. someone already called him out on this already, as he had no numbers to back up his staement. he then ranted of that he played since beta and knows wotc and their business plans by heart. that is like me saying i know what god would do. lol, i read the bible since i was a kid, so ask yourself what would jesus do? i know. lol

so here are the facts:

1. all that would need to be done to previous versions dlc is reformatting to use in new versions.
    no extra work or multitude of work hours for stainless to do. they could possibly just release an update 
    that lets the dotp to recognize past dlc. could be that simple.
2. eldrazi would not be that big of a problem. you state that mill would have no chance since it won't be able  
    to mill ancient depths. how do you explain celestial light then. it has 3 beacon of life, 1 serra avatar, 2      
    white sun's zeniths. bof, od, cl, all have cards that cannot be milled and they are in the same game as
    dream puppets. 
3. the old versions of dotp are already dead. no one buys them, and dotp 2013 was dead for months now.
    this would be good for both stainless and wotc. it would generate more sales for less effort and
    get a second use out of previous products that they could sell again. anytime a business can
    sell the same product more than once is always double profit no matter how you look at it. 




Wow, uhm....congratulations on not only horribly misreading the thread in at least five different ways, but then proceeding to draw conclusions that have no apparent basis from either what was said, or what you claim you think was said. I don't even know what else to say to that. Impressive stuff, though.

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

No, I don't have access to exact numbers, but I do have access to the entire history of Magic and how Wizards functions as a company, having played since Beta. I know what market analyists do and most of how they do it. I know the sorts of things companies like Wizards base decisions on. I can't guarantee it would be a losing proposition for them, no. But I can safely and accurately say that based on things that Wizards has said about various things they've tried and how they've impacted the game that this would be a moderate to high risk, low to moderate reward thing for them to do for this particular product.

Now in another product like Microprose's Magic: the Gathering, they could indeed allow full customisation with a limited card pool from a certain time frame without any risk to any of their other products. Again, I also said it's the one thing they might do here; allow full customisation, but only from a pool of a 500-1,000 cards. It's the retro DLCs and full customisation with a large card pool that would be almost nil chances of happening.

Actually every couple of years I do make a post somewhere trying to get them to release another product like MMTG with a Shandalar-like campaign mode, because that's some of the most fun I've ever had with a digital version of the game. It keeps not happening, sadly. 



You say all this yet I have still have yet to see you or anyone provide any kind of facts or stats. I do hear a lot of hearsay and puffed-up jargon but I have yet to see any proof. Even analyists give you facts and stats to back their outcomes. Give me something to hold onto and not just "what you think will happen" statements and I will be on your side in a second.

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

You say all this yet I have still have yet to see you or anyone provide any kind of facts or stats. I do hear a lot of hearsay and puffed-up jargon but I have yet to see any proof. Even analyists give you facts and stats to back their outcomes. Give me something to hold onto and not just "what you think will happen" statements and I will be on your side in a second.



Try reading the articles on magicthegathering.com once in awhile. That's where I get my information from. Some of the articles are 2-3 years old though so forgive me if I have better things to do than go dig them up because you're lazy and uninformed. Your ignorance is not my problem or responsibility.

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

Try reading the articles on magicthegathering.com once in awhile. That's where I get my information from. Some of the articles are 2-3 years old though so forgive me if I have better things to do than go dig them up because you're lazy and uninformed. Your ignorance is not my problem or responsibility.



Lets not start calling name here. You want people to believe your statements as truth but fail to provide the facts needed to support your statements  This is not me being lazy. It is not for the person (reader) to go out and prove your points; it is for you to make sound and knowledgeable statements that are founded and supported with clear and concise facts.

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

Try reading the articles on magicthegathering.com once in awhile. That's where I get my information from. Some of the articles are 2-3 years old though so forgive me if I have better things to do than go dig them up because you're lazy and uninformed. Your ignorance is not my problem or responsibility.



Lets not start calling name here. You want people to believe your statements as truth but fail to provide the facts needed to support your statements  This is not me being lazy. It is not for the person (reader) to go out and prove your points; it is for you to make sound and knowledgeable statements that are founded and supported with clear and concise facts.



I did not call any names. I said you were ignorant of facts that you are, obviously, ignorant of. You've proven this by the fact that you do not know them as you yourself have stated. I'm not asking anyone to believe my statements. I'm telling you things which have been mentioned (several times) on this very company's website before. I told you where the facts are. You are free to research them any time you want or desire. I read them the first time around, and recall them well enough to mention them in casual conversation. That does not mean I want or intend to go digging up the exact page(s) from years ago in order to satisfy you personally because you did not read the same publicly available articles that I did when they were first published.

Also, the burden of proof would be on me only if 1) I were selling something, 2) this were a court of law, 3) this were a police interrogation, 4) I were writing an article or book for money and were trying to prove something, and/or 5) I gave a damn. Which, really, I don't. 

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

So i am back and this is starting to get very interesting.
I noticed that godofatheism posts replies on almost every thread in the forums.
It seems to me he really is an atheist since he trolls every post.
I think he posts repilies just to get this type of reaction.
I since have ignored his remarks since he obviously is just full of himself.
And has an oppinion of every topic. I imagine him a bobble head type of person.
You know big head and constantly shaking back and forth saying no to everything.
I did not call any names. I said you were ignorant of facts that you are, obviously, ignorant of. You've proven this by the fact that you do not know them as you yourself have stated. I'm not asking anyone to believe my statements. I'm telling you things which have been mentioned (several times) on this very company's website before. I told you where the facts are. You are free to research them any time you want or desire. I read them the first time around, and recall them well enough to mention them in casual conversation. That does not mean I want or intend to go digging up the exact page(s) from years ago in order to satisfy you personally because you did not read the same publicly available articles that I did when they were first published.

Also, the burden of proof would be on me only if 1) I were selling something, 2) this were a court of law, 3) this were a police interrogation, 4) I were writing an article or book for money and were trying to prove something, and/or 5) I gave a damn. Which, really, I don't. 



I would love to know what "fact" I am ignorant of. You have still yet to tell me. Just like you have yet to tell me where you get your facts (which you still have yet to say) from. I hear the Wizard website but I dont see any source. What I hear is 'I am going to make a statement. Then I am right about everything I say until you go out and prove me to be wrong about it'. I am sorry but you are the one trying to get us to believe you, why would I do the work to prove your right. You have that backwards, lol. Also I am just asking you to give me one solid stat that adding "for-pay" dlc to this game would lead to this game not expanding and people not trying paper or MTGO. Give me one stat the adding a full editor would lead to people never expanding outside of Duel. Dont just make the statments you made before. That was all hearsay. I dont want to hear about what you would do, I dont want to hear hypotheticals. I want numbers, sources (urls, whitepapers, stock reporting, ect), give me something real. Otherwise stop talking as if you know what the hell you are talking about.

If you dont want to provide the facts that lead to your statements then simply dont talk as if everything you are saying is fact and trying so hard to disprove others. 

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

No matter how great this idea sounds, it will never EVER work. I'm not talking about Wizards not doing it, I'm talking about the cards. The 2009 and 2012 decks all have much fewer unlocks than 2013 (even WITHOUT the promo unlocks 2013 has many more), Kiora's Ancient Depths completely removes the viability of Jace's Mind of Void and Jace's Dream Puppets unless specifically combo'd with Izzet Mindstorm's for Jester's Cap and even then it would require neither Eldrazi to be in the Kiora player's hand and would have to be 2HG, numerous decks would be completely worthless, the older games' decks were rather haphazard in comparison to 2013's decks and thus would leave most of them at a disadvantage even with trimming...


There really is no possible way that this idea would turn out well. It sounds so exciting, but you have to admit that you're looking at it through nostalgia goggles. You miss the old decks but don't realize how many of them would be unplayable due to their lack of power or how many would break other decks. Also, the metagame would be totally controlled by Root of the Firemind, Beknighted, Goblin Gangland, and Sepulchral Strength. It would not be very fun.
No matter how great this idea sounds, it will never EVER work. I'm not talking about Wizards not doing it, I'm talking about the cards. The 2009 and 2012 decks all have much fewer unlocks than 2013 (even WITHOUT the promo unlocks 2013 has many more), Kiora's Ancient Depths completely removes the viability of Jace's Mind of Void and Jace's Dream Puppets unless specifically combo'd with Izzet Mindstorm's for Jester's Cap and even then it would require neither Eldrazi to be in the Kiora player's hand and would have to be 2HG, numerous decks would be completely worthless, the older games' decks were rather haphazard in comparison to 2013's decks and thus would leave most of them at a disadvantage even with trimming...


There really is no possible way that this idea would turn out well. It sounds so exciting, but you have to admit that you're looking at it through nostalgia goggles. You miss the old decks but don't realize how many of them would be unplayable due to their lack of power or how many would break other decks. Also, the metagame would be totally controlled by Root of the Firemind, Beknighted, Goblin Gangland, and Sepulchral Strength. It would not be very fun.



I am sure they can simply expand/tweak the decks of the older games. I did think of that which is why I suguested it for 2014 and not just an update for 2013. As for decks not being stong or not working with other decks. That is already in this game now. There are decks in 2013 that cant get milled, there are decks that are worthless in certain formats, that own/control/always see in 1v1, 3v3, 4v4, 2hg. The fun comes in how you play and what you play.

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

I do agree that some decks from the old games would break or be extremely underpowered if brought current games. The amount of unlocks is the key. They can give the old decks augmented unlocks to balance them out.

As for ancient depths, you would always have to hold an eldrazi in your hand if u drew it.
You would never play it just so u could discard it to shuffle so u wouldnt get milled.
And u would never mass polymorph since it would thin ur deck and put them in play.
It is a good deck but slow. I remember it dying from creature beats early before it got going.
Jace does have 5/5 flyers to kill early game. It will be balance and only shine in multiplayer formats, not 1 v 1.

If they do give us retro dlc for the new version i would assume they would tweak the unlocks to be on par with the power of the new decks so the game would be balanced. And any deck can win, it is just the person playing it and the luck of the draw. I have seen many an upset just because of mana flood or lack of mana to cast anything. It is all luck and probability.
Don't get me wrong some decks will have a better chance of beating others based on card quality, but it will be luck and probability of you drawing the win in time and vice versa.

This idea is feasable, and doesn't require massive amounts of money or time to manufacture.
It has already been done on steam by hackers and modders. This would take the glory from them and give it back to wotc. This would accomplish a lot of things.
More hype and publicity for the game.
Reselling past dlc for more income
Bringing more players into the fold allowing them to experience a diversity of decks.
Showing more cards to new players enticing them to transition to other more advanced versions of magic.

I don't see how this would ruin the game. And if you insist on saying comboes of decks from past games and new games ruining 2 headed giant then remember that it allows for the other decks from that game to be played to counter them. Each game was balanced in itself, and bringing everything together would be just as balanced.
This thread is filled with sheer lunacy...as much as I would love to see full customisation, it is an unfeasable buisness strategy. This has already beed deduced from the higher ups of a company far more successful than yours shadowdagger. And my favorite dotp deck of all time is machinations, so I would love to see the older decks here in 2013...but Stevo and GodoAtheism are right on that one too. Double mill would ruin 2HG for one. The 2009 W/U deck and DP would be almost unplayable, and would be seen in almost every match. Just drop this massive sense of entitlement you seem to have developed and be happy with what you have. You clearly love the current game enough to argue your ideas about 'improving' it on a public forum, so it can't be that bad. 
I am Blue/White
I am Blue/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both orderly and rational. I value control, information, and order. I love structure and hierarchy, and will actively use whatever power or knowledge I have to maintain it. At best, I am lawful and insightful; at worst, I am bureaucratic and tyrannical.
People are really into themselves here.
This was a simple idea and everyone is using the same defense.
They keep saying that we will never get full deck customization and keep refering that with retro decks.
Am i not mistaken this thread is all about retro ddecks not full deck customization. I know we will never get deck customization. But there is no proof of wotc not releasing retro dlc.
The OP specifically asked for deck customisation too. 
I am Blue/White
I am Blue/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both orderly and rational. I value control, information, and order. I love structure and hierarchy, and will actively use whatever power or knowledge I have to maintain it. At best, I am lawful and insightful; at worst, I am bureaucratic and tyrannical.
yes, but I never talk about if it would be a good busness choice or not but people still went there. This thread was meant to start as discussion on if they would like full edit and old decks in the next Duels release. Nowhere in there did I ask if it was a good thing for Wizard. Thats beside the point but there are people who cant hanlde talking on topic and choose to make the thread a topic of their own choosing. I just wanted to know if the people who play the game would like this not if it would fill the pockets of Wizard.

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

If the topic is on if they, with they being WotC, would do this then the topic is actually ALL about what would be good for wizards. After all, if it isn;t good for them, then the answer is clearly 'no they will not'.

As for whether we would like it or not, then my personal answer is this. Would love to see Machinations in here, but not if it brings the likes of other mill decks, and no to customisation.  
I am Blue/White
I am Blue/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both orderly and rational. I value control, information, and order. I love structure and hierarchy, and will actively use whatever power or knowledge I have to maintain it. At best, I am lawful and insightful; at worst, I am bureaucratic and tyrannical.
If the topic is on if they, with they being WotC, would do this then the topic is actually ALL about what would be good for wizards. After all, if it isn;t good for them, then the answer is clearly 'no they will not'. 


Really you are going to aurge to me what I meant when I started this thread. That take some balls guy and I bow to that.

"They" refers to the playerbase.

IMAGE(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/eb11/anyarpxhyntrzn86g.jpg)

Jpoplive i know you started the thread but in your first post you mention it was brought up in another thread. That was me you were talking about. I thought it was a good idea and would give dotp a much needed online playability boost. These games are really good for their price point. But they lack the lasting playability of other games. They are like a new fad, everyone jumps on board then throws it away as soon as it gets old. They come back for the dlc drops then leave again. Having access to all previous decks would make this games 100 times better.
I do understand that mind of void and dream puppets would rule 2 headed giant but i would still want this. It would be a simple thing to ban that team up in 2 headed giant games. They already don't allow double decking. But 4 player free for all would be no problem, and way more fun due to the fact that the decks you can play against span 3 years.

You will have your hard core 2 headed giant players playing all kinds of deck comboes.
And i seriously don't think mill will be the worst team up. It would be goblin gangland paired with dragons from 2012. For insane goblin rush.
So i am back and this is starting to get very interesting. I noticed that godofatheism posts replies on almost every thread in the forums. It seems to me he really is an atheist since he trolls every post. I think he posts repilies just to get this type of reaction. I since have ignored his remarks since he obviously is just full of himself. And has an oppinion of every topic. I imagine him a bobble head type of person. You know big head and constantly shaking back and forth saying no to everything.



That's pretty funny, considering that I have a much smaller post count than some people who've been here less than a year, and I've been here eight and some change. I speak only when I have something of value to add or I feel strongly on a topic. You might learn from that.

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.