12/28/2013 Feature: "Seeing the Future"

10 posts / 0 new
Last post

This thread is for discussion of the feature article "Seeing the Future", which goes live Wednesday morning on magicthegathering.com.

Really surprised they hyped this "leagues" article all week and it said literally nothing excep "leagues are hard, we are going to change how they work, leagues are REALLY hard guys, but we aren't ready to reveal info yet, SERIOUSLY LEAGUES ARE SOOOO HARD TO CODE EVEN THOUGH THEY EXISTED BEFORE".
 

And on to year 6/7 of no leagues. 

Leagues are sounding like they are going to basically be daily events, except you can play the 'rounds' over a longer period of time instead of a single 4 hour block.

 

Probably with more matches, but same sort of structure.

WBurgess wrote:

Leagues are sounding like they are going to basically be daily events, except you can play the 'rounds' over a longer period of time instead of a single 4 hour block.

 

Probably with more matches, but same sort of structure.

 

That and "no more playing unlimited matches within a set time frame for X dollars". AKA not leagues at all because that was too good a value for players.

Zigler wrote:

 

WBurgess wrote:

Leagues are sounding like they are going to basically be daily events, except you can play the 'rounds' over a longer period of time instead of a single 4 hour block.

 

Probably with more matches, but same sort of structure.

 

 

That and "no more playing unlimited matches within a set time frame for X dollars". AKA not leagues at all because that was too good a value for players.

 

If what they are planning is similar to what I suggested, wouldn't that be a better structure for daily events? A rolling event you join, play 4 matches at your leisure and are dropped with prizes based on record, free to join again.

"we want to deliver a Magic Online that appeals to as broad a player base as possible. ..."

 

ah yes and the way you took that into account is by making the duel scene as little customizable as possible, because clearly the person who plays 6 player commandeer has the same needs to the interface as me, who plays 2 player constructed for the most part ....

 

I'm so glad that i don't care about leagues because this articles are noting but disappointing to read if you actually do care about them. I wonder if the promising ever will stop ....

WBurgess wrote:

 

Zigler wrote:

 

WBurgess wrote:

Leagues are sounding like they are going to basically be daily events, except you can play the 'rounds' over a longer period of time instead of a single 4 hour block.

 

Probably with more matches, but same sort of structure.

 

 

That and "no more playing unlimited matches within a set time frame for X dollars". AKA not leagues at all because that was too good a value for players.

 

 

If what they are planning is similar to what I suggested, wouldn't that be a better structure for daily events? A rolling event you join, play 4 matches at your leisure and are dropped with prizes based on record, free to join again.

 

Also, maybe it isn't the ideal solution, but it does solve the issue of the league sharks/tiebreaker grinding.

 

For me, the fundamental aspect of Sealed leagues were 1) being able to spread your playing over a greater amount of time, and 2) being able to tweak your deck, with the one-pack-per-week thing. If these two remain untouched, the it's Leagues for me.

The words "feature team" sent a legitimate shiver down my spine - sounds just like work .

 

When I started playing MTGO (2003? Really?), I had enough time in my life to plan my league playing so that I could avoid the sharks.  The first 24-48 hours after the the booster add date were when you could get a match against your average league participant; the next 5 days of the week were mostly time for playing the top decks and top players, or for trying to crank up your tiebreaker percentage.

 

Ten years later I find that two kids results in a lot less time to play leagues (although, on the positive side, my 6.5-year-old is able to follow the game now).  So if the new leagues allow the ability to play a few matches at times of my choosing, avoid the "shark" timing issue, and lets me build my collection a bit more, it would definitely help get me back into MTGO.  

 

I'm enjoying this week of MTGO articles, because I've been following MTG for the past few years, but not MTGO.  So it's a good refresher for old dogs.

This article seems a fair description of the current state (with a very positive spin, but that is only reasonble since it is an announcement from the company and any good employee must place the best spin and I don't blame them for that. I would do the same in the same position).

 

My question is simply this:

 

What is Magic BETA's vision?  

 

Is it to provide the 'bare minumum" to make the client a little better than Version 3 (that's certainly what it looks like to me).  I have been following the BETA now for over a year, and it seems to me that we are not going to receive a client worthy of 2014.  It looks, feels and acts like something from the 1990s, and after a year of following this BETA client I have seen only changes to small details, with nothing to fundamentally shift the paradigm from a 1990s model (and yes I have provided detailed feedback by the formal feedback surveys to identify areas of recommended change).  PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE can someone explain how the BETA is anywhere near worthy of 2013?

 

I find it ironic that the article is titled "Seeing the Future".   Judging from the BETA client, the article should be called "Stuck in the Past",

 

Kind Regards,

Dwarven_Pony

 

Chris Kiritz wrote:
We've had a separate feature team developing Leagues since midyear and we're currently on target for delivery next year.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnP5iDKwuwk
Sign In to post comments