|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 8:38AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2007
|
This article was a pleasant surprise!
But still, by MaRo's star metric I have to limit it to ****, missing the coveted fifth by not having the courage to touch on future stages of a game's evolution which Magic hasn't yet reached.
Stage #7: Design Dogma Impedes Set Design
The constant need to find new design space eventually subjects all of the design team's sacred cows to more intense scrutiny. Inevitably those design rules which have little or no basis in fact are stripped away to open up new options.
Stage #8: Near Duplicate Environments Become Unavoidable
Eventually it becomes almost impossible for the design team to produce a fresh play experience every time. Veteran players will recognise the play style of entire environments and "solve" them increasingly rapidly. Because of the rapid spread of information via the internet, this phenomenon also impacts newer players.
Stage #9: Competition Becomes Impossible
Inevitably there comes a point where the game can no longer really achieve anything it hasn't done before. Under these circumstances, retaining market share becomes a job not for the design team, but for the marketing team. Experienced designers leave the product and the design team gets fewer in number and on average younger until first it's only one guy and then eventually no full-time staff at all. At some point during this process, the average quality level of newer sets will start to drop significantly. Only a small hardcore of long term players will care much.
Stage #10: No More New Sets
Economic reality bites and the game's corporate owner du jour decides it no longer makes financial sense to create more sets. They reprint some old sets to mark the game's 50th anniversary. I regale my grandchildren with talk of how great RGD draft was before the M10 rules changes. They nod and smile, hoping I haven't noticed they weren't really listening.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 8:53AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Jul 25, 2011
|
"...since then, every set has reused an old mechanic. Shards of Alara had cycling. Zendikar had kicker. Scars of Mirrodin didn't have a straight-up repeat, but that was because metalcraft was a new kind of "artifact matters" and infect was a mixing of poison with wither. Innistrad has... well, you'll see." Scars of Mirrodin had Imprint.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 9:02AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2010
|
"...since then, every set has reused an old mechanic. Shards of Alara had cycling. Zendikar had kicker. Scars of Mirrodin didn't have a straight-up repeat, but that was because metalcraft was a new kind of "artifact matters" and infect was a mixing of poison with wither. Innistrad has... well, you'll see."
Scars of Mirrodin had Imprint.
You're not the first to say that, I bet MaRo's going to apologize to the mechanic in next week's coloumn intro...
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 10:07AM
#24
|
|
|
Stage #7: Design Dogma Impedes Set Design
[...]
Stage #8: Near Duplicate Environments Become Unavoidable
[...]
Stage #9: Competition Becomes Impossible
[...]
Stage #10: No More New Sets
I largely disagree with this prediction, and Scars is actually the perfect example of the new direction they're just now unveiling. I think that Mark's State of Design column next month will include something about multiple block themes, layered themes, or combined themes, whatever he wants to call it. The fundamental change that I think makes Scars a great block and positive sign of what's to come is that it's an artifact block, a poison block, AND a nostalgia block.
The reason that Mark always seems optimistic about design renewability is that at some point in the last few years they learned that monopolar block themes aren't the way to go. For instance, their "tentpole" renewable themes, multicolor and tribal, both suffered big setbacks when Shards was much less well-received than Ravnica and Lorwyn (following on the heels of Kamigawa, arguably a tribal block) seems to have been a dud block. The fact that this came right after Time Spiral, which was supposed to make nostalgia the new tentpole, fell flat with non-veteran audiences, must have brought them to the point of re-examining everything.
Zendikar and M10 were the first wave, hitting a new main block theme at the same time they hit the "back to basics"/simplicity approach hard. Scars, though, is an even more important landmark, because of the multiple themes. They intend to create a neverending supply of designs by crossing elements against each other that haven't been done before, and elevating the storytelling aspect to make each block feel more different (see, for instance, "adventure world" followed by the Mirran vs. Phyrexian story followed by the emphasis on Innistrad being a horror block rather than something mechanical as most blocks have been teased before).
I can tell that they've solved how to come up with new sets and have all-but-mastered Limited development. I think now their biggest concerns are revealed by Forsythe's comments following the Standard bans that they're struggling to keep Constructed routinely fresh, and to perfect planeswalker development so they're popular without being the next JTMS.
I've got my share of gripes with the status quo, but there's every reason to be optimistic about Magic's future.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 10:14AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2007
|
and have all-but-mastered Limited development
After raising my eyebrows somewhat at the earlier part of your post this really made me laugh. I've worked it out! You are the anti-me! Have you come from a parallel dimension to destroy me in single combat? ;-)
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 10:49AM
#26
|
|
|
@bateleur_: Obviously, yes, that's why I'm here. ;-)
The reason I say that is because of the positive reception for almost every draft environment post-ZZW. Rise is apparently quite beloved (I've only done it once, so I don't have much opinion); M11 has gotten high reviews, especially for a core set; full block and SSM versions of Scars drafting are seen as deep and interesting. Only triple-Scars really got harsh reviews, at least as far as I've seen, due to its bipolarity between the one or two drafters getting great infect decks and everyone else.
Current Limited is definitely very bomby, but the playable card pool is deeper than ever, and they're paying constant attention to making all colors relevant. The bombs frequently offset each other or at least give opponents a chance to come back. M12 Overrun is the poster-child counterexample, but after drafting M12, I see how much green needed something good, and understand why they did it. I even like the subtleties implied by Tom's passing mention of Youthful Knight being cut from M12; that plus the absence of White & Black Knights limits first strike's presence on the board, encouraging attacks, without having the profusion of early evasive creatures that made Zendikar so absurd. I just find myself in tons of interesting games, some where I think I can't lose but then face an opponent coming back unexpectedly. It's mostly a subset of rare and mythic cards that are all but unbeatable which ruin some matches.
On my main point: You don't think the multiple-themes approach has significant promise? I can't help but think I'm way more likely to enjoy a block that has a diversity of themes. Compare that to something like Lorwyn, which, as I tweeted to Mark when he was quashing the rumor that Innistrad would be heavy-tribal, was so upsettingly bad in preview weeks that I was out of the game for roughly three years because of disinterest in that set.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 11:06AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2010
|
For what it's worth, much of what you're saying resonates with how I feel the game is doing, DrSylvan.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 1:55PM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2007
|
the positive reception for almost every draft environment post-ZZW
Fair enough. We just have different definitions of "all but mastered" then. Every time a new set comes out I'm a little sad to see they've repeated so many of their usual errors (removal too good, broken cards at Uncommon, archetypes too linear, too many archetype-critical cards being high picks, too few decisions in early turns, etc.). And even then, that's assuming that criticism of rares in Limited isn't relevant, which isn't 100% true.
I just find myself in tons of interesting games
That's definitely good!
On my main point: You don't think the multiple-themes approach has significant promise?
It's a real option, if that's what you mean, but I don't think it changes the nature of a game's evolution even though it clearly extends it.
I can't help but think I'm way more likely to enjoy a block that has a diversity of themes. Compare that to something like Lorwyn
All this means is that you like modular play. I do too, but WotC have made it clear that they will vary between linear and modular sets (I'm assuming you're familiar with MaRo's terms - "linear" to WotC actually means the exact opposite of what the word normally means).
Incidentally, for a tribal set Lorwyn was actually pretty good for Limited. Once everyone worked out how good Merfolk were the draft format ended up pretty healthy. (Which is not to say you would have liked it, but they've done a lot worse.)
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 2:14PM
#29
|
|
|
. Not to mention that Magic has been around so long that some of it's players are younger then the game itself!
I was waiting for an acknowledgement of this also. Like a comment I saw not long ago that there are kids in college, for whom The Simpsons has never not been on TV. And I'm *almost* old enough to have a theoretical kid in college myself. (I have a 4 year old though, I can't tell you how eager I am for him to be old enough to start learning Magic. )
A little short, as mentioned already, but still nice to see these ideas put down for the record. And for the record, I was saying years ago that they should reuse previously proven mechanics instead of constantly trying something new. It even goes with Maro's old standby story of how he has cards that have been sitting in design files for years, just waiting for the right set. I believe that can apply to mechanics also, for both the mechanics that worked and the ones that didn't quite click the first time, as new design philosophies may reveal a different facet of the mechanic that makes it work.
I'd also like to point out a giant untapped resource for new ideas. You can run all the new developer searches you want, but that's only going to skim the surface of the community. WOTC needs to lock a team of lawyers in a room and not let them out until they come up with a way for the community to submit cards in a simple, legal fashion. Set aside a subsection of the forum, and let them loose. Whenever R&D gets stuck on something, just wade in there and start plucking goodies.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 01, 2011 - 3:38PM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2004
|
Congrats on 500 articles! I love reading this kind of big-picture introspective look at the game (from time to time). Since I started my own Multiverse database for custom cards almost a year ago, I've seen a lot of designs by new designers (as well as many extremely good designs by impressively competent amateur designers). One of the points I'm really appreciating these days is the value of simplicity, as MaRo mentions in Stage 3: "What is the least you could put on a card and have it still be cool? What is the least amount of things you could put in a set and have it still work? This is the stage where a designer starts to appreciate the value of doing more with less." Finding the simplest way to do things is such a skill, one that takes a lot of work, but R&D are getting extremely good at it. Sure, there are occasional exceptions such as Cathedral Membrane  (how many games will that play any differently to a 6/3 defender with no other rules text?), but the fact that I'm able to cite one or two exceptions itself proves the rule is generally doing very well.
|
|
|
