The reason I play modern are different from the reasons I play EDH. I think there is substance behind the idea that EDH has damaged/ buried 60 card casual magic but from the perspective of an LGS and Wizards, commander is far more profitable and therefore worth producing.
With regards to Wizards producing more EDH applicable cards in standard sets, the mantra of "good in EDH" had been in the rumour mill way before EDH became popular. Added to this we know that not all cards can be constructed all stars or limited beasts, if the option is utter garbage vs useful in EDH I'll take the latter option every time.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH BRGKresh the BloodbraidedBRG, A box of lands and ideas.
Modern: RG Titanshift. A deck made of cards too stupid for EDH.
Retired: Lots. More than I feel you should suffer through or I should type out.
If anything, Standard is. Swinging from OP combolicious year to not even having Rampant Growth is a bit much.
Of course, in reality, millennials have killed Magic. Just like millennials have killed the suburbs, retirement, beer, wine, gambling, fashions, cars, malls, and pretty much everything else.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
I started playing magic in the late 90s. Originally, it was just my brother and I playing with our friends who live on the same street. Eventually, we found out about a local store that ran Magic tournaments and went to play. After that, I went to FNM every week.
I played every set and never took a break from the game. Last spring, before Amonket came out, I was still trying to make some weird monored standard deck work in a format that clearly was not supporting it. However, I've had to completely drop playing standard in 2017 due to my Friday nights now being taken up by MMO raiding. My magic life has changed from showing up for all the standard tournaments to sending out some calls or SMS on a Tuesday afternoon to see if we can get a few players to come over for an EDH game after they get off work. I'd absolutly go to my LGS to play Magic on Friday nights if my schedule freed up, but I can't say for certain I'd be super keen to dive into a standard where I'm a year out of current, would be easier to just stick with my EDH decks. Not that I'd completely rule out playing standard again, but it's hard to justify the cost and the "grind" when I'm not really going to play in PPTQs or even game day.
Its clear like it was writing on the wall. As simply put? Yes. If anyone has played online games, you maybe familiar with "Weekly Modes". The reason those modes are not constant is to not create too large of a schism in the player base by dividing it too much. As dividing it too much causes longer queue times since there is not as many users. Commander is a custom mode that was made official and its pulling a good percentage of the player base away from the main modes which are limited, standard and modern. None of these other custom modes like Star, Emperor, Stairwell or Chaos Draft have had the same pull as Commander. A game that divides its playerbase too much is not a healthy game.
Magic the Gathering will never die. Not until its financially not worth it to Hasbro or WOTC to keep it alive anymore that is. I seen it with other card games, death is a sort of inevitability unless it can become timeless. I also have seen very few card games get revived after they died off. Even after being revived, its usually on life support and such life support is never permanent.
Commander is a custom mode that was made official and its pulling a good percentage of the player base away from the main modes which are limited, standard and modern.
Commander predates modern and is more popular by at least a couple metrics. There are roughly 1/3 more reddit subscribers to r/edh than r/modernmagic (it's larger than r/spikes as well) and there are about half again as many people browsing the EDH/commander sub compared to the modern sub on this site as I type this, so I'm not sure why modern should be considered one of the "main modes" and commander shouldn't be. That seems like an arbitrary distinction without a whole lot to back it up.
I don't disagree that the playerbase becoming too fragmented is a negative but I don't think commander is having that effect. If anything it's done a remarkably good job pulling casual players in, philosophical differences about the format aside.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[Pr]Jaya | Estrid | A rotating cast of decks built out of my box.
Nope. If anything EDH one of Magic's best supporting pillars. Yes, I will not deny it has effectively killed all other forms of Casual formats (even the few games of planeschase/archenemy seen have a good chance of being EDH-based), but the nature of Casual Formats is that it requires only one unified format to succeed in any measure, unlike Competitive Formats, simply because there's no prize as incentive people to adopt multiple formats.
Did the rise of EDH (or rather, effectively, the rise of Casual Format as a thing) chew away a portion of players who would have played Competitive Formats (or rather, they would have stuck with those formats for longer than they do now)? Yes, it definitely did. But I personally believe the actual percentage lost isn't as drastic as some would imagine - ultimately unless you are a Pro, or someone with the absolute dedication in trying to be one, it's unlikely the average player sticks around Competitive Formats for very long (comparatively to the game's age, at least).
Before the time of EDH, most of these players would leave the game altogether, making them unlikely to even return, whereas with the EDH snare to retain interest in the game overall, there exists the minuscule chance a good Competitive Format and/or Season will see them return to the scene (perhaps even multiple times even). So while EDH might encourage shorter stints in Competitive Formats, it returns the favor by still ensnaring them in our beloved cardboard trap, so the possibility of return is definitely much higher than if players leave altogether. This effectively creates a safety net for the game overall should a sizable part of their Competitive Formats enter a lull period (Which is apparently all the time if we take the combined complaints over the years, but that all actually means the safety net is even more important).
It's not just gameplay-wise. Financially, it helps much too - the Casual Format being established ensnares Casual Players for longer, and it's common knowledge that these are the players who buy most of the primary product (and generate sizable introductions to the Secondary Market for it start-up). The "retained players" who are less "casual" might not do this as much directly, but they do drive demand in the Secondary Market, which in turn gives incentives for the "actual" Casual Players to buy more primary product as well.
I'm not sure how much the echo chamber of "X Comeptitive Format is terrible" is actually true (especially over the years), but if those formats are actually dropping, yet MTG's sales have been proven to be increasing each and every year, then I believe my viewpoint to be correct - EDH is the reliable pillar, the failsafe net that keeps the game functioning in the long run, the very reason that the other possible factors that are crippling the Competitive Formats have not successfully sunk the game at all.
EDH isn't killing magic, its killing what magic used to be. Specifically, its killing 60 card casual. Tournaments suffer because Standard sucks, Modern is mediocre, and Legacy and Vintage become more difficult for new players to jump into with every passing year.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
I don't think EDH kills anything, but rather complement it, Getting mixed with competitive can be reslly difficult for the casual player. I introduced my son to Magic and he went the competitive way to the point we can barely play with each other. He can't just open a Merfolks vs Goblins and simply enjoy a game becaude he's a competitive player. And that's great. Building a deck for him is putting an mtggoldfish list together and maybe tweaking it a bit, he watches videos and analizrs the meta. He's market savvy. He plays every week and adjusts his deck and playstyle... And he doesn't like commander. I like brewing my own stuff and somtimes the criteria for choosing a card is just "looks fun". I attend competitive events from time to time and competitive players can be quite offputting sometimes for more casual players like me. I personally keep a deck or two for every format and I don't expect winning a modern event with thr boros prowess I mysrlf brewed, but just playing it and have a good time anf if I win, awesome
Another factor that I find important is the time you have to devote to magic. Competitive playing is very time-demanding and I don't think I'm the only one here who manages to play only a couple of times a month. I just don't have the time, qnd I want to stress this. My son plays three times a week, sometimes four. He can get competitive because he goes to school and not much else. I wouldn't be able to keep up with that rythm.
So different players have different approaches and I do think it's best for wizarda to be keen ob it.
Commander is a custom mode that was made official and its pulling a good percentage of the player base away from the main modes which are limited, standard and modern.
Commander predates modern and is more popular by at least a couple metrics. There are roughly 1/3 more reddit subscribers to r/edh than r/modernmagic (it's larger than r/spikes as well) and there are about half again as many people browsing the EDH/commander sub compared to the modern sub on this site as I type this, so I'm not sure why modern should be considered one of the "main modes" and commander shouldn't be. That seems like an arbitrary distinction without a whole lot to back it up.
I don't disagree that the playerbase becoming too fragmented is a negative but I don't think commander is having that effect. If anything it's done a remarkably good job pulling casual players in, philosophical differences about the format aside.
Senority for a format billed mostly for just "kitchen table play" does not make a main mode that is taken as seriously. Modern, Limited and Standard are each billed in a competitive manner while also having the possibility of casual fun as a side thing. The common answer to when there is too many modes is to cut one mode off, in previous years I would have argued that it wouldn't be Standard but the way they are handling the blocks or lack there-of in the future is just bad omens. MTG has had worse Standards than this, yet its the collective foot stamp of refusing to play that is more harmful than any tier 1 deck. If one of those four crumble away, it will shake player confidence greatly than any blunder WOTC has done previously.
The problem with 60 card Kitchen Table Casual Decks was that players would race to see who would get their infinite combo/win condition off first let alone get them confused with legal Standard, Modern, and Legacy decks at the time. Sheldon Menery thought that EDH/Commander would help solve that problem by increasing the variance of decks through the nature of the format being 100 card Singleton in an effort to decrease consistency/synergy to improve gameplay quality. What he didn't realize was that the more players ran playsets of cards with similar or identical abilities/mana costs the more they could increase the consistency/synergy of these decks which ended up becoming more of a liability than an asset towards the format itself.
It also doesn't help that the design process of new set releases encourages the opportunity to increase this type of consistency/synergy in EDH/Commander decks. By allowing the use of the game's entire card pool that ends up giving players more leeway to take advantage of this loophole which would eventually create a similar climate to what we see in other formats with online netdecking especially in 1 vs. 1 Duel Commander. Draw/Tutor abilities also play a major factor as well which helps maximize what a specific deck is wanting to accomplish such as getting that one combo piece to swing for lethal through Voltron with enough mana on board to help pull it off.
In a lot of ways this has made EDH/Commander a lot less fun for those who are seeking to get the kind of enjoyment out of a casual format that they normally wouldn't have been able to get with 60 card Kitchen Table Casual but If you stop to really think about it they're not that much different from one another. EDH/Commander gives off the illusion that winning on turn 4 or 5 isn't possible like in other formats but don't let that fool you when it's not that hard to pull off especially If you're running a Commander that's a part of that win condition such as Prossh, Skyraider of Kher. The more players succeed in breaking a format the more they expose it's flaws that aren't always addressed by those in charge.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
If the secret of Commander is in not breaking it then why did Sheldon Menery create it so that players could? It's not as If he envisioned that the format itself would ensure a sustainable future for Magic without a successful Standard. Modern and Legacy both act as a safety net for Magic in case Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro screws up. Commander doesn't have the same benefit because doing so would end up creating collusion If they decide to officially sanction it like other formats.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
If the secret of Commander is in not breaking it then why did Sheldon Menery create it so that players could? It's not as If he envisioned that the format itself would ensure a sustainable future for Magic without a successful Standard. Modern and Legacy both act as a safety net for Magic in case Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro screws up. Commander doesn't have the same benefit because doing so would end up creating collusion If they decide to officially sanction it like other formats.
He created it breakable because there's no feasible way to make it un-breakable without ruining it. The number of combos and tutors are huge. You'd either need a huge banlist or a rotation, both of which are pretty un-fun and probably something will still sneak through. There's always a top deck. Tell me how you'd change the format so that it couldn't be broken, and odds are good that it would step on a lot of players' toes who are trying to play fair, and probably still be broken. Rather than remove the ability to break it, he removed the motivation by making it unsanctioned.
I have honestly no idea what you're saying about collusion but it sounds wrong.
I think transitioning into commander is what happens to all the people who don't want to transition into competitive.
I will never touch standard; the constant rotation and need to buy new cards to rebuild your deck is extremely off-putting, especially after WotC started printing big-money mythics like Baneslayer and JTMS (even though they are getting slightly better about not doing so, it wasn't a complete accident that those cards happened).
Modern seems slightly interesting, I'll admit. The main thing keeping me out of it is the cost for a competitive manabase; you can't really run monocolor and expect to do well with the exception of a few specific monored archetypes. I'll probably get those lands some day and give it a shot.
Legacy and Vintage are way too hard to get into, and represent everything I find boring and unfun about Magic (extreme deck consistency and combo'ing out as fast as possible).
I enjoy limited because it's the only format where everyone is on a truly level playing field in terms of what cards they have access to.
More than anything, I think Commander has become the ultimate casual format. It occasionally attracts old and jaded competitive players who enjoy the relatively lax banlist so they can play all of the superbusted cards from their Legacy/Vintage deck(s) without necessarily auto-winning, but I know very few players who would play it to the exclusion of Modern or Standard.
It also does something which resonates very strongly with players: it lets you choose an advantage of some sort that only you have in the form of your commander. Having a 'specialty' is a very neat feeling in games like Magic which try so hard to establish a resonance between players and the cards. There's a legendary out there for everyone, and playing your Heartless Hidetsugu burn deck is going to feel very much different from the other guy's Mogis, God of Slaughter burn deck whereas any two Modern or Standard burn decks are going to be at least 70% identical. This is further exaggerated by the singleton nature of it: mandatory inclusion of as much Lightning Bolt in your burn deck now only takes up 1% of your deck space rather than 6.7% of it, leaving a lot more room for personal preference once you run out of staples.
I don't feel Comander is killing magic. It think it's just a different game using the same gaming elements.
For me personally, I don't like limited formats and I don't like buying packs (I have way too much cards already, I'm at the point where I sometimes feel like I'm spending more time keeping the carboard organized then actually enjoying it). I don't like competitive formats because my primary goal to play this game is to have fun as as soon as prizes are involved part of that just flies straight out the window. I don't like standard because of the quick rotations: I like to play well, streamlined decks but it is unaffordable to keep up with standard with half your deck needing to be replaced each year. Modern staples are just too expensive and legacy and vintage well, let's just say one mortgage is more than enough.
So what remains is commander, the format that never seems to get old, i like the build around aspect, I like the higher variance between games that 100 singleton offers versus 9 x 4 + 24 lands does. And it's the only thing that keeps me spending money on magic through buying singles (and because I do, someone somewhere is opening more packs then when I wouldn't).
Having said all that, I did read somewhere that Wizards will be releasing ready to play decks as a new product featuring the standard theme du jour. I could see myself buying those decks if they are indeed good enough (and not containing a rare that everyone in their right mind would play 4 of in such a deck just once).
Also, kill mythic rarity. It's done nothing good for the game. The bad cards are cheap anyway and the good rares are just made more expensive.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
One of my EDH friends made a good point, "In commander, you only need one copy of an expensive card, while in 60 card deck you'd need 3~4 to maintain consistency." Granted, expensive cards don't mean cutthroat competitive decks, but they are correlated, and because EDH is singleton it's more affordable to need one copy instead of needing a few (such as fetch lands).
WotC is also a lot more courageous on testing new mechanics in commander than regular 60 cards decks.
This I agree with. The first person you quoted also said that 60 card formats in casual tabletop result in infinite combo races, which is too simplified. My group has been playing 60 card formats for decades now without regular infinite combos. In fact, we enjoy our 60 card games more than Commander, Commander being a fun change of pace. Our meta is balanced, thriving and more fun now than ever before. I know there are other 60 card casual tabletop playgroups that don't do this infinite win race, as I talk to members of those groups in the Casual forums on this site. 60 card formats are no different than Sheldon's quote. The secret to all formats is to not break them. The only thing truly broken about those other formats in home tabletop groups are the players, just like in Commander.
Is Commander and all the Commander-related products something that involves Magic? Yes.
Is Commander and all the Commander-related products something owned by Wizards? Yes.
Is Commander and all the Commander-related products selling well? Yes.
Then the company is making money, and is making money off something related to Magic. Considering that, by definition, a company exists to make money, then it means that Commander is doing what the company wants it to do: as such, it is foolish to say that it is "killing" Magic, as a product is only "dead" when it stops making money. At most, Commander is killing the way older players are used to play Magic (and even that is debatable), but that actually isn't a bad thing per se, because at least it shows that Magic as a whole is evolving... Which is a positive thing, because a product that doesn't evolve is more prone to stop making money.
This is something people on forums like this one always seem to forget for some reason: for a company, it's all about the money. It never was, and it never will be, about what you think is fun, or what you think is good, or what you think is broken, or what you think is "meta". It is, and it couldn't not be, about the money. So as long as people keep spending their money for products that are related to Magic, Magic will be alive and well, regardless of format, individual mentality or deckbuilding philosophy.
I have to disagree with this manner of thinking because it is both far to deconstructionist and far too short sighted.
First, making money is the primary motive of a company, but it is not the only way to judge the success of a product, and should never be the only method used, as it fundamentally ignores the consumer and only focuses on what the product does for the company. It's easier to explain this by comparing it to a car that many people are familiar with, the Ford Mustang. The Mustang is perhaps in the top ten of most iconic cars of all time. It is very profitable, but its profitability varies from year to year and from generation to generation (that is, between redesigns). Most people who are familiar with the car have a pretty well established idea of what the Mustang is: a mid size two door with an emphasis on big engines and speed. Loud, powerful engines, muscular design, the Mustang isn't just fast, its visually imposing and it roars. It is aggressive. Except, in the 80s, it wasn't. In the 80s, in response to high oil prices that nearly killed the segment, the Mustang (and its American competition) got smaller, got sleeker, and got quieter. Smaller, less powerful, more fuel efficient engines replaced the behemoths of the past, and the car made up for it in terms of performance by being lighter and better handling, and by having a more aerodynamic, less aggressive design. The result saved the Mustang, and killed it at the same time. You see, the Mustang had become a different car. Sure, it had the same name, and it was profitable, but it wasn't a real Mustang, it was a different sort of car calling itself the Mustang. It wasn't a "pony car", an aggressive mid size two door made for straightaway speed compelled by loud, raw power, which is what a Mustang always was. It was instead a competitor to cars like the 240z, light, sleek, quick speedsters with smaller, shriller engines that approached the idea of performance by being light and agile rather than big and powerful. A fine product, but a different one, that appeals to a different customer. It saved the name, but not the car.
The second point is that this line of thinking is also very shortsighted. Things that are profitable in the short term may be bad in the long term. Reducing product quality can be highly profitable, both because you reduce your costs and because a reduction in price can bring in more customers. Unfortunately, over the long term, this can lead to a reduction in trust among customers, worse opinions about the product, and eventually customers leaving out of long term dissatisfaction. Short term profitable decisions can kill the product in the long term.
Now, neither of these are necessarily true about commander (though I'd argue it is for people who like 60 card casual, as its a pretty different game), but short term profitability for the company isn't a very good argument that the company is making good choices or that the product is good. Plenty of investment banks were profitable because of decisions that eventually killed the company.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
I have to disagree with this manner of thinking because it is both far to deconstructionist and far too short sighted.
First, making money is the primary motive of a company, but it is not the only way to judge the success of a product, and should never be the only method used, as it fundamentally ignores the consumer and only focuses on what the product does for the company. It's easier to explain this by comparing it to a car that many people are familiar with, the Ford Mustang. The Mustang is perhaps in the top ten of most iconic cars of all time. It is very profitable, but its profitability varies from year to year and from generation to generation (that is, between redesigns). Most people who are familiar with the car have a pretty well established idea of what the Mustang is: a mid size two door with an emphasis on big engines and speed. Loud, powerful engines, muscular design, the Mustang isn't just fast, its visually imposing and it roars. It is aggressive. Except, in the 80s, it wasn't. In the 80s, in response to high oil prices that nearly killed the segment, the Mustang (and its American competition) got smaller, got sleeker, and got quieter. Smaller, less powerful, more fuel efficient engines replaced the behemoths of the past, and the car made up for it in terms of performance by being lighter and better handling, and by having a more aerodynamic, less aggressive design. The result saved the Mustang, and killed it at the same time. You see, the Mustang had become a different car. Sure, it had the same name, and it was profitable, but it wasn't a real Mustang, it was a different sort of car calling itself the Mustang. It wasn't a "pony car", an aggressive mid size two door made for straightaway speed compelled by loud, raw power, which is what a Mustang always was. It was instead a competitor to cars like the 240z, light, sleek, quick speedsters with smaller, shriller engines that approached the idea of performance by being light and agile rather than big and powerful. A fine product, but a different one, that appeals to a different customer. It saved the name, but not the car.
The second point is that this line of thinking is also very shortsighted. Things that are profitable in the short term may be bad in the long term. Reducing product quality can be highly profitable, both because you reduce your costs and because a reduction in price can bring in more customers. Unfortunately, over the long term, this can lead to a reduction in trust among customers, worse opinions about the product, and eventually customers leaving out of long term dissatisfaction. Short term profitable decisions can kill the product in the long term.
Now, neither of these are necessarily true about commander (though I'd argue it is for people who like 60 card casual, as its a pretty different game), but short term profitability for the company isn't a very good argument that the company is making good choices or that the product is good. Plenty of investment banks were profitable because of decisions that eventually killed the company.
Well that was well-thought-out and articulate.
Weird.
I agree with everything you said - it's definitely true that commander could, in theory, ruin magic. Obviously it's pretty difficult to tell with any reliability, but I do tend to doubt it has much negative effect. If it culls anyone from standard or modern (to the degree that they play those formats significantly less or quit entirely), it's probably not the type who are seriously looking to make the pro tour. It may cull the weaker FNM players who, tired of spending constant money for poor returns, switch to a popular casual format like EDH. That may in turn lower the self-esteem of the weaker-end of the FNMers who will now lose more, but I think the good players thrive on stiffer competition.
One thing I do worry about a little is the number of formats that wotc has to design for in standard sets, especially as it regards limited. Looking at cards which, at least to me, appear to be designed for EDH - in this set, for example, profane procession and journey to eternity - some of those cards can cause some pretty undesirable elements for the limited game. As much as the precons tend to annoy me, that's one thing they definitely do right - making commander cards that never see limited play frees up R&D to devote more spots in draftable sets to ensuring the limited game is good, rather than inserting fun value-over-time EDH-intended rares that are absolutely soul crushing to lose to in a game of draft.
I don't think so ... Commander is actually making Magic miles ahead better.
This format is very enjoyable for all the non competitive mtg players, sure sometimes there will be those players bring cutthroat tier 1 combo decks, but most of the players are casuals.
I don't know if it's been mentioned yet but I also think Commander is a great format because you only need one copy of each card. This is great for playing on a budget (I know commander decks get expensive) but realistically it's easy for casual players to pick up copies of cards without needing 4 copies of everything.
I agree with the sentiment that commander is what has kept me playing Magic. I played casually when I was a kid and then I played competitively in my teens. Then I got into college and couldn't afford T2 anymore. I played casually here and there. But I was pretty much on a hiatus and was slowly selling away most of my cards. Then I found a crew that played commander and I've been playing it since 2013 nonstop. If it weren't for commander I would've probably sold off / given away practically my entire collection.
As for commander spiking the prices of cards, it's undeniable. When Protean Hulk got unbanned it raised in price pratically tenfold. It happened so fast that sellers in tcgplayer actually rescinded the orders because they were sold before they realized it had gone up in price (which I feel is a douche move). The day Prophet of Kruphix got banned Seedborn Muse triplicated in price. These are just two example off the top of my head in recent memory where the value of a card was logically determined by the commander format.
My YouTube Channel: The Commander Tavern - a channel I just started where I'll post deck techs and gameplays. Please support by checking it out. Maybe you'll like its content and subscribe! Thanks!
I agree with all of the OP’s facts and observations, but I come to the opposite conclusion. Commander has saved Magic, not killed it.
Regarding competitive play, the player base has spiked a couple of very noticeable times – around 2005, and then around 2010 on through 2014. There is no way for the global availability of cards to satisfy the would-be demand for competitive formats like Legacy, and even Modern. A huge segment of the player base needs to be satisfied almost exclusively by Standard, Limited and Casual play, and to be honest, a player engaged in limited play only is missing out on a lot of the collection-building aspect that is a major draw for TCG’s. They just turn around and trade their chase cards to buy into more drafts. Ok for a lot of players, but not sustainable to prop up a huge player-base.
Second regarding competitive play itself, Magic has been declining since 2014, precisely to coincide with the release of Hearthstone. In this player’s honest opinion, that game is just all-around more suited to competitive play. Magic is a game where you will literally lose 20% or so of your games to mana screw/flood issues in Modern and Legacy, and up to 35% in some Standard formats where there are cards being played of 4 mana and higher. The mechanic where you have to randomly draw your mana sources from your deck simply doesn’t match a Swiss-style tournament structure where you are out of the running after a couple of losses. In Hearthstone, people still complain that the random element decides too many games, and that is a competitive structure where you can ladder as many games as you need to ride out any unlucky streaks. Relative to other games, Magic is very poorly rewarding of skill.
Just look at the history of the DCI floor rules. Of the section of players part of the “Hall of Fame”, nearly all of them established their reputations at a time where tournament judges were more concerned with rules arbitration, and simply were not on the lookout for the type of cheating endemic to card games. And since then, the rewards on the Grand Prix to certain of these “pros” are that they receive three (3!!) byes in any Grand Prix. That keeps the illusion of competitiveness alive when a name that you recognize is 8 times as likely to show up in the finals than a newcomer, just on numbers. It’s possible for anyone to grind enough events to get into this bracket, but enough past success will give you the same benefits automatically. There are a few other organizers, but the Wizards events themselves are simply not designed to have a level playing field.
Regarding card pricing, EDH has been the major force behind keeping good cards valuable. I started collecting in earnest at around Ravnica and Kamigawa blocks, and during that time before Modern and EDH were established, the one single rule behind a card’s price was whether it was played in Standard. Take a card like Loxodon Hierarch. Game-changing card it’s not, but is it played in Standard? Yes? Instant $15 card. Doubling Season? Not played, crap, junk bin rare. Dark Confidant, seems interesting but not played in Standard. Junk. Chord of Calling. Cloudstone Curio, Privileged Position? Who cares what the cards actually do, are they played in Standard? Even Umezawa’s Jitte went from a $25 card to the sub $10 range overnight after the Standard rotation, and now it’s up again with no perceivable demand other than casual and EDH.
The game is simply not sustainable for a majority player base to build value in their collection when there is nowhere to play good cards. It exacerbates problems in design also where it literally doesn’t matter what they print at 5cmc and up unless Tinker or Show and Tell can cheat it out. Before the Commander boom, a player’s appraisal of a card’s strength was literally of zero bearing in collecting, something to avoided for sure.
The only formats truly suffering in magic are vintage and sta card.
Hi rage is due to most people preferring legacy over vintage. And standard just keeps printing crap set after crap set. There is little value in what you get from standard these days. Sure there may be a few gems but overall. No.
Each is actually a thrivi g community that has gotten players who were leaving magic (like myself) to stay. I would not have been going to DBM back in 2010 had it it been for each keeping my interest in the game. Granted standard kept sucking my wallet dry so I still stopped. But I still play commander almost every Thursday.
The only formats truly suffering in magic are vintage and sta card.
Hi rage is due to most people preferring legacy over vintage. And standard just keeps printing crap set after crap set. There is little value in what you get from standard these days. Sure there may be a few gems but overall. No.
Each is actually a thrivi g community that has gotten players who were leaving magic (like myself) to stay. I would not have been going to DBM back in 2010 had it it been for each keeping my interest in the game. Granted standard kept sucking my wallet dry so I still stopped. But I still play commander almost every Thursday.
I think that preference for vintage is largely due to key cards being out of most players reach. It's really only accessible via proxy or via mtgo, and mtgo didn't have vintage for most of its existence leading to Legacy getting established as THE eternal format. If more people would try it online, I think they'd find it to their liking.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
With regards to Wizards producing more EDH applicable cards in standard sets, the mantra of "good in EDH" had been in the rumour mill way before EDH became popular. Added to this we know that not all cards can be constructed all stars or limited beasts, if the option is utter garbage vs useful in EDH I'll take the latter option every time.
BRGKresh the BloodbraidedBRG, A box of lands and ideas.
Modern:
RG Titanshift. A deck made of cards too stupid for EDH.
Retired: Lots. More than I feel you should suffer through or I should type out.
Of course, in reality, millennials have killed Magic. Just like millennials have killed the suburbs, retirement, beer, wine, gambling, fashions, cars, malls, and pretty much everything else.
On phasing:
I played every set and never took a break from the game. Last spring, before Amonket came out, I was still trying to make some weird monored standard deck work in a format that clearly was not supporting it. However, I've had to completely drop playing standard in 2017 due to my Friday nights now being taken up by MMO raiding. My magic life has changed from showing up for all the standard tournaments to sending out some calls or SMS on a Tuesday afternoon to see if we can get a few players to come over for an EDH game after they get off work. I'd absolutly go to my LGS to play Magic on Friday nights if my schedule freed up, but I can't say for certain I'd be super keen to dive into a standard where I'm a year out of current, would be easier to just stick with my EDH decks. Not that I'd completely rule out playing standard again, but it's hard to justify the cost and the "grind" when I'm not really going to play in PPTQs or even game day.
Magic the Gathering will never die. Not until its financially not worth it to Hasbro or WOTC to keep it alive anymore that is. I seen it with other card games, death is a sort of inevitability unless it can become timeless. I also have seen very few card games get revived after they died off. Even after being revived, its usually on life support and such life support is never permanent.
I don't disagree that the playerbase becoming too fragmented is a negative but I don't think commander is having that effect. If anything it's done a remarkably good job pulling casual players in, philosophical differences about the format aside.
Did the rise of EDH (or rather, effectively, the rise of Casual Format as a thing) chew away a portion of players who would have played Competitive Formats (or rather, they would have stuck with those formats for longer than they do now)? Yes, it definitely did. But I personally believe the actual percentage lost isn't as drastic as some would imagine - ultimately unless you are a Pro, or someone with the absolute dedication in trying to be one, it's unlikely the average player sticks around Competitive Formats for very long (comparatively to the game's age, at least).
Before the time of EDH, most of these players would leave the game altogether, making them unlikely to even return, whereas with the EDH snare to retain interest in the game overall, there exists the minuscule chance a good Competitive Format and/or Season will see them return to the scene (perhaps even multiple times even). So while EDH might encourage shorter stints in Competitive Formats, it returns the favor by still ensnaring them in our beloved cardboard trap, so the possibility of return is definitely much higher than if players leave altogether. This effectively creates a safety net for the game overall should a sizable part of their Competitive Formats enter a lull period (Which is apparently all the time if we take the combined complaints over the years, but that all actually means the safety net is even more important).
It's not just gameplay-wise. Financially, it helps much too - the Casual Format being established ensnares Casual Players for longer, and it's common knowledge that these are the players who buy most of the primary product (and generate sizable introductions to the Secondary Market for it start-up). The "retained players" who are less "casual" might not do this as much directly, but they do drive demand in the Secondary Market, which in turn gives incentives for the "actual" Casual Players to buy more primary product as well.
I'm not sure how much the echo chamber of "X Comeptitive Format is terrible" is actually true (especially over the years), but if those formats are actually dropping, yet MTG's sales have been proven to be increasing each and every year, then I believe my viewpoint to be correct - EDH is the reliable pillar, the failsafe net that keeps the game functioning in the long run, the very reason that the other possible factors that are crippling the Competitive Formats have not successfully sunk the game at all.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Another factor that I find important is the time you have to devote to magic. Competitive playing is very time-demanding and I don't think I'm the only one here who manages to play only a couple of times a month. I just don't have the time, qnd I want to stress this. My son plays three times a week, sometimes four. He can get competitive because he goes to school and not much else. I wouldn't be able to keep up with that rythm.
So different players have different approaches and I do think it's best for wizarda to be keen ob it.
To put this in a more memey sense: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/08/05/us/06nytnow-onfire/05onfire1_xp-facebookJumbo.jpg
It also doesn't help that the design process of new set releases encourages the opportunity to increase this type of consistency/synergy in EDH/Commander decks. By allowing the use of the game's entire card pool that ends up giving players more leeway to take advantage of this loophole which would eventually create a similar climate to what we see in other formats with online netdecking especially in 1 vs. 1 Duel Commander. Draw/Tutor abilities also play a major factor as well which helps maximize what a specific deck is wanting to accomplish such as getting that one combo piece to swing for lethal through Voltron with enough mana on board to help pull it off.
In a lot of ways this has made EDH/Commander a lot less fun for those who are seeking to get the kind of enjoyment out of a casual format that they normally wouldn't have been able to get with 60 card Kitchen Table Casual but If you stop to really think about it they're not that much different from one another. EDH/Commander gives off the illusion that winning on turn 4 or 5 isn't possible like in other formats but don't let that fool you when it's not that hard to pull off especially If you're running a Commander that's a part of that win condition such as Prossh, Skyraider of Kher. The more players succeed in breaking a format the more they expose it's flaws that aren't always addressed by those in charge.
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
Shheldon the following about the secret of Commander
"Restriction breeds creativity." - Sheldon Menery on EDH / Commander in Magic: The Gathering
"Cancel Culture is the real reason why everyone's not allowed to have nice things anymore." - Anonymous
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" - Mark 8:36
"Most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution." - Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
"Every life decision is always a risk / reward proposition." - Sanjay Gupta
I have honestly no idea what you're saying about collusion but it sounds wrong.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
I will never touch standard; the constant rotation and need to buy new cards to rebuild your deck is extremely off-putting, especially after WotC started printing big-money mythics like Baneslayer and JTMS (even though they are getting slightly better about not doing so, it wasn't a complete accident that those cards happened).
Modern seems slightly interesting, I'll admit. The main thing keeping me out of it is the cost for a competitive manabase; you can't really run monocolor and expect to do well with the exception of a few specific monored archetypes. I'll probably get those lands some day and give it a shot.
Legacy and Vintage are way too hard to get into, and represent everything I find boring and unfun about Magic (extreme deck consistency and combo'ing out as fast as possible).
I enjoy limited because it's the only format where everyone is on a truly level playing field in terms of what cards they have access to.
More than anything, I think Commander has become the ultimate casual format. It occasionally attracts old and jaded competitive players who enjoy the relatively lax banlist so they can play all of the superbusted cards from their Legacy/Vintage deck(s) without necessarily auto-winning, but I know very few players who would play it to the exclusion of Modern or Standard.
It also does something which resonates very strongly with players: it lets you choose an advantage of some sort that only you have in the form of your commander. Having a 'specialty' is a very neat feeling in games like Magic which try so hard to establish a resonance between players and the cards. There's a legendary out there for everyone, and playing your Heartless Hidetsugu burn deck is going to feel very much different from the other guy's Mogis, God of Slaughter burn deck whereas any two Modern or Standard burn decks are going to be at least 70% identical. This is further exaggerated by the singleton nature of it: mandatory inclusion of as much Lightning Bolt in your burn deck now only takes up 1% of your deck space rather than 6.7% of it, leaving a lot more room for personal preference once you run out of staples.
- Rabid Wombat
For me personally, I don't like limited formats and I don't like buying packs (I have way too much cards already, I'm at the point where I sometimes feel like I'm spending more time keeping the carboard organized then actually enjoying it). I don't like competitive formats because my primary goal to play this game is to have fun as as soon as prizes are involved part of that just flies straight out the window. I don't like standard because of the quick rotations: I like to play well, streamlined decks but it is unaffordable to keep up with standard with half your deck needing to be replaced each year. Modern staples are just too expensive and legacy and vintage well, let's just say one mortgage is more than enough.
So what remains is commander, the format that never seems to get old, i like the build around aspect, I like the higher variance between games that 100 singleton offers versus 9 x 4 + 24 lands does. And it's the only thing that keeps me spending money on magic through buying singles (and because I do, someone somewhere is opening more packs then when I wouldn't).
Having said all that, I did read somewhere that Wizards will be releasing ready to play decks as a new product featuring the standard theme du jour. I could see myself buying those decks if they are indeed good enough (and not containing a rare that everyone in their right mind would play 4 of in such a deck just once).
Also, kill mythic rarity. It's done nothing good for the game. The bad cards are cheap anyway and the good rares are just made more expensive.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
WotC is also a lot more courageous on testing new mechanics in commander than regular 60 cards decks.
Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest WUR Voltron Control
Temmet, Vizier of Naktamun WU Unblockable Mirror Trickery
Ra's al Ghul (Sidar Kondo) and Face-Down Ninjas
Brudiclad, Token Engineer
Vaevictis (VV2) the Dire Lantern
Rona, Disciple of Gix
Tiana the Auror
Hallar
Ulrich the Politician
Zur the Rebel
Scorpion, Locust, Scarab, Egyptian Gods
O-Kagachi, Mathas, Mairsil
"Non-Tribal" Tribal Generals, Eggs
This I agree with. The first person you quoted also said that 60 card formats in casual tabletop result in infinite combo races, which is too simplified. My group has been playing 60 card formats for decades now without regular infinite combos. In fact, we enjoy our 60 card games more than Commander, Commander being a fun change of pace. Our meta is balanced, thriving and more fun now than ever before. I know there are other 60 card casual tabletop playgroups that don't do this infinite win race, as I talk to members of those groups in the Casual forums on this site. 60 card formats are no different than Sheldon's quote. The secret to all formats is to not break them. The only thing truly broken about those other formats in home tabletop groups are the players, just like in Commander.
I have to disagree with this manner of thinking because it is both far to deconstructionist and far too short sighted.
First, making money is the primary motive of a company, but it is not the only way to judge the success of a product, and should never be the only method used, as it fundamentally ignores the consumer and only focuses on what the product does for the company. It's easier to explain this by comparing it to a car that many people are familiar with, the Ford Mustang. The Mustang is perhaps in the top ten of most iconic cars of all time. It is very profitable, but its profitability varies from year to year and from generation to generation (that is, between redesigns). Most people who are familiar with the car have a pretty well established idea of what the Mustang is: a mid size two door with an emphasis on big engines and speed. Loud, powerful engines, muscular design, the Mustang isn't just fast, its visually imposing and it roars. It is aggressive. Except, in the 80s, it wasn't. In the 80s, in response to high oil prices that nearly killed the segment, the Mustang (and its American competition) got smaller, got sleeker, and got quieter. Smaller, less powerful, more fuel efficient engines replaced the behemoths of the past, and the car made up for it in terms of performance by being lighter and better handling, and by having a more aerodynamic, less aggressive design. The result saved the Mustang, and killed it at the same time. You see, the Mustang had become a different car. Sure, it had the same name, and it was profitable, but it wasn't a real Mustang, it was a different sort of car calling itself the Mustang. It wasn't a "pony car", an aggressive mid size two door made for straightaway speed compelled by loud, raw power, which is what a Mustang always was. It was instead a competitor to cars like the 240z, light, sleek, quick speedsters with smaller, shriller engines that approached the idea of performance by being light and agile rather than big and powerful. A fine product, but a different one, that appeals to a different customer. It saved the name, but not the car.
The second point is that this line of thinking is also very shortsighted. Things that are profitable in the short term may be bad in the long term. Reducing product quality can be highly profitable, both because you reduce your costs and because a reduction in price can bring in more customers. Unfortunately, over the long term, this can lead to a reduction in trust among customers, worse opinions about the product, and eventually customers leaving out of long term dissatisfaction. Short term profitable decisions can kill the product in the long term.
Now, neither of these are necessarily true about commander (though I'd argue it is for people who like 60 card casual, as its a pretty different game), but short term profitability for the company isn't a very good argument that the company is making good choices or that the product is good. Plenty of investment banks were profitable because of decisions that eventually killed the company.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Weird.
I agree with everything you said - it's definitely true that commander could, in theory, ruin magic. Obviously it's pretty difficult to tell with any reliability, but I do tend to doubt it has much negative effect. If it culls anyone from standard or modern (to the degree that they play those formats significantly less or quit entirely), it's probably not the type who are seriously looking to make the pro tour. It may cull the weaker FNM players who, tired of spending constant money for poor returns, switch to a popular casual format like EDH. That may in turn lower the self-esteem of the weaker-end of the FNMers who will now lose more, but I think the good players thrive on stiffer competition.
One thing I do worry about a little is the number of formats that wotc has to design for in standard sets, especially as it regards limited. Looking at cards which, at least to me, appear to be designed for EDH - in this set, for example, profane procession and journey to eternity - some of those cards can cause some pretty undesirable elements for the limited game. As much as the precons tend to annoy me, that's one thing they definitely do right - making commander cards that never see limited play frees up R&D to devote more spots in draftable sets to ensuring the limited game is good, rather than inserting fun value-over-time EDH-intended rares that are absolutely soul crushing to lose to in a game of draft.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
This format is very enjoyable for all the non competitive mtg players, sure sometimes there will be those players bring cutthroat tier 1 combo decks, but most of the players are casuals.
EDH: Xenagos, God of Revels.
Dunes of Zairo
SHANDALAR
Innistrad - The Darkest Night
~THE RAVNICAN CONSORTIUM~
A Community Set
Commander: Allies & Adversaries
As for commander spiking the prices of cards, it's undeniable. When Protean Hulk got unbanned it raised in price pratically tenfold. It happened so fast that sellers in tcgplayer actually rescinded the orders because they were sold before they realized it had gone up in price (which I feel is a douche move). The day Prophet of Kruphix got banned Seedborn Muse triplicated in price. These are just two example off the top of my head in recent memory where the value of a card was logically determined by the commander format.
BGU [Primer] Sidisi, Brood Tyrant BGU | BG [Primer] Mazirek, Kraul Death Priest BG | G [Primer] Polukranos, World Eater G
My YouTube Channel:
The Commander Tavern - a channel I just started where I'll post deck techs and gameplays. Please support by checking it out. Maybe you'll like its content and subscribe! Thanks!
Regarding competitive play, the player base has spiked a couple of very noticeable times – around 2005, and then around 2010 on through 2014. There is no way for the global availability of cards to satisfy the would-be demand for competitive formats like Legacy, and even Modern. A huge segment of the player base needs to be satisfied almost exclusively by Standard, Limited and Casual play, and to be honest, a player engaged in limited play only is missing out on a lot of the collection-building aspect that is a major draw for TCG’s. They just turn around and trade their chase cards to buy into more drafts. Ok for a lot of players, but not sustainable to prop up a huge player-base.
Second regarding competitive play itself, Magic has been declining since 2014, precisely to coincide with the release of Hearthstone. In this player’s honest opinion, that game is just all-around more suited to competitive play. Magic is a game where you will literally lose 20% or so of your games to mana screw/flood issues in Modern and Legacy, and up to 35% in some Standard formats where there are cards being played of 4 mana and higher. The mechanic where you have to randomly draw your mana sources from your deck simply doesn’t match a Swiss-style tournament structure where you are out of the running after a couple of losses. In Hearthstone, people still complain that the random element decides too many games, and that is a competitive structure where you can ladder as many games as you need to ride out any unlucky streaks. Relative to other games, Magic is very poorly rewarding of skill.
Just look at the history of the DCI floor rules. Of the section of players part of the “Hall of Fame”, nearly all of them established their reputations at a time where tournament judges were more concerned with rules arbitration, and simply were not on the lookout for the type of cheating endemic to card games. And since then, the rewards on the Grand Prix to certain of these “pros” are that they receive three (3!!) byes in any Grand Prix. That keeps the illusion of competitiveness alive when a name that you recognize is 8 times as likely to show up in the finals than a newcomer, just on numbers. It’s possible for anyone to grind enough events to get into this bracket, but enough past success will give you the same benefits automatically. There are a few other organizers, but the Wizards events themselves are simply not designed to have a level playing field.
Regarding card pricing, EDH has been the major force behind keeping good cards valuable. I started collecting in earnest at around Ravnica and Kamigawa blocks, and during that time before Modern and EDH were established, the one single rule behind a card’s price was whether it was played in Standard. Take a card like Loxodon Hierarch. Game-changing card it’s not, but is it played in Standard? Yes? Instant $15 card. Doubling Season? Not played, crap, junk bin rare. Dark Confidant, seems interesting but not played in Standard. Junk. Chord of Calling. Cloudstone Curio, Privileged Position? Who cares what the cards actually do, are they played in Standard? Even Umezawa’s Jitte went from a $25 card to the sub $10 range overnight after the Standard rotation, and now it’s up again with no perceivable demand other than casual and EDH.
The game is simply not sustainable for a majority player base to build value in their collection when there is nowhere to play good cards. It exacerbates problems in design also where it literally doesn’t matter what they print at 5cmc and up unless Tinker or Show and Tell can cheat it out. Before the Commander boom, a player’s appraisal of a card’s strength was literally of zero bearing in collecting, something to avoided for sure.
Hi rage is due to most people preferring legacy over vintage. And standard just keeps printing crap set after crap set. There is little value in what you get from standard these days. Sure there may be a few gems but overall. No.
Each is actually a thrivi g community that has gotten players who were leaving magic (like myself) to stay. I would not have been going to DBM back in 2010 had it it been for each keeping my interest in the game. Granted standard kept sucking my wallet dry so I still stopped. But I still play commander almost every Thursday.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
I think that preference for vintage is largely due to key cards being out of most players reach. It's really only accessible via proxy or via mtgo, and mtgo didn't have vintage for most of its existence leading to Legacy getting established as THE eternal format. If more people would try it online, I think they'd find it to their liking.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!