What is the problem with Wizards?
05/10/20 0 comments
Here I bring my opinion about the problems in WotC's vision that are causing so much upheaval among players of non-rotating formats such as Modern and Legacy.Edit Article
CompanionsBehemoth brought this new mechanic, which practically means "start the game with an extra card", as long as your deck meets certain requirements. This card advantage made a big impact on non-rotating formats, especially with Lurrus of the Dream-Den, which I would say is the card that defines Modern at the moment. Sam Black, a pro player recognized by his deckbuilds, dedicated an entire article explaining why this mechanics is bad for the game.
WHEN IT ALL STARTEDMany consider Modern Horizons (MH1) to be the expansion set in which the design of the cards started to go wrong. In fact, the impact on non-rotating formats was immense, with several cards becoming staples on famous decks and others causing new decks to emerge and old ones to become obsolete. However, we had many harmful cards, to the point that MH1 had a card banned in each of the non-rotating formats in which it is valid: Hogaak, Arisen Necropolis in Modern, Wrenn and Six in Legacy and Arcum's Astrolabe in Pauper (probably would be in Legacy too if banlist was by popular vote hahahaha).
WOTC'S STANCEOver the past year, the phrase that echoed among redditors was "guys... they already said they don't playtest for eternal formats" (ok... actually it was "WotC is destroying Magic!!", but this one we hear since MTG was created hahahaha). I consider not playtesting a huge mistake, but I will leave that discussion for my next article. So let's assume, for the sake of this analysis, that WotC is right in that stance, and that in fact taking into account 25+ years of cards (or 15+ years in the case of Modern) limits the space for innovative designs, and that they don't want Standard to always be "more of the same". Sure, no problem. We will solve the problem by banning possible cards that happen to be a problem and eliminate in the design those that we don't even need to test to know that they will be problematic in eternal formats. After all, there are cards that just by reading it we already know will make Modern or Legacy a complete mess, right?
"Wizards does not test eternal formats", but instead
"Wizards does not care if there will be problems with eternal formats. If the card will cause problems, but it is good for the Standard design, so be it".
SO, WHAT IS THE KEY POINT?Quick answer: The metric of how much the card is being used is not the correct one for non-rotating formats. One of the reasons we like them is that they don't rotate, and the release of a single card may be enough to give a little shake in the metagame and bring new play patterns that innovate the gameplay experience. Now moving to the long answer. In the reddit post Modern no longer resembles a non-rotating format the redditor VintageJDizzle made an analogy that I really liked. He compared Magic to music to explain why Modern looks like a rotating format like Standard today. The cards released are like songs from WotC albums, and if everyone is "listening" to the new one, it is because the expansion set was a success. The problem is that we like our favorite bands not only for what they do, but for what they have done throughout their history. I would not like to go to a concert of my favorite band and hear only the songs from the last album. I want to sing along with the classics too. Otherwise, it would fell that I'm not watching the band I've always loved to hear and watch. And with MTG this is what's happening. You see the top32 decklists of the Modern and Legacy tournaments and the images are always from the cards released in the last 10 to 12 months. It gives the feeling that for you to have a minimal competitive chance in the game, you have to include about 20 new cards in your 75 (or 95, right Yorion, Sky Nomad? ...). This is very frustrating for those who have had their pet deck for years, who always cultivated it and had fun when they released a new card that was going to be a good addition that they could test 2 or even 3 on the list. And out of nowhere you see that you either have to buy 20 new cards and play with version 2.0 of your deck, or just give up on it. It is as if the game had turned into something completely different during these 10 to 12 months. Non-rotating formats have always been famous for their stability. Drastic changes were never a good proposition. And the gradual changes, for example when a new deck appeared or an existing deck gained a new toy that made it stronger, already gave that little shake in the format that brought the fun of unpredictability back. Following the VintageJDizzle analogy, we are not listening to all these new songs because we like them. We are listening because we are being forced to...
CONCLUSIONThis article brought a review of key points in the history of Magic in the last 10 to 12 months to support my opinion about the problem in the way that WotC is analyzing what is success for a new expansion, and how it affects the playerbase. For my next article, I will talk about what steps WotC and the playerbase itself may take to solve this problem. I will also address attitudes that are already being taken on this issue. I hope you enjoyed it, and I look forward to your feedback. Stay awesome eternal players!!
Fala ae pessoal, Se eu não responder por aqui, só entrar em contato pelo whatsapp: 21 9 7427-9721