Hasbro quote on MtG

[Glyfair]

I was reading a recent article on the ICV2 website. It was talking about how MtG's success was a bright spot on a not so great quarter.

There was an interesting quote about Hasbro's take on WotC's management and why MtG has gained in the marketplace.

But just to talk about the core brand reinvention, a couple of years ago, we changed the management team. We have great leadership out on the West Coast. The team had really re-thought that business entirely, really went back out after a trial mechanism in getting young people and people who may have lapsed as users to get back into the brand. They really reinvented the entire play pattern in many ways, but kept the things that were always important to the core player and to the fan. The fruits of that effort are starting to come to be borne out, both in the analog card business as well as the digital business. So I really compliment the team for their efforts in – this is a true case of brand reinvention, re-imagination, all yet keeping the core methodology very consistent for that core fan.

Now, I know some here would find this the opposite of what they have been doing with D&D. Still, I can see a certain part of that vision in the Essentials line. Thoughts?

 

[Henry]

Thoughts?

I think that you can't go home again, and this applies to the circumstances that made D&D such a great hit in the late 70's early 80's.

 

[MerricB]

As a Magic player, it is interesting to see how Wizards have changed their handling of the game in recent years. I would say that it's travelling very well, which is no mean feat for a game of its type and age.

What are the changes they're talking about? From what I can see:

* A new core set every year with 50% new cards to attract older and newer players
* More integrated blocks from year to year, so cards aren't so caught up as only being playable with cards from its set.
* A greater emphasis on promoting store-play magic
* More support for multiplayer magic (Planechase, Archenemy)
* A big clean-up of the rules with M10.
* The Deckbuilder's Toolkit to help people starting Magic (too much of a success - it sold out too fast!)

This isn't to say that everything has been a success (the Worldwake set, for instance!) but the game is doing pretty well.

With relation to D&D, we do know that they're just moving into their "Acquire New Players" phase with Essentials. There has been an increased emphasis on supporting casual store play (D&D Encounters), although the success of that program is, in my opinion, mixed. The RPGA's "Living Forgotten Realms" program is at present at a turning point, and it's uncertain as to how it will progress into the future.

Conversely, 4E just in itself did some fairly major changes to the rules that haven't been seen in Magic. (M10 cleaned up a lot of rules, but didn't really change that much in how you play the game). 4E is a lot, lot more controversial as a result, and I'm not 100% convinced that every design decision made was the right one. (For instance, while I like combat in 4E, I think it runs too long - and this is without grind issues).

Cheers!

 

[DaveMage]

Now, I know some here would find this the opposite of what they have been doing with D&D. Still, I can see a certain part of that vision in the Essentials line. Thoughts?

I think it's too early to tell with the Essentials line.

I think Essentials may lead to 4E brand confusion (it already seems to have even here amongst those of us "in the know").

Brand confusion is probably not a very good thing for the D&D line.

 

[RangerWickett]

I think it's too early to tell with the Essentials line.

I think Essentials may lead to 4E brand confusion (it already seems to have even here amongst those of us "in the know").

Brand confusion is probably not a very good thing for the D&D line.

What confusion? We all know that OD&D (1974) is the one true game. All others are pale imitations.

 

[mkill]

I think Essentials may lead to 4E brand confusion (it already seems to have even here amongst those of us "in the know").

There is a deep-running fear among D&D players that we're on the eve of the next letter upgrade to E&E (Essentials & Evils). Of course, the holdouts who still play A&A (Attics & Ancients) will tell you how this was never a good idea in the first place.

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

The best thing Wizards has done in the past several years is clean house in the Magic department. And the best part of that house cleaning was getting rid of Randy Buehler.

The game was more and more catering to the existing pro player because former pro players, like Randy, were managing the brand and its development with tunnel vision.

IMHO.

 

[Stormonu]

The best thing Wizards has done in the past several years is clean house in the Magic department. And the best part of that house cleaning was getting rid of Randy Buehler.

The game was more and more catering to the existing pro player because former pro players, like Randy, were managing the brand and its development with tunnel vision.

IMHO.

hmmm. I've been wondering if the "cleaning house" that has been occurring on D&D side of things has been a good thing or a bad thing for the brand.

 

[Cerebral Paladin]

The RPGA's "Living Forgotten Realms" program is at present at a turning point, and it's uncertain as to how it will progress into the future.

Could you say more about this, Merric? I've played a couple of LFR games, but I've never really been an LFR player in a meaningful sense. What makes now a turning point for the program?

 

[Eridanis]

Now, I know some here would find this the opposite of what they have been doing with D&D. Still, I can see a certain part of that vision in the Essentials line. Thoughts?

On the contrary - I think that "brand reinvention and re-imagination" is exactly what they're trying with 4E and Essentials. (See Heroscape, upcoming board games, ending the traditional hardcover-rulebook model...) Magic has been very successful, and as a MtG player since Legends, that makes me happy. I think D&D, as a brand, has more challenges to reach a broad market, though, and that's why IMO we'll see less "RPG" and more "traditional games" bearing the D&D brand in years to come.

I was about to write that they're "throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks," but that's hardly fair or accurate. As a business, they're trying to find out how to grow their market share, and they're trying many different ways to see what's most successful. We'll be able to say more a year from now when we see how these new ventures play out.