I think you may have misinterpreted what I was saying regarding the mulligan. Teferi does not specifically add to any issue there. Specifically being the key word. What I was saying was that the Vancouver Mulligan was instituted to lessen the amount of games that felt super un-interactive. Teferi, in my opinion, epitomizes a card that is steeped with un-interactivity. What I was saying was that it seems contradictory to introduce mechanics that prevent that issue, only to print cards that exacerbate it.
The mulligan thing was more about having less non-games due to bad starting hands than interactiveness of cards, so your argument here makes little sense. The point of saying Teferi is not interactive makes even less sense. We are talking about a control card which means you wanna interact with your opponent.
In the manner that you are describing, I don't think Wizard's has some crazy insider trading insight into the "secondary market." I think we, the players dictate that. However, if there is no ceiling in terms of power, Wizard's has the ability to influence the primary market to an almost unethical degree. Where Call of the Herd was the nut high, for $20 a piece, and that just gave you two elephants sorcery speed, its concerning to me that wizard's can immediately influence the market, at their behest, just by printing this powerful cards. Like hey guys, looks like sales are down this quarter, so lets print something outrageous that sort of defies the ideology we have stuck to for years, because hey... we need profits. I can tell you first hand, this is not conducive to the garnering of new players.
Carney T @ 22 is reasonable for the nut high rare in the color. No issue with me here.
Jade Ranger @ 13 is reasonable for a staple in the most played deck currently. No issue with me here.
Being able to get a playset of the most powerful green rare in the format, for less than what I can get 2 Teferi for.... Big issue with me here. I think that should probably put some perspective on the problem.
As for the Ultimates... I understand the general premise... That said, it feels super clunky, pokemon-y, unmagic-like to me to win a game in that fashion. I have found myself in plenty of situations where I have been playing turbo fog against bg, both players with walkers set up, and its just a race to 'ultimate.' I feel like that deters from the strategy of the game when you can just, oops, I win like that. This is probably just the old, salty magic player in me, but even in my prime, if you beat someone with Phage the Untouchable, it wasnt really a mark of being a good player. Teferi, specifically, I sort of have an issue with the wording. Apparently there is a semantic rule difference between "when" and "whenever," which is somewhat unclear to me.
Still I have difficult comprehend why Teferi is a problem while you don't have problems with cards like Carnage Tyrant ($25 for a mostly SB card and the epitome of non-interactive threat) and Jadelight Ranger (a boring $16 value card needed in mostly green decks like you said) and also so many other cards that would fit the same Teferi bill.
No offense, but it seems more about being salty about a card you want but you don't feel like chewing the price. If you really believed Teferi was that broken of a design and that shady of a push by WotC, you should have cleared the house and bought them when you could get them for less than $20. Or less than $35, $40, and so on. If you really believe Teferi shouldn't exist because he fundamentally breaks some market pricing, just jump on this train already. It will be at $75+ someday if your opinions about it holds true. Of course, WotC can influence the prices; however, they do it more with reprints rather than printing obviously powerful cards. Like you said, the demand makes the price. If players believe the card is $50 powerful, it will be regardless of what WotC thinks.
I believe WotC thought Teferi would be a nifty PW for control and designed that way without thinking about just selling boxes or influence prices and so on. Like I mentioned already, if you follow the price history, at the beginning most people didn't think much of this card. Some even said he was similar to Jace from SOI block. Just a slightly upgrade vs a clunkier casting cost. Unlike Jace the Mindsculptor, people underestimated Teferi. It took some time to get to this point. This reflected in the price history.
Another example would be Liliana of the Veil. I think it was the first pushed 3cmc PW. At first people were hyped about her and this reflected the pre order price of $60 I believe (very pretty high at the time). After some weeks, she didn't see much play in Standard, so her price got as low as $2X. After people see her potential in Legacy and Modern, her price recovered a bit, but it was still around $40 and 50 for a good time till she started to explode in price reaching a whopping $80 which was very high at the time as well. The same complaints (maybe not the mulligan one as it seems so random) could apply to her: insane price for an obviously pushed card (it even had an official article about the designer basically bragging on how pushed she was), game ending ultimate, and so on.
Again I sympathize with your sentiment about prices, but just picking Teferi for this complaint it's not a good reason. This is not a new problem and not vaguely unique to or caused by Teferi. If you picked 100 Teferis at $15 or so, would you have the same complaint? Maybe we should start complaining about how Arclight Phoenix shouldn't exist as well. It seems very similar in case.
Your point about ultimates still doesn't make much sense. I think you only envision one way of playing and dismiss others. A race of who ultimate first is as valid as any situation. You are ignoring so much stuff that goes on those situations and simply judge it as not-MTG-like. There are so many different ways to get that "ops I win the game" or maybe "bad" ways to win the game through very low strategies and Teferi way would be very low on this list. Still it's fine if you have this opinion. What isn't fine is just Teferi. So many other PWs have similar problems, so why not make the complaint more general?
Dunno about why Teferi specifically is a problem. None of the arguments said are new or are just feelings (which I understand somewhat).
I stopped playing during Mercadian Masques and came back during New Phyrexia, so I also got shocked by the prices of the cards in Standard, PW cards, powerlevel of creatures, and mythic rarity. I think Jace hit like absurd $200 mark and Baneslayer was like 40~50. And in most Standard, some cards would reach $50 mark sometimes. So it's nothing new. I remember people complaining about $20 bucks T2 rares. Nothing new under the sky about pushed cards in Standard.
About Teferi being OP, I disagree. You need to keep control to the point Teferi is good, so you can't jam that in any deck. Control is on and off as being one of the best decks. It's very powerful and the demand makes it a $50+ card. However, it doesn't seem something broken that warps all formats around it. It's just something powerful aside Jace, the Mindscuptor that would be more OP card than Teferi overall. Maybe in the future something may make it broken, but it's unlikely. Other cards were OP in Standard for different reasons. Teferi is just one of the most powerful things you can do in Standard and other formats, but it's not the only thing.
1) I do agree with no card should be super expensive, but the only thing that would offset this is reprinting them in precon decks which is something WotC doesn't do normally. They aren't Pokemon. They are very conservative with it. Now I would not complain much specifically about Teferi. Standard overall is at all time high with $600 Standard decks which would put some Modern decks to shame value wise. I'd say Teferi's price at $50 feels more right than Jadelight Ranger, Carnage Tyrant, and so on. These seem way more overpriced.
Now the point 1a), if you believe that some people at WotC has links with some secondary market, so they can manipulate the prices indirectly, yeah it's probably right. Still, it's nothing new. They obviously know if a pushed card will be pricey with some confidence. Still it is set by the secondary market. They can do a douche move making some utility spells as rare or mythic. Carnage Tyrant and Rekindling Phoenix could be rare and some of the rare removal could be uncommon like in the past. However, they use the excuse of limited format to justify these upticks in rarities which makes prices high. They could design sets a bit more tightly that could sustain powerful cards at lower rarity, but they rarely do that and still make some mistakes while hurting the prices of Standard cards.
Still nothing new about it and not a Teferi specific problem. This particular card isn't even a good example (as people underestimated it as you could get Teferi for $15ish for a brief time and for less than $40 for weeks). Teferi is clearly not a good example of this problem.
2) I quite don't get this problem and Teferi. What the mulligan rule has to do with Teferi specifically? Lot of cards similar to Teferi were printed before during this period. If lack of interactivity is the problem, the mulligan rule would be worse with combo decks. They usually aren't interactive or solitaire style. You are complaining about a card that goes in a control shell which wants to interact with your opponent's card. WotC statements is making the game about the board, so Teferi is a good way to have control decks something on the board. Again, maybe Teferi isn't the best example for this "problem".
3) The emblem grip is just nonsense. If you get there, you are supposed to have it finish the game. That's the point of most ultimates. Maybe the problem is the design of emblems as you can't interact with any of them. Still not a problem specific with Teferi as well. We had Liliana's and Chandra's ultimate in the past that would finish games faster than Teferi's ultimate. You don't even need to ultimate with some other PWs like Karn and company.
So in the end, I understand some of the complains and they are mostly old problems/complaints. However, I don't quite get why Teferi is bad in the ways you explained it. It's either not alone in the problem or just the wrong example. I don't like pushed cards being at higher rarity and no good uncommon/common like most people I think. However, some of the complaints may just sound as "old school player" doesn't like "NWO" MTG. Some valid, some just a matter of taste, but hating on Teferi seems unwarranted.
Dunno how I really feel about it. Probably it's fine. In the end of the day it's just extra option on how to buy sealed product and it's perfect tailored to those who likes to buy single boosters for the thrill.
Maybe they should hire game designers from other countries to occasionally make their sets. They are about diversity after all, so why not apply that to card design and world building? At very least hire teams from European countries, Japan, or Korea. I'd like to see more artists from East Asia at least and allow some artists from anywhere make some abstract art. They could focus the US team for balance purposes. Standard is very sensible to big fluctuations in power level between sets.
Now to the original point, it may not look good for the MTG only stores for sure, also they selling special products directly to the public seems ominous to some, but I've seen complains people had with LGS overcharging and going over MSRP and asking better access to sealed products over the years. Also, even some clamored to WotC sell singles (or bundle of) directly, so I don't think those are strong enough signs of doom in the future.
I believe the bad card stock during Kaladesh to Ixalan era is more worrisome than that. They are still trying to get back to the card stock quality, but there yet. This could make counterfeit more dangerous of an impact than the Amazon and Mythic Edition debacle. Also, the lack of better support for LGS events is also worrisome. It's clear that WotC is very skimpy with promos. They occasionally throw a bone, but they should just throw the entire skeleton to make these events more attractive.
I'd say that the Mythic Edition problem just showed to WotC that we will dig whatever they put on for whatever price even with really bad service. About the Amazon thing, I have seen people happy about being able to buy boxes without resorting to acrobatics like patreon. It's sure bad for MTG only stores, but I don't think it will impact hobby stores that much, but it may make them host less events, as even selling singles may become less attractive. However, WotC could counter this by giving stores better promo support.
I think MTG would do just fine even if all MTG only stores disappear. It'd sux royally for a lot players as the density of places that host events dwindle to just big hobby shops, but at worse we just roll back to a pre-Innistrad era I imagine. Maybe I'm being optimistic.
Well HS has issues with AI as well, still it's a good experience. Eternal does have single player matches and it's more complex than HS and close to MTG. The AI is pretty basic, but it's serviceable. It doesn't need to be that scripted to be serviceable. They could just limited AI with portal like cards and give them a good quality of cards (or cards designed for AI only). They are already doing it anyway with exclusive Arena cards.
You can have good experience with strategy games even with bad AI or scripted AI. It doesn't need to be 100% MTG game either. They could have puzzle like experiences with only one or multiple solutions. Weekly puzzle challenges could be provided as PvE experience (and as a source of some reward).
The point isn't just teach the basics of the game and the interface. There are so much more you can learn about MTG that could be fulfilled by PvE. The tutorial in Arena is very basic and just there. It's serviceable for what is trying to do. Still it brushes off so many aspects of MTG rules, gameplay, and even interface. Puzzles with scenarios and complex board states could teach timing triggers and so much more complex stuff. No AI needed and could be 100% scripted.
You really don't need an impressive AI at all. Just good and inventive design.
I'd say WotC always had problems with printings since the beginning. We are more forgiven of past bad batches because of nostalgia (they are charming now), but they are fooling around with the card stock and foiling quality for a long time.
I guess today's problem started around RTR as they had to ramp up card printing production and started to get noticeable with MM15 and other supplemental products, got bad during EMA, and finally hit rock bottom with Kaladesh/Amonkhet/Ixalan. Not just foils, card stock which probably affects foils as well.
Sadly WotC is very stingy with foil quality. My early 90s anime cards still look pack fresh while old foils starts to inevitably warp a bit or get foggy and new foils are just crap. Even Japanese printing won't help with WotC specifications. This is basically WotC trademark at this point although this low point is indeed too low even for WotC.
Also, I can see WotC reaches another rock bottom with this in the future. Planning ahead isn't WotC's forte. Another big growth of playerbase would cause a higher demand of printing. Lot of the bad batches released probably would be lessened if whoever was in charge of this planned ahead instead of cutting corners. Sadly, WotC will cut corners on various logistical aspects of MTG.
There are more lore material out there besides what WotC show us actually and you give credit for. RPG material also expand on these. Ravnica has some amount of lore. After all it's the third revisit and they were written with different approaches during different eras. Mirrodin could also be portraited. You don't need that rich of a lore in a mobile/online card game. Still it's way better lore than most of the card games out there and this could be a selling point that is vastly underused.
Even if it's story focused on characters and planes are just placeholder stages, it's still miles better than the competition. Yet the competition sells their smudge of a setting way better than WotC with Arena.
We are talking about online card game after all. Not a full fledged RPG. Yet they could have a singleplayer campaign worthy of a RPG that could sell the setting to the public while expanding its branding. The material and resources are there.
Yeah, Arena is fine as mediocre fine. It's not bad per se, not even the economy is that bad as well (I think paper MTG doesn't convert well for digital model, but I guess it's a different discussion). However, I think this is the problem. It stinks of just being OK. Like a student trying to get a passing grade just for formality reason.
Even the codes and freebies are given so half-assed and half-hearted.
As of the topic of new players. One thing Arena gets completely wrong is the lack of singleplayer content. Other card games, even *****ty predatory mobile ones, have singleplayer gameplay. Some very limited, others amazing as a campaign deserving of a proper strategy game. Arena doesn't even have a bad one. They could use this to give essential cards (I mean essential, not limited pick 7+ cards) to new players while teaching them the real basics of MTG (like card advantage, card evaluation, and so on, not that dumb stuff like blocking, attack, and so on). I'm surprised on how insightful Eternal's tutorial was. I believe Faeria had a very good tutorial system as well. If HS singleplayer had a better reward, it would be perfect (gameplay wise is indisputable).
Also, one thing MTG could beat their competition is lore. Singleplayer would present flavor and identity to new players immersing them in the world building of MTG. R&D spends lot of resources on this, so why not present this valuable asset to them? It would actually help with the old guard as well.
This game feels like it started as "how to strip money from customers the best way possible" first and gameplay second. It seems like the devs have no idea on what direction to take with Arena. They say it's for the general public, but they pander the old guard and don't really do much at attract players outside of the HS community with those sponsorships. I guess they are happy with that.
They thought that an engine for the card would be more than enough. The basics are all over the place. The UI and menus are so 2000s, the animation effect is just OK at this stage of the beta, the timer is garbage, the collection management is amateurish, and matchmaking seems barebone at best. Arena would be amazing in 200X, but its systems and propositions seem very dated.
I don't care about the whole "economy sux" etcetera. HS economy sux and it's doing pretty fine. However, HS gameplay justifies its shoddy economy. It clearly started as a gameplay first like any good designed game should. Arena doesn't feel like that, so the only thing that matters is the economy as gameplay is just the bare minimum of acceptability for today's standard. I believe HS economy is worse than Arena right now, but it doesn't matter because HS service is way ahead of Arena (and that's a game with a very vocal community). Now I don't think there are much to Arena to back its economy proposition.
Sadly the message WotC/Hasbro gets from us customers is we are OK with this underpar service while they charge 250 bucks + shipping (on the website it mocks us with free shipping messages). It's just easy cash for them.
The whole experience was a mess. I guess that's not much different from past occurrences; however, this was a bit product with a huge shift in terms of distribution.
Maybe they should have let Amazon fill the orders, after all what's the point of ceasing distribution to LGS and letting Amazon do it if Hasbro can't handle a mere spike in traffic?
Every system inside Hasbro website and customer service were overwhelmed. They clearly didn't put any effort in this. They should have expected that as they barely can handle SDCC orders.
After all this time playing Arena and seeing how it is evolving, it's getting better, but it's not serving the real purpose for customers, new audience, and ultimately shareholders. They want a bigger stack from twitch/mobile audience, but I don't see Arena serving this purpose. At the same time it's trying to make MTGO crowd not unhappy by making it as close as MTG as possible while trying to be light and friendly to the general public. Again, it will failure at both fronts. At best it's just a compromise. However, we have that already and it's MTGO.
I think the best they can do is those duel games. Maybe they should make a new IP that may have some aspects of MTG Lore (like the idea of players being Planeswalkers) with new rules better adapted to mobile and streaming gaming that also can be translated to paper if they wanted to. It would hit two birds with two stones: increase the brand name for a bigger and younger audience and also increase the digital presence in a meaningful way. They could leave the Avenger style writing to that as well.
MTG is clearly not cut for the digital era IMO. MTG is in its own bubble and maybe it should stay that way. MTG isn't for everybody and never will be. Trying to push it to a wider audience just dilute its own special charm. Arena could just be a proper mobile/freemium game without trying to translate the paper experience 100%. It's not suitable to anybody. People are just forced to use MTGO because either they don't have better option or the need a tool for grinding. MTGO is perfect fine as is. Arena is just a more streamlined MTGO experience without any identity of its own. It's try to be HS with bad mobile micro transactions and MTGO style events.
Got luck!
The mulligan thing was more about having less non-games due to bad starting hands than interactiveness of cards, so your argument here makes little sense. The point of saying Teferi is not interactive makes even less sense. We are talking about a control card which means you wanna interact with your opponent.
Still I have difficult comprehend why Teferi is a problem while you don't have problems with cards like Carnage Tyrant ($25 for a mostly SB card and the epitome of non-interactive threat) and Jadelight Ranger (a boring $16 value card needed in mostly green decks like you said) and also so many other cards that would fit the same Teferi bill.
No offense, but it seems more about being salty about a card you want but you don't feel like chewing the price. If you really believed Teferi was that broken of a design and that shady of a push by WotC, you should have cleared the house and bought them when you could get them for less than $20. Or less than $35, $40, and so on. If you really believe Teferi shouldn't exist because he fundamentally breaks some market pricing, just jump on this train already. It will be at $75+ someday if your opinions about it holds true. Of course, WotC can influence the prices; however, they do it more with reprints rather than printing obviously powerful cards. Like you said, the demand makes the price. If players believe the card is $50 powerful, it will be regardless of what WotC thinks.
I believe WotC thought Teferi would be a nifty PW for control and designed that way without thinking about just selling boxes or influence prices and so on. Like I mentioned already, if you follow the price history, at the beginning most people didn't think much of this card. Some even said he was similar to Jace from SOI block. Just a slightly upgrade vs a clunkier casting cost. Unlike Jace the Mindsculptor, people underestimated Teferi. It took some time to get to this point. This reflected in the price history.
Another example would be Liliana of the Veil. I think it was the first pushed 3cmc PW. At first people were hyped about her and this reflected the pre order price of $60 I believe (very pretty high at the time). After some weeks, she didn't see much play in Standard, so her price got as low as $2X. After people see her potential in Legacy and Modern, her price recovered a bit, but it was still around $40 and 50 for a good time till she started to explode in price reaching a whopping $80 which was very high at the time as well. The same complaints (maybe not the mulligan one as it seems so random) could apply to her: insane price for an obviously pushed card (it even had an official article about the designer basically bragging on how pushed she was), game ending ultimate, and so on.
Again I sympathize with your sentiment about prices, but just picking Teferi for this complaint it's not a good reason. This is not a new problem and not vaguely unique to or caused by Teferi. If you picked 100 Teferis at $15 or so, would you have the same complaint? Maybe we should start complaining about how Arclight Phoenix shouldn't exist as well. It seems very similar in case.
Your point about ultimates still doesn't make much sense. I think you only envision one way of playing and dismiss others. A race of who ultimate first is as valid as any situation. You are ignoring so much stuff that goes on those situations and simply judge it as not-MTG-like. There are so many different ways to get that "ops I win the game" or maybe "bad" ways to win the game through very low strategies and Teferi way would be very low on this list. Still it's fine if you have this opinion. What isn't fine is just Teferi. So many other PWs have similar problems, so why not make the complaint more general?
I stopped playing during Mercadian Masques and came back during New Phyrexia, so I also got shocked by the prices of the cards in Standard, PW cards, powerlevel of creatures, and mythic rarity. I think Jace hit like absurd $200 mark and Baneslayer was like 40~50. And in most Standard, some cards would reach $50 mark sometimes. So it's nothing new. I remember people complaining about $20 bucks T2 rares. Nothing new under the sky about pushed cards in Standard.
About Teferi being OP, I disagree. You need to keep control to the point Teferi is good, so you can't jam that in any deck. Control is on and off as being one of the best decks. It's very powerful and the demand makes it a $50+ card. However, it doesn't seem something broken that warps all formats around it. It's just something powerful aside Jace, the Mindscuptor that would be more OP card than Teferi overall. Maybe in the future something may make it broken, but it's unlikely. Other cards were OP in Standard for different reasons. Teferi is just one of the most powerful things you can do in Standard and other formats, but it's not the only thing.
1) I do agree with no card should be super expensive, but the only thing that would offset this is reprinting them in precon decks which is something WotC doesn't do normally. They aren't Pokemon. They are very conservative with it. Now I would not complain much specifically about Teferi. Standard overall is at all time high with $600 Standard decks which would put some Modern decks to shame value wise. I'd say Teferi's price at $50 feels more right than Jadelight Ranger, Carnage Tyrant, and so on. These seem way more overpriced.
Now the point 1a), if you believe that some people at WotC has links with some secondary market, so they can manipulate the prices indirectly, yeah it's probably right. Still, it's nothing new. They obviously know if a pushed card will be pricey with some confidence. Still it is set by the secondary market. They can do a douche move making some utility spells as rare or mythic. Carnage Tyrant and Rekindling Phoenix could be rare and some of the rare removal could be uncommon like in the past. However, they use the excuse of limited format to justify these upticks in rarities which makes prices high. They could design sets a bit more tightly that could sustain powerful cards at lower rarity, but they rarely do that and still make some mistakes while hurting the prices of Standard cards.
Still nothing new about it and not a Teferi specific problem. This particular card isn't even a good example (as people underestimated it as you could get Teferi for $15ish for a brief time and for less than $40 for weeks). Teferi is clearly not a good example of this problem.
2) I quite don't get this problem and Teferi. What the mulligan rule has to do with Teferi specifically? Lot of cards similar to Teferi were printed before during this period. If lack of interactivity is the problem, the mulligan rule would be worse with combo decks. They usually aren't interactive or solitaire style. You are complaining about a card that goes in a control shell which wants to interact with your opponent's card. WotC statements is making the game about the board, so Teferi is a good way to have control decks something on the board. Again, maybe Teferi isn't the best example for this "problem".
3) The emblem grip is just nonsense. If you get there, you are supposed to have it finish the game. That's the point of most ultimates. Maybe the problem is the design of emblems as you can't interact with any of them. Still not a problem specific with Teferi as well. We had Liliana's and Chandra's ultimate in the past that would finish games faster than Teferi's ultimate. You don't even need to ultimate with some other PWs like Karn and company.
So in the end, I understand some of the complains and they are mostly old problems/complaints. However, I don't quite get why Teferi is bad in the ways you explained it. It's either not alone in the problem or just the wrong example. I don't like pushed cards being at higher rarity and no good uncommon/common like most people I think. However, some of the complaints may just sound as "old school player" doesn't like "NWO" MTG. Some valid, some just a matter of taste, but hating on Teferi seems unwarranted.
Now to the original point, it may not look good for the MTG only stores for sure, also they selling special products directly to the public seems ominous to some, but I've seen complains people had with LGS overcharging and going over MSRP and asking better access to sealed products over the years. Also, even some clamored to WotC sell singles (or bundle of) directly, so I don't think those are strong enough signs of doom in the future.
I believe the bad card stock during Kaladesh to Ixalan era is more worrisome than that. They are still trying to get back to the card stock quality, but there yet. This could make counterfeit more dangerous of an impact than the Amazon and Mythic Edition debacle. Also, the lack of better support for LGS events is also worrisome. It's clear that WotC is very skimpy with promos. They occasionally throw a bone, but they should just throw the entire skeleton to make these events more attractive.
I'd say that the Mythic Edition problem just showed to WotC that we will dig whatever they put on for whatever price even with really bad service. About the Amazon thing, I have seen people happy about being able to buy boxes without resorting to acrobatics like patreon. It's sure bad for MTG only stores, but I don't think it will impact hobby stores that much, but it may make them host less events, as even selling singles may become less attractive. However, WotC could counter this by giving stores better promo support.
I think MTG would do just fine even if all MTG only stores disappear. It'd sux royally for a lot players as the density of places that host events dwindle to just big hobby shops, but at worse we just roll back to a pre-Innistrad era I imagine. Maybe I'm being optimistic.
You can have good experience with strategy games even with bad AI or scripted AI. It doesn't need to be 100% MTG game either. They could have puzzle like experiences with only one or multiple solutions. Weekly puzzle challenges could be provided as PvE experience (and as a source of some reward).
The point isn't just teach the basics of the game and the interface. There are so much more you can learn about MTG that could be fulfilled by PvE. The tutorial in Arena is very basic and just there. It's serviceable for what is trying to do. Still it brushes off so many aspects of MTG rules, gameplay, and even interface. Puzzles with scenarios and complex board states could teach timing triggers and so much more complex stuff. No AI needed and could be 100% scripted.
You really don't need an impressive AI at all. Just good and inventive design.
I guess today's problem started around RTR as they had to ramp up card printing production and started to get noticeable with MM15 and other supplemental products, got bad during EMA, and finally hit rock bottom with Kaladesh/Amonkhet/Ixalan. Not just foils, card stock which probably affects foils as well.
Sadly WotC is very stingy with foil quality. My early 90s anime cards still look pack fresh while old foils starts to inevitably warp a bit or get foggy and new foils are just crap. Even Japanese printing won't help with WotC specifications. This is basically WotC trademark at this point although this low point is indeed too low even for WotC.
Also, I can see WotC reaches another rock bottom with this in the future. Planning ahead isn't WotC's forte. Another big growth of playerbase would cause a higher demand of printing. Lot of the bad batches released probably would be lessened if whoever was in charge of this planned ahead instead of cutting corners. Sadly, WotC will cut corners on various logistical aspects of MTG.
Even if it's story focused on characters and planes are just placeholder stages, it's still miles better than the competition. Yet the competition sells their smudge of a setting way better than WotC with Arena.
We are talking about online card game after all. Not a full fledged RPG. Yet they could have a singleplayer campaign worthy of a RPG that could sell the setting to the public while expanding its branding. The material and resources are there.
Even the codes and freebies are given so half-assed and half-hearted.
As of the topic of new players. One thing Arena gets completely wrong is the lack of singleplayer content. Other card games, even *****ty predatory mobile ones, have singleplayer gameplay. Some very limited, others amazing as a campaign deserving of a proper strategy game. Arena doesn't even have a bad one. They could use this to give essential cards (I mean essential, not limited pick 7+ cards) to new players while teaching them the real basics of MTG (like card advantage, card evaluation, and so on, not that dumb stuff like blocking, attack, and so on). I'm surprised on how insightful Eternal's tutorial was. I believe Faeria had a very good tutorial system as well. If HS singleplayer had a better reward, it would be perfect (gameplay wise is indisputable).
Also, one thing MTG could beat their competition is lore. Singleplayer would present flavor and identity to new players immersing them in the world building of MTG. R&D spends lot of resources on this, so why not present this valuable asset to them? It would actually help with the old guard as well.
They thought that an engine for the card would be more than enough. The basics are all over the place. The UI and menus are so 2000s, the animation effect is just OK at this stage of the beta, the timer is garbage, the collection management is amateurish, and matchmaking seems barebone at best. Arena would be amazing in 200X, but its systems and propositions seem very dated.
I don't care about the whole "economy sux" etcetera. HS economy sux and it's doing pretty fine. However, HS gameplay justifies its shoddy economy. It clearly started as a gameplay first like any good designed game should. Arena doesn't feel like that, so the only thing that matters is the economy as gameplay is just the bare minimum of acceptability for today's standard. I believe HS economy is worse than Arena right now, but it doesn't matter because HS service is way ahead of Arena (and that's a game with a very vocal community). Now I don't think there are much to Arena to back its economy proposition.
Maybe they should have let Amazon fill the orders, after all what's the point of ceasing distribution to LGS and letting Amazon do it if Hasbro can't handle a mere spike in traffic?
Every system inside Hasbro website and customer service were overwhelmed. They clearly didn't put any effort in this. They should have expected that as they barely can handle SDCC orders.
I can't even reach them on phone or message as well. Great job, Hasbro.
I think the best they can do is those duel games. Maybe they should make a new IP that may have some aspects of MTG Lore (like the idea of players being Planeswalkers) with new rules better adapted to mobile and streaming gaming that also can be translated to paper if they wanted to. It would hit two birds with two stones: increase the brand name for a bigger and younger audience and also increase the digital presence in a meaningful way. They could leave the Avenger style writing to that as well.
MTG is clearly not cut for the digital era IMO. MTG is in its own bubble and maybe it should stay that way. MTG isn't for everybody and never will be. Trying to push it to a wider audience just dilute its own special charm. Arena could just be a proper mobile/freemium game without trying to translate the paper experience 100%. It's not suitable to anybody. People are just forced to use MTGO because either they don't have better option or the need a tool for grinding. MTGO is perfect fine as is. Arena is just a more streamlined MTGO experience without any identity of its own. It's try to be HS with bad mobile micro transactions and MTGO style events.