Thursday, February 21, 2008

Cutting States etc.

Well they finally released more information about the Organized Play changes and even posted it on the mothership main page this time. Here is the summary (from WoTC 's perspective, obv) about a Q & A session at Kuala Lumpur. I would not have liked to have been Chris Galvin sitting around trying to explain to a bunch of guys who play Magic for money why Wizards was cutting tournament budgets for grassroots marketing strategies. Why they picked this venue to address the issue is beyond me, but at least it gives a little more insight into why States got axed, regardless of whether or not we agree with it. BTW, I don't agree with it. Can you imagine States being a failure? That is Galvin's argument. Check it.
T

3 comments:

Scoop_Phase said...

States might have been a failure to bring in new players to the game but it succeeded in keeping the fringe serious players in the game. I don't agree with what they're doing either. Their growth of new players might have been stagnant but getting new players at the expense of losing fringe tournament players isn't growing the business either.

Matt said...

The number one thing that needs to happen to bring new players to the game is to release a stable, functional Magic Online Version 3. Period. That's it.

TooSarcastic said...

The argument that States only affected 3-4% of the Magic playing populace seems deceptive. I'm sure the data is correct, but can you imagine what percentage a normal PT would affect? Even including the side drafts and other things, I can't imagine a scenario where a PT would affect 3-4% of Magic players worldwide. States/Champs clearly is most vivsible major tournament of the whole year for the majority of Magic players, reagardless of what percentage that is. The only with more impact would have to prereleases and FNMs. The more important argument, as usual, is the bottom line. If Champs wasn't doing what Wizards wanted it to do, then why continue to pay for it.