[Retros] Ch5: Place of the Retro Logics

[Kevin Begley]

ps: in problem chess, we need not buy our pieces.

Good luck selling Hasbro on the potential revenues in the MtG Problem
market.
You should read this:
http://www.superdataresearch.com/content/uploads/2009/08/TCG2010.pdf

The first thing you should note (if you don't already know): revenue was
always the primary motivation for MtG.
The second thing you should note:  the folks who have been playing MtG
enthusiasts for suckers are actively seeking some means to draw revenue
from solitary enthusiasts.

Read that last statement carefully...
The primary limitation on sales projections:  the suckers who purchase MtG
can not find anyone to engage in active play.
As a result, they discontinue the endless purchase of what are essentially
pokemon cards.

You want to know the only reason why MtG can not compete with chess
problems?  Because Habro has found no way to make money selling takebacks!

Do not make the mistake of comparing problem chess with such an absurd
commercial endeavor, -- it only erodes your own credibility to profess to
have been taken by their fantasy marketing pitch.




On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 11:50 PM, Kevin Begley <kevinjbegley at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Andrew,
>
> Magic (the Gathering) is, like FIDE chess, a game.
> If you want to compare the success of MtG, compare it with another game.
>
> Watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLPiJHGZkJ0
> By comparison, MtG doesn't even have a decent parody.
>
> If you want to draw comparisons with problem chess, you must draw
> references to the problem form of MtG (which, I presume, you have yet to
> invent).  Good luck with that (I think you'll find that MtG doesn't much
> care for problems, as they do not represent an especially purchase-driven
> enterprise).
>
> I do sympathize with your enthusiasm for MtG.
> I will even concede that MtG may be wrongly perceived by popular culture
> (in all the same ways that Fairy Chess can be).
>
> But, the analogies you make, between MtG and Chess (or Problem Chess) are,
> well, a backfire of careless wizardry.
>
> As I understand it, the ratio of rules to cards, in MtG, is only
> compensated by a profound excess of cards.
> Its selling point is not even the game itself, it is in fact a
> misadventure of a game, which must masquerade as a dungeons and dragons
> fantasy, for the purpose of sales.
>
> You'll not find anybody seriously advocating for the benefits of teaching
> MtG in our schools.
> But, you'll find plenty of studies which suggest that there are benefits
> to chess problems.
>
> The best anyone can say about MtG:  children could be doing worse things...
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://one.pairlist.net/pipermail/retros/attachments/20140621/b8c245aa/attachment.html>