@DecksandDraughts honestly FAB just needs more casual minded players. LSS definitely sees this too which is why they've spent so much time and money on both Round the Table and Casual Play Kits. It's why they've even considered pve as an option
@@RedZoneRogue Haven't played in a year, but unless they nuke Blitz event rewards entirely this isn't going to work. You need to have a game mode where casual and regulars can coexist and all existing events are too high on the competitive side for one reason or another. It's too late to force new casual formats when the existing playerbase is conditioned to avoid them.
So i didn't cover this well in my video, but one of the biggest factors he failed to realize about fab financials is the game is very meta dependent. Monarch, and tales in the gutter not because they're not good sets, but they're mostly unplayable ect. Same with dtd and bright lights to an extent
100% - towards the end i talk about the average player really only nursing 1-2 decks when they need to be inspired to have like 6-7 so each set isn't a liability outside its initial excitement. I LOVE Bright Lights...but my investment is ranger and I don't want build up another 100% effective deck cause the costs and opportunities to play it for fun in an aggressive competitive season. I just don't care about the set anymore. That's a big problem...and a huge trend.
Thank you so much for the well articulated and thought out commentary, Joey. I always love your content. My biggest fear for TCGs/FAB is this wall street type mindset that’s been plaguing them for around half a decade. Studios/LSS have to do so much to work with and around these people. The hobby we love is being tested and pushed to its limits just because people wanted to make a quick buck. It’s amazing how much damage greed can cause. We can’t escape it but hopefully we can avoid a 90s type crash that does permanent damage.
I don't think that kind of crash is really going to happen with the age of the internet. Things can't just "disappear" anymore. Hell, things that disappeared then still linger. I don't think the wall street mentality will last much longer in games that actually matter. Kickstarter has aggressively proven how little it works, MTG tried it and failed spectacularly, and Lorcana is giving it the massive middle finger. The real question isn't just with the fans though, it's with stores, events, those entities that serve as the catalyst that can actually support these things. That's the damage that needs repair, and I would love to see games do a better job taking care of them. Just saying "LGS first" doesn't mean anything without a true way to give them a leg up and keep it up BETWEEN releases, not just during them. The door is wide open though...and I'm sure people are open to suggestions.
@@jamesoncurry5224 I don't think you're talking about a collector more than you are an investor. I need a better definition of "collector" here as I don't know what you're collecting if you're overtaking that many people. At the end of they day, those...I'm just sticking with investors...need to feel confident that more money is being brought into the game, which you can't do if LGS's back down...and LGS's back down when players back down. All you have left is the original FAB complaint of "rich people passing money back and forth."
The bundle/fat pack/etb idea is a great one. Stores near me used to do prerelease deals of a fat pack and a box. If someone wants a little, they get the fat pack, if they want more they get a box, if they want the neat stuff and even more packs they can get both.
Supply and demand. Two sides of the FaB coin. Rudy is ranting on supply (over) and Joey is dissecting demand (under). You both are right. Rudy is taking the emotional approach and Joey the analytical. Both valid positions and good videos in my opinion. Creating demand in a flooded market with macro headwinds is tough. So is cutting print runs when the greed monster comes knocking when distro loses its adult pants. FaB needs to redesign something because it feels terrible to buy a box and lose 50% of your money if you don't open it in 72 hours or lose 70% (or whatever the negative EV is) if you do open it. There are 100s of ways to spend your money on things other than cardboard. Part of the justification of TCGs is they keep some kind of value. If singles and boxes are going to perpetually depreciate, then there's not much reason to get involved past a box or two, but the TCG model requires much more spending than that to maintain the high costs of original art, quality printing, and high level tournament support. I don't know why FaB gave up on PvE. That announcement was my point of highest interest, but then radio silence.
If too much almond milk is made, and there’s only a few almond milk enjoyers, the rest will go bad. But if you have a proper proportional diversification of different types of milk, fewer products will sour and there will be more demand. I think LSS has had this problem from the start. There’s no need to have 100k boxes, or whatever the number is, of each set, when many of your player base has specific interests. If you buy a set of anything else, just about, there’s diversity of cards for all players and their play styles. There’s value in a box for everyone. That’s not the case with FaB. I also think there are other behind the scenes things going on with Rudy and LSS, and it was way overdue for him to do a video like this. I think it would be amazing to have a video of you and him chatting about this stuff over some tacos. Seriously, we need more honesty about what’s going on in the industry. People need to simultaneously take this stuff more and less serious lol. More because of the expense they put into playing these games and having a more informed idea of how to spend. Less because they’re GAMES! Supposed to be enjoyable, not nuclear codes. Please forgive my rant. One more thing to consider. The last FaB debacle from a couple years ago. It feels exactly the same. But what do I know 😅
Oh lord knows I'm not stranger to rants, haha - but I think you're dead on and were from the beginning. MTG's infamous "if you don't like it, don't buy it" line is exactly what's happening here, but it's a weird line to draw, right? "I have 16K players (random number). Do I print to 16K? Or do I appreciate x% don't care and I print to a demand from...say 5K players?" Worse off is that order that comes in from distro, knowing..."well, a lot more of them will at least play pre-releases, right? Maybe that will turn them into looking deeper into the product?" (I feel Bright Lights definitely created some converts, looking at Callings). Lord knows it would be fun and I may pop on a podcast here and there after this all ends here in two days - I do enjoy having the conversations and think I've brought something of value to them. Twist my arm to have a sit down with a Rudy or other members of what I've been dubbing "Three Pitch Mafia." I know I'm not "the answer guy" for sure, but I'd love that challenge of being up against the other side of the spectrum from where I land.
@@DecksandDraughts you bring incredible value, more than most, and I honestly think Rudy does too when he rants like this, although he was obviously still holding back. It’s desperate how much the TCG community needs honesty and balance in content, and from the game creators especially. The thing with LGSs, and i think Rudy was telling the truth about this, because it’s like this everywhere for business owners. How do I predict how many hamburgers i need to make today so i don’t run out, or have to throw away food? Same with game creators. Do i over print, anticipating growth that may or may not come? I like the rules I’ve heard, 1. Print to demand minus 1, and 2. Just print fewer boxes. Also, the “game pieces” do matter to an extent. I can’t recall how many cases of FaB my husband and i have opened, only to be sorely disappointed at the “case hit”. It’s not a feel good thing when you open a $300 case that winds up with a value under $50, and no decent gameplay cards. FaB has had a balance problem for a very long time, along with overprinting. How do they fix it? Do they want to fix it?
I started playing in September this year and i am loving the game, but to be honest, the game is too competitive to its own good, what makes it hard to attract new players. A month or so ago, i finally managed to convince the players at my lgs to play some Commonor just for fun... what decks did they all brought? Ira and Rheinar... dude, how fun... not! Also, i think LSS and LGS have to do more to attract new players and cultivate a more casual play style/sessions. The Round the Tabble is a great product for that, but as far as i know, there werent any events associated with it, there wasnt any LGS just opening one or 2 RTT and let players just have fun, try out the game, etc
I 100% agree that LSS and LGS's need to do more, or at least be more creative in their approaches. The CNC promo with heavy hitters is a really good start, but that may only scale so much and is only useful at release.
The one thing also people dont realize is rudy helped over many years buying cheap stocks out from lgs and selling those to his patrons for pretty cheap too… this actually was valuable for lgs survivals… no one wants to see that tho…
Couple things: 1. He didn't bring it up and he could have. His one opportunity to was a nonsensical palette purchase he declined. 2. The number he likely did that for compared to the bigger picture is negligible. 3. Those were decisions he made on his own and, really, that doesn't change his attitude now.
Lots if people playing flesh and blood also plays on talishar, all of those i know does. If you compare november/december 2022 with the same period in 2023, we have an increase in games being played of 55% in one year, going from 110.000 gaæes to 170.000 games, that is freaking awesome🤟 I would say that overall the playerbase is for sure growing😊🥰🍻
Glad to have gained fresh perspective on the state of FAB. As a collector and casual player, I do wish to see this game explore more than just its competitive scene.
Thank you so much! I appreciate that! I am in the same boat, just don't have the time to "git gud" and don't like going out in those rare moments 'cause my screwing around just gets demolished by refinement and practice. It's not a fault in either direction (if anything, mine for bringing a knife to a gun fight), but it is a clear line in the sand that could use a little blurring.
If the value of the staples would be preserved by not reprinting the same exact piece or it getting diminished by power creep, nobody would have a problem buying many multiples for each deck, knowing your money is being preserved and not lost. I actually did that for grand archive and it was a good move for me since value of these cards will probably only increase with time. I’m only confident in this because the company itself has signaled that to their customer base which in turn improves confidence and drives up value. That makes my purchase valuable and therefore it makes sense to dish out the money. Same dynamic happens with a lot of different products in every day life. It would be key to understand what differentiates an item with store of value capability from a perishable or a replaceable item and how that affects your bottom line business model: selling more cards.
He never actually said he was outright pulling away from FaB. He said he would still like to run his release events and kits. He was just not going to sell boxes monthly. Also, the whole demand argument isn't exactly correct. Distro is notorious for requesting more products than they actually need to stockpile. So if you print to demand from Distro, you will be inherently over printing product.
If distro requests products, and, in doing so, buys them, then they bought that product and an order was fulfilled. No game, in their right mind, gets an order for 100K boxes and says "ya know, how about we just give you 80K instead 'cause I don't think you're going to push through it all?"
@@SHADOWCLOUDGAMING Gonna need more than "nuh uh," especially if you're going to bring Sorcery into the mix as a company making "what may sound, on paper, like a smart decision." MTG dumped product into landfills but made the decision to print it...so they clearly didn't say no. And Pokemon printing to oblivion to deal with the scalping problem is well-known...so they also didn't turn down opportunities to print.
I should add, I'm not discounting the stockpiling thing. We knew this with Monarch 1st and it was absolute crap - but that's not overprinting. That's over-ordering.
@@DecksandDraughts In those instances that happened years ago sure. But a lot of time has passed since then and print runs have been reigned in significantly by companies. Pokemon since the over print era has acquired their own printing facility and has reigned in their print runs significantly. The magic dumpster dump was mostly secret lairs and unfinity. Hardly a case to be made that they fulfill every order from distro. And my comment wasn't just "nuh-uh". You said something that wasn't true and you had just as much evidence for your claim as I had for mine. It's a known issue that in the past year distro hasn't been able to fulfill their allocations to LGSs because the companies themselves haven't given distro their full order.
Bright Lights was great value. I took 8 cards out of it and sold them for 80% of the cost of the box and supplimented them with cheaper chaff cards and now its just as much fun but super cheap, with a playmat.
There is definitely more value in Bright Lights than people give it credit for I feel, and if you aren't looking to go holy crap flip it territory and enjoy the awesomeness of the set, yeah, you're certainly going to find your value!
Glad you made a video interesting view point that I think is right. I wish LSS could see what the distribution was asking for and release less than that to keep boxes at msrp. If boxes went up in price release a little and if prices went down don’t release anymore. I really thought fab 2.0 was supposed to be doing this and I’m assuming they aren’t. This brought up a good point I never thought of about tales. So really most heroes will living legend so to me it seems like no one should ever hold onto a sealed fab box unless you wanted to draft that particular set down the road. I actually hope fab finds a way to use the living legend cards so those cards can retain some value. I’m sorta ok of the fab market so I don’t know what is going on but boxes are almost metazoo cheap from looking on TCGplayer
I'm a little happy that we are going through this as there are business models I feel need to be weeded out. 2.0 is a great idea on paper, ruined by a group that only cares about the value aspect of the product. As someone who dabbles, I LOVE not having the pressure of 1st Edition removing me from anything interesting. I also don't open immediately weighing my enjoyment in of I can make my money back. I want more than just 2 of the cards from what I open... and that has been a mindset that needs to filter down to a player base that we know is the vast majority (see the LL'd out TOA)
Also as a competitive player, I definitely have a singular main. But I’m building a collection to have another 3-4 meta relevant decks to enjoy as a player and be able to help people practice against. Generic Ms being super expensive makes that very annoying when I only have 1 Playset though.
I keep landing on the Generic M's being THE biggest blocker in FAB hands down. I don't mind "expensive cards" but there are more creative ways to do expensive cards and we've seen that PLENTY.
It's something I've always liked. Same with leagues with league challenges. Not restrictions, mind you, but some extra flare if you want to. Love love love the idea
i disagree on the TCC UPF box. They wanted to push the UPF format and I think this did it. they could have cut the playmat and dropped the price but it's competitive with other 4 player board game prices and I believe it should be seen as such.
I admit my UPF take is a really spicy one and I did a vid on it - but there is still a sentiment there that moves the needle a bit. I want more aggressive splits between funny formats purely because of the CnC/E-Strike/Generic Playset problem I outlined.
Thanks for posting this, it's unfortunate that I'm about 4 months late to the conversation, but I guess I'll still chime in lol. So full transparency, I'm currently a One Piece TCG Player/Content Creator, but before I decided on OP, when I was first getting back into TCG's around the end of the Pandemic I had 3-4 Options I was seriously looking in to; those options being FaB, OP:TCG, Lorcana, and Digimon. I won't go down my full journey and decision process in determining which game I wanted to fully commit to, but I'll at least explain why I didn't choose to go all in on FaB. (I do still play though, just very casually and as I believe you mentioned in the video, not much for a casual player to do in the scene) Initially, when exploring Flesh and Blood, I came across some really positive feedback/information. Everything at first glance looked really good and I was pretty excited to give this game an honest go. In fact, I was ready to fully dive in to the game. I was attracted to the fact that it rewarded skilled play. I enjoyed the game flow and back and forth. I like that there is a Hero representing you with specialized equipment. I like how instead of there being "colors" in the game there are classes etc. However, then I started running into some pretty big issues (at least for me): 1. The price of entry. You talk about this a bit throughout the video, but around @21:19 I feel like you hit the absolute biggest problem on the head. There are a list of cards that you should basically have access to if you have any intentions of being able to play this game even at a local level like E Strikes, C&C's, Art of Wars, Warmonger's, Fyendal's, Crown of Providence, Balance of Justice, and then a few other pieces of equipment for whatever your class needs (Phantasmal's, Spell Creeper's, Dynamo's, etc). Unfortunately, Viserai is my main and there is a card I will literally never be able to own because it costs $300... yep Arknight Shard lol. That immediately discouraged me as a newer player trying to get into the scene. Some positive news on this, currently E.Strikes and Art of Wars are around $25 US. 2. Scarcity of players at Local tournaments in my area. I preface this with, I'm not in some small city (population: 1 million people) and TCG's are really booming in my area for MTG, OP:TCG, Digimon, and so on, but not so much for FaB. There are around 10 LGS in my area all within about 30-40 minutes of each other but I think only 2 of them still carry FaB products now. I searched far and wide and the closest store that I can go to that supports FaB is about 35 minutes away from me and they are lucky if they get 10 players to show up outside of a pre-release type of event.. I don't know the full history on this situation in my area and why the game is not supported more across the other stores, but it is a very unfortunate problem where I live (Florida). 3. One Piece ended up being one of the best TCG's I've ever played. I've been playing TCG's for over 15 years now and I never pass up on learning a new TCG when I come across it and OP:TCG has been incredible. I won't go to far down this point, just saying it did absolutely play a factor, especially as a Content Creator. I hope my comment is not received in the wrong light, I actually really enjoy FaB and I have 5 physical decks "complete" and ready to go if the scene ever picks back up where I live (Viserai, Teklovossen, Katsu, Prism, and the recently LL'd Dromai). I have complete in quotations because I refuse to pay for the cards over $40. Thanks again for putting this video up.
I agree so much. I wish people explored more in this game. I love this game mechanically, and I love every new class and every new hero in those classes and how they change up the gameplay. I buy boxes of every set (and got sad when I pulled zero new hero cards from DTD, but that's a different factor). I think people are really limiting themselves by not exploring every class somehow. Lexi and Azalea weren't for me, but I love how Riptide plays. Anyway, I hope CNC and Estrike are expansion slot cards in heavy hitters. That will bust the game wide open for 2024.
I'd love to see what happens with the $20 CnC. I would agree that this game busts WIDE open - maybe number raw player number, but the value of those players increases dramatically.
That's my favorite thing about card games for the most part. Building decks is easily 50% of my enjoyment. Then playing and further refining those decks to be as competitive as possible is the other 50%. The issue that I noticed about FAB was when I started, with Monarch, there simply weren't a ton of cards to really experiment with. I mean, there were cards, but there were clearly best cards for each hero type, and there was no reason to deviate to try to build another gameplab when one was so clearly superior. Now it's been a couple of years so maybe that has changed. But at the same time, the legend rule already hurt me because I believe that Chane can't even be used anymore. I've got no interest in investing in a game where I can't use my old game pieces. The idea sounds good in theory, but it's honestly not good for the long term health of the game.
Lots if people playing flesh and blood also plays on talishar, all of those i know does. If you compare november/december 2022 with the same period in 2023, we have an increase in games being played of 55% in one year, going from 110.000 games to 170.000 games, that is freaking awesome🤟 I would say that overall the playerbase is for sure growing😊🥰🍻
I think overprinting is the problem but also stuff like the ban system being so robust and extrem could be a problem. That’s would be a design problem, like for example set rotation would be. Is not a sustainable model because value is destroyed over time systematically thus changing the behavior of the consumer after a while. You then can only hope for the player base to save you at that point. Collectors will head out basically kneecapping your customer base by a lot. Most grown people that I know (not me) buy into games for the ride and enjoyment of the game. The like being a part of the game but don’t even really have time to pursue play (besides friendlies here and there) or are not confident in their playing abilities yet want to be a consumer pf the product. Almost half of the tcg audience relate to this type of product in a very different way that you may be thinking in your line of reasoning.
We've seen this cycle for 30 years now -- CCG gets published, does really well, then dies. Some take longer than others, put out more expansions than others, have more players than others, but if the singles market dies, it's over. Why? Because unless we go completely virtual there's only so much physical space, and stores have to sell product to stay alive and provide the space to play the games. These must synergize as space costs money. It's really hard to support more than a few games at any given time as a store. Conventions can be agnostic of the singles market to a certain extent as they provide space based on what people want to play (there are still tournaments of Wyvern out there), but the masses cannot be convention bound, as again there's only so much space, events, etc -- plus they are far more expensive for participants by and large. But once your game becomes convention bound its days as a living game are numbered, if not already over. Ask the Netrunner players about this. VtES players. The various Decipher games players. Heck, INWO players. Sorcery and Lorcana were the worst thing to happen to FaB. I wish FaB well, but at least two out of three of these are destined to the dustbin of failed CCGs. Which ones? I have no idea (it might be all three), but pretending that all can survive long term is just silly. Ask any Yu-Gi-Oh player how they feel about the state of things now. 2024 will see a lot of CCGs transition to TCGs or die.
I feel like "CCG" and "TCG" are too interchangeable - even Rudy pushed "CCG" a number of times in his video for things that actually label themselves as TCG. I'd like to see a true evolution of the product to appreciate the changing atmosphere. MTG has Arena, but how they've used it is downright predatory. Altered TCG is doing something WILD with their product that I'm curious about, but at the end of the day, if you ignore the basics, there's no foundation that will help you through your mistakes. This is why I feel FAB is actually in the best shape of the three (and I agree that Sorcery and Lorcana are the worst things to happen, not to FAB, but to TCGs in the last two years). Having the strong player foundation has kept them growing even as the secondary tanks - now it's find how do you find the right amount of product to create and how do you adjust the mindset of that foundation to get more out of those players. The term, which I had on my mind the whole time and never used, like a dunce, was "ACV" or "Average Customer Value." How do you bump up the ACV per set, because that's the REAL crux of the issue. 16K players doesn't mean squat if the meta is stuck on product from two years ago and 60% of that base doesn't care about your new stuff.
Lorcana will more than likely be fine, if for no other reason than it will appeal to some subset of Disney collectors. It's a large part of why Pokémon is still around after all of these years. If Lorcana ends up being a good game, then that just sweetens the deal. I've bought some starters but I have yet to actually check them out. As for Sorcery, it looks cool, but it's also yet ANOTHER fantasy themed card game. I've seen very limited gameplay and it did look interesting, but if it has supply issues and hoarders trying to capitalize on that (which is apparently happening) that could stunt its growth before it even makes a mark. And again, ANOTHER fantasy card game. FAB was overhyped from day 1 thanks to people like Rudy. They talked a big game about how it was "for the players," but the costs of the game did not reflect that. Now that they've apparently make more production available, they've chased the early investors out. This is the real curse of the modern card game. Players want to be able to build a competitive deck for $100 (or less) and buy a $5 pack and pull a $20 card. It can't work like that with the current business model.
@Xoulrath_ Lorcana will be fine because I feel that the company is building the right foundation. Player and experience minded, with more (by an exponential degree) people enjoying the function of Lorcana than the EV. Their collectability game is close to stellar and the IP is going to carry them far because it's just so damn attractive. They are trying to find a balance between the standard model and the exceptional Pokémon model, where you can build a cheap competitive deck, but also see tons of value out of the product too. They have some adjustments to make, but I also think they have some really creative product designs that will keep things relevant longer. Sorcery...is getting it's own video. I've been on multiple podcasts talking about this and, to those who've watched me, know my utter hatred for this garbage product lol. I still feel that FAB is for the players, bit the community who was built on value and buzz wants something different. LSS did more good than harm in their approach, and now needs to work on changing the mindsets of the ill-guided masses to more of their adjusted vision.
Between FaB, Lorcana, and Sorcery, FaB will last the longest. Lorcana's biggest problem is Ravensburger and their consistent blundering. It seems highly unlikely they are ever going to hire the right people to manage the game. Additionally, Hasbro will probably throw some insane amount of money at Disney come license renewal and Lorcana will insta die. Hasbro already has Marvel rights for MTG. It doesn't take much of a leap for them to get Disney rights too and bury Lorcana. Sorcery is a mess. Erik doesn't care about LGS. They can't keep staff. Simon left once already. Ira has left over art concerns. They simply don't have the necessary infrastructure as a company to make it. Sorcery is incredibly lazy as well, recycling art and abusing player passion to fulfill many business aspects like playtesting and promotion. I'm quite familiar with lazy TCG creators, having worked for one prior. I would be surprised if they make it past Set 3.
I like a lot what you say, but I have to disagree on the overall idea that LSS needs to do more to entice players to explore. Flesh and Blood, I feel, is a game that works best when you're focusing on one or two specific classes, as you the player are constantly improving your skills in that class, trying out the various heroes, etc. Instead of trying to get players to try new things, LSS could get a lot more done by making more generalized sets like Dynasty, which has something for everyone. A general set like that once a year (an equivalent to Magic's Core Sets, you could say) followed by 2-3 specializing sets will accomplish several things at once - the general sets give new players an excellent jumping-on point while the specialty ones give fans of specific classes new tools which help across several formats. It's clear to me that LSS WANTS to do this, by the way, they maybe haven't perfected the method yet. As for printing. Look, I'm a long-term thinker. I love the fact that LSS is (was) pretty open about their print numbers as that can go a long way to instill confidence in collectors and investors alike. But I think a firm balance is needed so that sets don't become 'scarce' until well after their life cycle - basically, I don't have an answer for this, but I think a print run large enough to satisfy initial demand is all they need: print enough to satisfy the orders +30% more boxes so that there's still some on the market in the future, none of this 'multiple wave' crap other TCGs like to do. I've collected, invested, and sold cards for years. Flesh and Blood is one of the healthiest games on the market I've seen. It'll be fine.
Love this, and thanks for a good challenge on it! As a competitive game, there certainly will be those who will love the focus and that will be...and is a GREAT experience. I'm looking at translating it to sales, but I also know that sometimes...most times...time only gives you so much. Maybe there is an answer in a wild product design instead of just the norm. Hero-centric games struggle in the mainstream for this reasons. There aren't really any that kill it in the TCG model. If anything, half this answer is to stop thinking about "how do they hit magic levels" and more "what is the level of success that works for everyone"...and just serves as a nice cruise control game until the card pool hits those crazy explore whatever levels. I guess, question to you, thoughts on rotations?
@@DecksandDraughts I'm against Rotation since it's one of the lazier ways to get players to buy product (if sets are only 'legal' for so long, players must buy new sets, after all) and I actually quite prefer the LL system they put in place. Sure it had its flaws, initially tying CC and Blitz together and then later on by just not having enough heroes, but the first issue was solved fairly fast and the second one is (hopefully) being solved this year. Ultimately I believe games should be built around how their initially intended to cycle cards out. Magic decided very early on to do set rotations, and Pokemon did it from the beginning. Both of those games are designed around this feature. Yugioh doesn't have any kind of rotation and every set is (supposedly) designed with the intention of being played with every other set. I believe it's inevitable that a game like Flesh and Blood - one without rotation built-in - will suffer from some serious power creep in the future that will heavily impact both casual and competitive play. After all, all non-rotating TCGs DO experience this. But I have faith that the guys at LSS will take the right steps to mitigate disaster (whether that be bans, an update to the LL policy, or something else entirely, I could not guess).
As a former FaB player sets being laser focused on one or two things is absolutely why the game is stagnating (that and competitive toxicity). It's all about selling a fantasy, if the fantasy you are selling does not interest me I am out. At this point FaB product is more like MtG commander decks in booster packs, that ain't gonna work when half the existing classes have no support or competitive viability.
I wish that more players understood this. I never got to play FAB competitively because it jaut never got started in my area. That said, I AM a massively competitive player and I've dabbled in Magic off and on for 27 years. I play Modern primarily (when I can), and also mess around with Pioneer and Pauper formats for the game (if you're familiar). The thing that I LOVE about Modern is that you can do very well by simply understanding what the meta is, which allows you to use your favorite cards (so long as they aren't trash lol) and still do well at tournaments. Playing the game with a strictly meta deck is beyond boring if the cards and characters don't appeal to me. I tried to get into FAB and there were many reasons as to why I ended up not buying further product after Monarch, but one of those reasons was the sets being done in such a way that I didn't necessarily care about them if they didn't have cards for the heroes that I liked. Aria was a cool set, for example, but I was working on building a Chane deck, then he got banned (I know it's the legend thing but not being able to use the card means that it's banned; the reason why doesn't matter). So I moved to Levia; I liked the Shadow Brute thing. But Aria didn't offer anything new.
It depends. I'm a competitive player but I'm not the biggest fan of drafting. It's fun, and I enjoy it for the first few weeks of a new set release to get some cards and just enjoy a different way to play. But after that, it's all about Constructed formats for me. That's how I've felt for almost 27 years now, off and on with Magic. As for FAB, I tried to get into it, and the only lgs near me that sold it did nothing to promote the game at a competitive or a casual level. Yet that same game store had dozens of players on any given day playing Commander both casually and in the store run tourneys. I bring this up because the store owner seemed to think that simply having the product was good enough to get people to buy it. That isn't so. Whether people want competitive or casual play, the lgs needs to give the players the ability to have that environment. Expecting the players to buy the product, build the community, and then effectively run the tourneys for free, all while making the store money, is NOT going to work. I've seen too many stores do this. They don't care about the games that they sell; they just want your money. I would have loved to have given FAB a real chance but my game store owners either never invested what was needed to get the scene started, or they didn't carry the product at all. To further make matters worse, the little bit of FAB that I do have, and the heroes that I liked, have been made not legal because of the stupid legend rule. Bad ideas all around.
@@Xoulrath_as an LGS owner there is little we can do to make a game community happen. We have tried over and over to make different games happen and unless the community itself steps up and runs with it it seems only as a cash grab. Not to mention margins on TCGs are slim to non-existant and are a commodity product customers often times buy under our cost online it all adds up to a loss to try to push things day in day out to just lose money.
@@stevengilland4524 oh I didn't give full details. The community WAS there. The game store owner was a fucking idiot. The problem is that he was a music guy that was trying to sell random collectables. He shifted to card games after having players ask whether or not he was going to be doing gaming. Then he failed to support the community. He just wanted the cash. Simply opening a store isn't enough. When you've got the player base and they are asking for the store to run formats, run the formats.
@@stevengilland4524 As someone who put in countless hours into building the Colorado community, I feel this in my soul. The bitter truth is that the community is needed to really keep things going or, as a shop owner, no way is a TCG worth the investment outside of, perhaps, the feels that come with it.
There are no options or securities for tcgs so if you want a stable price during the whole selling window, the manufacturer has to make the first adjustment in gauging correctly the demand for his production. That’s only if they wouldn’t want any of the parts involved to lose money.. like for example distributors. That’s called good business practice which in turn makes long term business possible. Are you familiar with basic market dynamics??🤔 respectfully, your argument are so detached is is surprising
Lots of good points I like the video but yea the products are being over printed. That’s not debatable. That being said over production isn’t the only issue either.
I keep loving the "singles are selling well" argument because it's only very specific singles and is being touted by people with the capital to buy and sell a lot of the high end things. Like 90% of the cards in the game aren't worth dick and everyone is complaining that they can't open their value in a box most of the time, so I don't know why singles are suddenly the saving grace. They arent.
@DecksandDraughts I played Magic back in the mid 90's but my parents hated it. So I switched to Star Wars and Star Trek and played them much more. It was easier to get friends to play them versus "demonic" Magic 🤣🤣
So essentailly you support this game becoming a board game. If the mass majority of seal official product is being sold for cheaper than what LGS's get them for, this game is considered a failure. If stores dont even make their own nut first, how can they continue supporting a game that results in net negative results financially? If the game relies on the success of other games to sustain ling term gameplay, isnt that a FAILED GAME?
You were close and then just...veered into the ravine. LGS's need to be able to support the game. At the end of my video, I suggested a reason that FAB struggled to have new products sell, at least in the kind of quantities that would let LGS's make money off of them. That's the whole "people need to be encouraged to play more than one deck so new sets hold the interest of the wider community" thing. This needs to be financially viable. We're what...12 sets in? A few "high priced chase items" ain't cuttin' the mustard. That's why we're here and why my title encouraged you to think more creatively about the financials. The term you're looking for is ACV: Average Customer Value, which is really low, I feel, per set, and that's the real problem. Regarding the board game thing...I have zero clue what you're talking about. Same with the game relying on the success of other games to sustain long term play. I...can't even wrap my mind around where you got that so Ima just...be done here.
The market can easily dictate supply and demand... you think tcg titles are >> publically traded fortune 500 companies?? No shot in helllll whatsoever. If youre gonna print "class specific" card sets, how are you too naive to have zero foresight into the future and maybe print less than your "major" sets.. Do you think the FAB marketplace is better designed than the NASDAQ/NYSE? Why is it that LSS struggles with "stock" mentality? Maybe cause they WANT to establish a board game/exploding kittens meme game mentality????
@@DecksandDraughtslol facts and truth hurt. Funny you "walk away" from FAB in dramatic fashion yet here you are back whining about someone "you dont give af about" lol. What is this...Your 7th comeback video after saying you quit FAB for one reason or another... Ya i dont even pLaY tHiS gAmE but i play as often as you claim to quit fab/content creation - FREQUENTLY 😂
@@DecksandDraughts aside from Rudy's business aspect, I wonder if there are other factors that bled into the creation of his video. It sounded like a man who was having everything go wrong. I guess what im postulating is that there must have been other emotional non-tcg factors and it manifested in the way that it did in his videos.
Connecting the dots of MetaZoo and LSS, it's certainly something that would spark some anger, but in that passion, I still would have expected some insight outside of the cookie cutter. Sadly, it has been a trend for a while as most of the "information" has been introduced as "messages from Patrons" and even his own anecdotes contradict each other. I could give him the benefit of the doubt, but he has been pushing a narrative constantly being proven wrong across multiple games and doubling down on "stay the course." Now that the rocket missed "The Moon" and landed in the Sun, he's tripling down and blaming every other factor but his course. No. That doesn't get to go unchecked. :-)
@@DecksandDraughts I’m just saying there are some parallels between the game piece mentality and the Modern Monetary Theory democrats abide by. Both mentalities tend to think money can be detached from value and created out of thin air.
@@skurai Thanks for playing along. So let's start with me being fiscally conservative, socially progressive. The bare bones of libertarian if everyone from that party with a microphone wasn't a special brand of moron whose only word that exists for it right now is..."libertarian." So, playing into MMT, I feel like you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong) "it's stupid to accept, as a solution to accessibility, that any publisher can just print more of a high value card whenever they want, not caring about the financial repercussions of their product's value as a result." Similar to a government saying "well, if we need more money...since we're the ones who make the currency we can just...make more of the currency." I certainly don't agree with it in the realm of devaluing a currency that is tied to an actual limited resource (which "money" is supposed to be) - especially one with more of a universal use. But we're talking about cards here where there isn't a limited resource it's tied to. The number of them is tied purely to a consciously made print run number that, unless denoted otherwise, has no actual limit. Additionally, it's secondary value isn't something that is set by the publisher, nor do they benefit directly from its secondary value increasing or decreasing (or they fucking shouldn't...but you've already watched temper tantrum part 3). I can certainly see how your dots connect, but you're talking difference between "the country and its population is fucking over their ability to survive" and "entry into our game is a challenge because key components of playing it wildly over-priced and that's really not a great business strategy." Do you feel that Lorcana shouldn't have continued printing The First Chapter if boxes stayed at $300, saying "well, the market has spoken, and let's not devalue that?"
@@DecksandDraughts I agree they shouldn’t be overpriced, lorcana fukced up heavy from the get go by a lot. But, they shouldn’t be all game pieces worth chump change either. There is a fine line of equilibrium between the two that would make the game affordable yet valuable. Like grand archive at the moment for example.(set 1 at least) But I don’t really understand how you think they’re both different. Fiat money is not really tied to anything besides trust in the government reassurance of it, and it actually being scarce or proportional to the demand for it. Cards are just the same way. Scarcity, desirability and demand are what makes the cardboard valuable. In that way, printing without gauging demand would either result in a lorcana or a metazoo situation. Don’t you think?
@@skurai Ok, I think we're closer than we think on this. GA's value comes primarily from CSRs and a very really good cards (which, hilariously, are rares and not SR/UR). I'm a fan of value coming from variants, not from things functionally exclusive. "Collectability" has really turned into this anyway (see "Collectors Boosters"). I'm all for chase, but it shouldn't block the play experience. Great example is Command and Conquer. I want that to be a $20 card because I wouldn't feel as bad about having 8 of them spread across like 3-4 decks. That cold foil $800 Dynasty variant? Hell yeah. Go for it. Give me more of that. $45 Singularity? Sure! You can only have one in a deck anyway so not the worst price. But $500 variant version right now? That's where I like the "stonks" money to be. I feel CnC being $60-70 prevents people from wanting to make multiple decks which turns sets into liabilities. This makes like...5 standard-print cards (often Generics) highly valuable and 200 of them "chump change." (See Dusk Til Dawn w/ Warmongers) I'd rather 5 cards valuable enough to see a return, with maybe 10-20% of the rest being able to at least pay for the pack, but, more importantly, have enough demand to find regular buyers. (See Dynasty) Regarding "gauging demand" - market and competitive analyses exists for this reason. You can view ICv2 sales reports on sales by volume, look at Alta Fox's analysis when they tried to buy MTG, plenty of other statistics that can show you the audience you have access to, and if you jump in early enough, you can start doing pre-orders, seeing how well your hype marketing actually hits (in terms of raw numbers...not how many idiot creators can put headlines in ALL CAPS MetaZoo.........) and what those customers are interested in.
"Please explore this game more than your one CC deck" so much this.
It has been my biggest worry. Player growth doesn't mean squat if 60% can't see value in a new product for what they're doing to enjoy the game.
Nope. I dont plan on it. The game is designed that I dont want to spend a ton of time in multiple buckets, but want to fine tune and practice my own.
@scythe0925 definitely not a plan of action for EVERYONE, but the group exploring and screwing around needs be much MUCH higher than it is now.
@DecksandDraughts honestly FAB just needs more casual minded players. LSS definitely sees this too which is why they've spent so much time and money on both Round the Table and Casual Play Kits. It's why they've even considered pve as an option
@@RedZoneRogue Haven't played in a year, but unless they nuke Blitz event rewards entirely this isn't going to work. You need to have a game mode where casual and regulars can coexist and all existing events are too high on the competitive side for one reason or another. It's too late to force new casual formats when the existing playerbase is conditioned to avoid them.
Couldn’t agree more that FaB really needs a fun, casual format/environment where people just play fun decks!
Bring it on!!
So i didn't cover this well in my video, but one of the biggest factors he failed to realize about fab financials is the game is very meta dependent. Monarch, and tales in the gutter not because they're not good sets, but they're mostly unplayable ect. Same with dtd and bright lights to an extent
100% - towards the end i talk about the average player really only nursing 1-2 decks when they need to be inspired to have like 6-7 so each set isn't a liability outside its initial excitement. I LOVE Bright Lights...but my investment is ranger and I don't want build up another 100% effective deck cause the costs and opportunities to play it for fun in an aggressive competitive season. I just don't care about the set anymore. That's a big problem...and a huge trend.
Thank you so much for the well articulated and thought out commentary, Joey. I always love your content.
My biggest fear for TCGs/FAB is this wall street type mindset that’s been plaguing them for around half a decade.
Studios/LSS have to do so much to work with and around these people. The hobby we love is being tested and pushed to its limits just because people wanted to make a quick buck. It’s amazing how much damage greed can cause.
We can’t escape it but hopefully we can avoid a 90s type crash that does permanent damage.
I don't think that kind of crash is really going to happen with the age of the internet. Things can't just "disappear" anymore. Hell, things that disappeared then still linger. I don't think the wall street mentality will last much longer in games that actually matter. Kickstarter has aggressively proven how little it works, MTG tried it and failed spectacularly, and Lorcana is giving it the massive middle finger.
The real question isn't just with the fans though, it's with stores, events, those entities that serve as the catalyst that can actually support these things. That's the damage that needs repair, and I would love to see games do a better job taking care of them. Just saying "LGS first" doesn't mean anything without a true way to give them a leg up and keep it up BETWEEN releases, not just during them. The door is wide open though...and I'm sure people are open to suggestions.
Collectors represent a larger imprint oftentimes than 10s of thousands of players… so yes… you wanna pay attention.
@@jamesoncurry5224 I don't think you're talking about a collector more than you are an investor. I need a better definition of "collector" here as I don't know what you're collecting if you're overtaking that many people. At the end of they day, those...I'm just sticking with investors...need to feel confident that more money is being brought into the game, which you can't do if LGS's back down...and LGS's back down when players back down. All you have left is the original FAB complaint of "rich people passing money back and forth."
The bundle/fat pack/etb idea is a great one. Stores near me used to do prerelease deals of a fat pack and a box. If someone wants a little, they get the fat pack, if they want more they get a box, if they want the neat stuff and even more packs they can get both.
Yeah! Makes for great bundles too!
Supply and demand. Two sides of the FaB coin. Rudy is ranting on supply (over) and Joey is dissecting demand (under). You both are right. Rudy is taking the emotional approach and Joey the analytical. Both valid positions and good videos in my opinion.
Creating demand in a flooded market with macro headwinds is tough. So is cutting print runs when the greed monster comes knocking when distro loses its adult pants.
FaB needs to redesign something because it feels terrible to buy a box and lose 50% of your money if you don't open it in 72 hours or lose 70% (or whatever the negative EV is) if you do open it. There are 100s of ways to spend your money on things other than cardboard. Part of the justification of TCGs is they keep some kind of value. If singles and boxes are going to perpetually depreciate, then there's not much reason to get involved past a box or two, but the TCG model requires much more spending than that to maintain the high costs of original art, quality printing, and high level tournament support.
I don't know why FaB gave up on PvE. That announcement was my point of highest interest, but then radio silence.
If too much almond milk is made, and there’s only a few almond milk enjoyers, the rest will go bad. But if you have a proper proportional diversification of different types of milk, fewer products will sour and there will be more demand. I think LSS has had this problem from the start. There’s no need to have 100k boxes, or whatever the number is, of each set, when many of your player base has specific interests. If you buy a set of anything else, just about, there’s diversity of cards for all players and their play styles. There’s value in a box for everyone. That’s not the case with FaB.
I also think there are other behind the scenes things going on with Rudy and LSS, and it was way overdue for him to do a video like this. I think it would be amazing to have a video of you and him chatting about this stuff over some tacos. Seriously, we need more honesty about what’s going on in the industry. People need to simultaneously take this stuff more and less serious lol. More because of the expense they put into playing these games and having a more informed idea of how to spend. Less because they’re GAMES! Supposed to be enjoyable, not nuclear codes.
Please forgive my rant. One more thing to consider. The last FaB debacle from a couple years ago. It feels exactly the same. But what do I know 😅
Oh lord knows I'm not stranger to rants, haha - but I think you're dead on and were from the beginning. MTG's infamous "if you don't like it, don't buy it" line is exactly what's happening here, but it's a weird line to draw, right? "I have 16K players (random number). Do I print to 16K? Or do I appreciate x% don't care and I print to a demand from...say 5K players?" Worse off is that order that comes in from distro, knowing..."well, a lot more of them will at least play pre-releases, right? Maybe that will turn them into looking deeper into the product?" (I feel Bright Lights definitely created some converts, looking at Callings).
Lord knows it would be fun and I may pop on a podcast here and there after this all ends here in two days - I do enjoy having the conversations and think I've brought something of value to them. Twist my arm to have a sit down with a Rudy or other members of what I've been dubbing "Three Pitch Mafia." I know I'm not "the answer guy" for sure, but I'd love that challenge of being up against the other side of the spectrum from where I land.
@@DecksandDraughts you bring incredible value, more than most, and I honestly think Rudy does too when he rants like this, although he was obviously still holding back. It’s desperate how much the TCG community needs honesty and balance in content, and from the game creators especially.
The thing with LGSs, and i think Rudy was telling the truth about this, because it’s like this everywhere for business owners. How do I predict how many hamburgers i need to make today so i don’t run out, or have to throw away food? Same with game creators. Do i over print, anticipating growth that may or may not come? I like the rules I’ve heard, 1. Print to demand minus 1, and 2. Just print fewer boxes.
Also, the “game pieces” do matter to an extent. I can’t recall how many cases of FaB my husband and i have opened, only to be sorely disappointed at the “case hit”. It’s not a feel good thing when you open a $300 case that winds up with a value under $50, and no decent gameplay cards. FaB has had a balance problem for a very long time, along with overprinting. How do they fix it? Do they want to fix it?
I started playing in September this year and i am loving the game, but to be honest, the game is too competitive to its own good, what makes it hard to attract new players. A month or so ago, i finally managed to convince the players at my lgs to play some Commonor just for fun... what decks did they all brought? Ira and Rheinar... dude, how fun... not!
Also, i think LSS and LGS have to do more to attract new players and cultivate a more casual play style/sessions. The Round the Tabble is a great product for that, but as far as i know, there werent any events associated with it, there wasnt any LGS just opening one or 2 RTT and let players just have fun, try out the game, etc
I 100% agree that LSS and LGS's need to do more, or at least be more creative in their approaches. The CNC promo with heavy hitters is a really good start, but that may only scale so much and is only useful at release.
The one thing also people dont realize is rudy helped over many years buying cheap stocks out from lgs and selling those to his patrons for pretty cheap too… this actually was valuable for lgs survivals… no one wants to see that tho…
Couple things: 1. He didn't bring it up and he could have. His one opportunity to was a nonsensical palette purchase he declined. 2. The number he likely did that for compared to the bigger picture is negligible. 3. Those were decisions he made on his own and, really, that doesn't change his attitude now.
Lots if people playing flesh and blood also plays on talishar, all of those i know does.
If you compare november/december 2022 with the same period in 2023, we have an increase in games being played of 55% in one year, going from 110.000 gaæes to 170.000 games, that is freaking awesome🤟
I would say that overall the playerbase is for sure growing😊🥰🍻
Glad to have gained fresh perspective on the state of FAB. As a collector and casual player, I do wish to see this game explore more than just its competitive scene.
Thank you so much! I appreciate that! I am in the same boat, just don't have the time to "git gud" and don't like going out in those rare moments 'cause my screwing around just gets demolished by refinement and practice. It's not a fault in either direction (if anything, mine for bringing a knife to a gun fight), but it is a clear line in the sand that could use a little blurring.
Appreciate the video, you make some great points.
If the value of the staples would be preserved by not reprinting the same exact piece or it getting diminished by power creep, nobody would have a problem buying many multiples for each deck, knowing your money is being preserved and not lost. I actually did that for grand archive and it was a good move for me since value of these cards will probably only increase with time. I’m only confident in this because the company itself has signaled that to their customer base which in turn improves confidence and drives up value. That makes my purchase valuable and therefore it makes sense to dish out the money. Same dynamic happens with a lot of different products in every day life. It would be key to understand what differentiates an item with store of value capability from a perishable or a replaceable item and how that affects your bottom line business model: selling more cards.
He never actually said he was outright pulling away from FaB. He said he would still like to run his release events and kits. He was just not going to sell boxes monthly.
Also, the whole demand argument isn't exactly correct. Distro is notorious for requesting more products than they actually need to stockpile. So if you print to demand from Distro, you will be inherently over printing product.
If distro requests products, and, in doing so, buys them, then they bought that product and an order was fulfilled. No game, in their right mind, gets an order for 100K boxes and says "ya know, how about we just give you 80K instead 'cause I don't think you're going to push through it all?"
@@DecksandDraughts It actually happens not infrequently. Magic does it. Sorcery has been doing it. Pokemon does it.
@@SHADOWCLOUDGAMING Gonna need more than "nuh uh," especially if you're going to bring Sorcery into the mix as a company making "what may sound, on paper, like a smart decision." MTG dumped product into landfills but made the decision to print it...so they clearly didn't say no. And Pokemon printing to oblivion to deal with the scalping problem is well-known...so they also didn't turn down opportunities to print.
I should add, I'm not discounting the stockpiling thing. We knew this with Monarch 1st and it was absolute crap - but that's not overprinting. That's over-ordering.
@@DecksandDraughts In those instances that happened years ago sure. But a lot of time has passed since then and print runs have been reigned in significantly by companies. Pokemon since the over print era has acquired their own printing facility and has reigned in their print runs significantly. The magic dumpster dump was mostly secret lairs and unfinity. Hardly a case to be made that they fulfill every order from distro. And my comment wasn't just "nuh-uh". You said something that wasn't true and you had just as much evidence for your claim as I had for mine. It's a known issue that in the past year distro hasn't been able to fulfill their allocations to LGSs because the companies themselves haven't given distro their full order.
Bright Lights was great value. I took 8 cards out of it and sold them for 80% of the cost of the box and supplimented them with cheaper chaff cards and now its just as much fun but super cheap, with a playmat.
There is definitely more value in Bright Lights than people give it credit for I feel, and if you aren't looking to go holy crap flip it territory and enjoy the awesomeness of the set, yeah, you're certainly going to find your value!
Glad you made a video interesting view point that I think is right. I wish LSS could see what the distribution was asking for and release less than that to keep boxes at msrp. If boxes went up in price release a little and if prices went down don’t release anymore. I really thought fab 2.0 was supposed to be doing this and I’m assuming they aren’t. This brought up a good point I never thought of about tales. So really most heroes will living legend so to me it seems like no one should ever hold onto a sealed fab box unless you wanted to draft that particular set down the road. I actually hope fab finds a way to use the living legend cards so those cards can retain some value. I’m sorta ok of the fab market so I don’t know what is going on but boxes are almost metazoo cheap from looking on TCGplayer
I'm a little happy that we are going through this as there are business models I feel need to be weeded out. 2.0 is a great idea on paper, ruined by a group that only cares about the value aspect of the product. As someone who dabbles, I LOVE not having the pressure of 1st Edition removing me from anything interesting. I also don't open immediately weighing my enjoyment in of I can make my money back. I want more than just 2 of the cards from what I open... and that has been a mindset that needs to filter down to a player base that we know is the vast majority (see the LL'd out TOA)
Also as a competitive player, I definitely have a singular main. But I’m building a collection to have another 3-4 meta relevant decks to enjoy as a player and be able to help people practice against. Generic Ms being super expensive makes that very annoying when I only have 1 Playset though.
I keep landing on the Generic M's being THE biggest blocker in FAB hands down. I don't mind "expensive cards" but there are more creative ways to do expensive cards and we've seen that PLENTY.
Maybe have local armories with incentive to play certain decks, such as "win with [insert heroes name] deck and get bonus winnings
It's something I've always liked. Same with leagues with league challenges. Not restrictions, mind you, but some extra flare if you want to. Love love love the idea
i disagree on the TCC UPF box. They wanted to push the UPF format and I think this did it. they could have cut the playmat and dropped the price but it's competitive with other 4 player board game prices and I believe it should be seen as such.
I admit my UPF take is a really spicy one and I did a vid on it - but there is still a sentiment there that moves the needle a bit. I want more aggressive splits between funny formats purely because of the CnC/E-Strike/Generic Playset problem I outlined.
Thanks for posting this, it's unfortunate that I'm about 4 months late to the conversation, but I guess I'll still chime in lol.
So full transparency, I'm currently a One Piece TCG Player/Content Creator, but before I decided on OP, when I was first getting back into TCG's around the end of the Pandemic I had 3-4 Options I was seriously looking in to; those options being FaB, OP:TCG, Lorcana, and Digimon. I won't go down my full journey and decision process in determining which game I wanted to fully commit to, but I'll at least explain why I didn't choose to go all in on FaB. (I do still play though, just very casually and as I believe you mentioned in the video, not much for a casual player to do in the scene)
Initially, when exploring Flesh and Blood, I came across some really positive feedback/information. Everything at first glance looked really good and I was pretty excited to give this game an honest go. In fact, I was ready to fully dive in to the game. I was attracted to the fact that it rewarded skilled play. I enjoyed the game flow and back and forth. I like that there is a Hero representing you with specialized equipment. I like how instead of there being "colors" in the game there are classes etc. However, then I started running into some pretty big issues (at least for me):
1. The price of entry. You talk about this a bit throughout the video, but around @21:19 I feel like you hit the absolute biggest problem on the head. There are a list of cards that you should basically have access to if you have any intentions of being able to play this game even at a local level like E Strikes, C&C's, Art of Wars, Warmonger's, Fyendal's, Crown of Providence, Balance of Justice, and then a few other pieces of equipment for whatever your class needs (Phantasmal's, Spell Creeper's, Dynamo's, etc). Unfortunately, Viserai is my main and there is a card I will literally never be able to own because it costs $300... yep Arknight Shard lol. That immediately discouraged me as a newer player trying to get into the scene. Some positive news on this, currently E.Strikes and Art of Wars are around $25 US.
2. Scarcity of players at Local tournaments in my area. I preface this with, I'm not in some small city (population: 1 million people) and TCG's are really booming in my area for MTG, OP:TCG, Digimon, and so on, but not so much for FaB. There are around 10 LGS in my area all within about 30-40 minutes of each other but I think only 2 of them still carry FaB products now. I searched far and wide and the closest store that I can go to that supports FaB is about 35 minutes away from me and they are lucky if they get 10 players to show up outside of a pre-release type of event.. I don't know the full history on this situation in my area and why the game is not supported more across the other stores, but it is a very unfortunate problem where I live (Florida).
3. One Piece ended up being one of the best TCG's I've ever played. I've been playing TCG's for over 15 years now and I never pass up on learning a new TCG when I come across it and OP:TCG has been incredible. I won't go to far down this point, just saying it did absolutely play a factor, especially as a Content Creator.
I hope my comment is not received in the wrong light, I actually really enjoy FaB and I have 5 physical decks "complete" and ready to go if the scene ever picks back up where I live (Viserai, Teklovossen, Katsu, Prism, and the recently LL'd Dromai). I have complete in quotations because I refuse to pay for the cards over $40. Thanks again for putting this video up.
I agree so much. I wish people explored more in this game. I love this game mechanically, and I love every new class and every new hero in those classes and how they change up the gameplay. I buy boxes of every set (and got sad when I pulled zero new hero cards from DTD, but that's a different factor). I think people are really limiting themselves by not exploring every class somehow. Lexi and Azalea weren't for me, but I love how Riptide plays.
Anyway, I hope CNC and Estrike are expansion slot cards in heavy hitters. That will bust the game wide open for 2024.
I'd love to see what happens with the $20 CnC. I would agree that this game busts WIDE open - maybe number raw player number, but the value of those players increases dramatically.
That's my favorite thing about card games for the most part. Building decks is easily 50% of my enjoyment. Then playing and further refining those decks to be as competitive as possible is the other 50%.
The issue that I noticed about FAB was when I started, with Monarch, there simply weren't a ton of cards to really experiment with. I mean, there were cards, but there were clearly best cards for each hero type, and there was no reason to deviate to try to build another gameplab when one was so clearly superior. Now it's been a couple of years so maybe that has changed. But at the same time, the legend rule already hurt me because I believe that Chane can't even be used anymore. I've got no interest in investing in a game where I can't use my old game pieces. The idea sounds good in theory, but it's honestly not good for the long term health of the game.
Lots if people playing flesh and blood also plays on talishar, all of those i know does.
If you compare november/december 2022 with the same period in 2023, we have an increase in games being played of 55% in one year, going from 110.000 games to 170.000 games, that is freaking awesome🤟
I would say that overall the playerbase is for sure growing😊🥰🍻
Great analysis, keep up the great work!
"Value in the box" should be the cold foils or rainbow foils. Regular versions should be accessible.
Great Chat!
I think overprinting is the problem but also stuff like the ban system being so robust and extrem could be a problem. That’s would be a design problem, like for example set rotation would be. Is not a sustainable model because value is destroyed over time systematically thus changing the behavior of the consumer after a while. You then can only hope for the player base to save you at that point. Collectors will head out basically kneecapping your customer base by a lot. Most grown people that I know (not me) buy into games for the ride and enjoyment of the game. The like being a part of the game but don’t even really have time to pursue play (besides friendlies here and there) or are not confident in their playing abilities yet want to be a consumer pf the product. Almost half of the tcg audience relate to this type of product in a very different way that you may be thinking in your line of reasoning.
Dude. Great points
Great video as always (but probably on of the best). I will elaborate more in another comment.
Awww thank you so much! Looking forward to your next note!
We've seen this cycle for 30 years now -- CCG gets published, does really well, then dies. Some take longer than others, put out more expansions than others, have more players than others, but if the singles market dies, it's over. Why? Because unless we go completely virtual there's only so much physical space, and stores have to sell product to stay alive and provide the space to play the games. These must synergize as space costs money. It's really hard to support more than a few games at any given time as a store.
Conventions can be agnostic of the singles market to a certain extent as they provide space based on what people want to play (there are still tournaments of Wyvern out there), but the masses cannot be convention bound, as again there's only so much space, events, etc -- plus they are far more expensive for participants by and large. But once your game becomes convention bound its days as a living game are numbered, if not already over. Ask the Netrunner players about this. VtES players. The various Decipher games players. Heck, INWO players.
Sorcery and Lorcana were the worst thing to happen to FaB. I wish FaB well, but at least two out of three of these are destined to the dustbin of failed CCGs. Which ones? I have no idea (it might be all three), but pretending that all can survive long term is just silly. Ask any Yu-Gi-Oh player how they feel about the state of things now. 2024 will see a lot of CCGs transition to TCGs or die.
I feel like "CCG" and "TCG" are too interchangeable - even Rudy pushed "CCG" a number of times in his video for things that actually label themselves as TCG. I'd like to see a true evolution of the product to appreciate the changing atmosphere. MTG has Arena, but how they've used it is downright predatory. Altered TCG is doing something WILD with their product that I'm curious about, but at the end of the day, if you ignore the basics, there's no foundation that will help you through your mistakes.
This is why I feel FAB is actually in the best shape of the three (and I agree that Sorcery and Lorcana are the worst things to happen, not to FAB, but to TCGs in the last two years). Having the strong player foundation has kept them growing even as the secondary tanks - now it's find how do you find the right amount of product to create and how do you adjust the mindset of that foundation to get more out of those players. The term, which I had on my mind the whole time and never used, like a dunce, was "ACV" or "Average Customer Value." How do you bump up the ACV per set, because that's the REAL crux of the issue. 16K players doesn't mean squat if the meta is stuck on product from two years ago and 60% of that base doesn't care about your new stuff.
Lorcana will more than likely be fine, if for no other reason than it will appeal to some subset of Disney collectors. It's a large part of why Pokémon is still around after all of these years. If Lorcana ends up being a good game, then that just sweetens the deal. I've bought some starters but I have yet to actually check them out.
As for Sorcery, it looks cool, but it's also yet ANOTHER fantasy themed card game. I've seen very limited gameplay and it did look interesting, but if it has supply issues and hoarders trying to capitalize on that (which is apparently happening) that could stunt its growth before it even makes a mark. And again, ANOTHER fantasy card game.
FAB was overhyped from day 1 thanks to people like Rudy. They talked a big game about how it was "for the players," but the costs of the game did not reflect that. Now that they've apparently make more production available, they've chased the early investors out. This is the real curse of the modern card game. Players want to be able to build a competitive deck for $100 (or less) and buy a $5 pack and pull a $20 card. It can't work like that with the current business model.
@Xoulrath_ Lorcana will be fine because I feel that the company is building the right foundation. Player and experience minded, with more (by an exponential degree) people enjoying the function of Lorcana than the EV. Their collectability game is close to stellar and the IP is going to carry them far because it's just so damn attractive. They are trying to find a balance between the standard model and the exceptional Pokémon model, where you can build a cheap competitive deck, but also see tons of value out of the product too. They have some adjustments to make, but I also think they have some really creative product designs that will keep things relevant longer.
Sorcery...is getting it's own video. I've been on multiple podcasts talking about this and, to those who've watched me, know my utter hatred for this garbage product lol.
I still feel that FAB is for the players, bit the community who was built on value and buzz wants something different. LSS did more good than harm in their approach, and now needs to work on changing the mindsets of the ill-guided masses to more of their adjusted vision.
Between FaB, Lorcana, and Sorcery, FaB will last the longest. Lorcana's biggest problem is Ravensburger and their consistent blundering. It seems highly unlikely they are ever going to hire the right people to manage the game. Additionally, Hasbro will probably throw some insane amount of money at Disney come license renewal and Lorcana will insta die. Hasbro already has Marvel rights for MTG. It doesn't take much of a leap for them to get Disney rights too and bury Lorcana.
Sorcery is a mess. Erik doesn't care about LGS. They can't keep staff. Simon left once already. Ira has left over art concerns. They simply don't have the necessary infrastructure as a company to make it. Sorcery is incredibly lazy as well, recycling art and abusing player passion to fulfill many business aspects like playtesting and promotion. I'm quite familiar with lazy TCG creators, having worked for one prior. I would be surprised if they make it past Set 3.
I like a lot what you say, but I have to disagree on the overall idea that LSS needs to do more to entice players to explore. Flesh and Blood, I feel, is a game that works best when you're focusing on one or two specific classes, as you the player are constantly improving your skills in that class, trying out the various heroes, etc. Instead of trying to get players to try new things, LSS could get a lot more done by making more generalized sets like Dynasty, which has something for everyone.
A general set like that once a year (an equivalent to Magic's Core Sets, you could say) followed by 2-3 specializing sets will accomplish several things at once - the general sets give new players an excellent jumping-on point while the specialty ones give fans of specific classes new tools which help across several formats. It's clear to me that LSS WANTS to do this, by the way, they maybe haven't perfected the method yet.
As for printing. Look, I'm a long-term thinker. I love the fact that LSS is (was) pretty open about their print numbers as that can go a long way to instill confidence in collectors and investors alike. But I think a firm balance is needed so that sets don't become 'scarce' until well after their life cycle - basically, I don't have an answer for this, but I think a print run large enough to satisfy initial demand is all they need: print enough to satisfy the orders +30% more boxes so that there's still some on the market in the future, none of this 'multiple wave' crap other TCGs like to do.
I've collected, invested, and sold cards for years. Flesh and Blood is one of the healthiest games on the market I've seen. It'll be fine.
Love this, and thanks for a good challenge on it! As a competitive game, there certainly will be those who will love the focus and that will be...and is a GREAT experience. I'm looking at translating it to sales, but I also know that sometimes...most times...time only gives you so much. Maybe there is an answer in a wild product design instead of just the norm. Hero-centric games struggle in the mainstream for this reasons. There aren't really any that kill it in the TCG model.
If anything, half this answer is to stop thinking about "how do they hit magic levels" and more "what is the level of success that works for everyone"...and just serves as a nice cruise control game until the card pool hits those crazy explore whatever levels.
I guess, question to you, thoughts on rotations?
@@DecksandDraughts I'm against Rotation since it's one of the lazier ways to get players to buy product (if sets are only 'legal' for so long, players must buy new sets, after all) and I actually quite prefer the LL system they put in place. Sure it had its flaws, initially tying CC and Blitz together and then later on by just not having enough heroes, but the first issue was solved fairly fast and the second one is (hopefully) being solved this year.
Ultimately I believe games should be built around how their initially intended to cycle cards out. Magic decided very early on to do set rotations, and Pokemon did it from the beginning. Both of those games are designed around this feature. Yugioh doesn't have any kind of rotation and every set is (supposedly) designed with the intention of being played with every other set.
I believe it's inevitable that a game like Flesh and Blood - one without rotation built-in - will suffer from some serious power creep in the future that will heavily impact both casual and competitive play. After all, all non-rotating TCGs DO experience this. But I have faith that the guys at LSS will take the right steps to mitigate disaster (whether that be bans, an update to the LL policy, or something else entirely, I could not guess).
As a former FaB player sets being laser focused on one or two things is absolutely why the game is stagnating (that and competitive toxicity). It's all about selling a fantasy, if the fantasy you are selling does not interest me I am out. At this point FaB product is more like MtG commander decks in booster packs, that ain't gonna work when half the existing classes have no support or competitive viability.
I wish that more players understood this. I never got to play FAB competitively because it jaut never got started in my area. That said, I AM a massively competitive player and I've dabbled in Magic off and on for 27 years.
I play Modern primarily (when I can), and also mess around with Pioneer and Pauper formats for the game (if you're familiar). The thing that I LOVE about Modern is that you can do very well by simply understanding what the meta is, which allows you to use your favorite cards (so long as they aren't trash lol) and still do well at tournaments. Playing the game with a strictly meta deck is beyond boring if the cards and characters don't appeal to me.
I tried to get into FAB and there were many reasons as to why I ended up not buying further product after Monarch, but one of those reasons was the sets being done in such a way that I didn't necessarily care about them if they didn't have cards for the heroes that I liked. Aria was a cool set, for example, but I was working on building a Chane deck, then he got banned (I know it's the legend thing but not being able to use the card means that it's banned; the reason why doesn't matter). So I moved to Levia; I liked the Shadow Brute thing. But Aria didn't offer anything new.
LSS is pushing draft more which hopefully makes every set appeal to the competitive players. We will see if that helps.
Crossing fingers! I LOVE draft!
It depends. I'm a competitive player but I'm not the biggest fan of drafting. It's fun, and I enjoy it for the first few weeks of a new set release to get some cards and just enjoy a different way to play. But after that, it's all about Constructed formats for me. That's how I've felt for almost 27 years now, off and on with Magic.
As for FAB, I tried to get into it, and the only lgs near me that sold it did nothing to promote the game at a competitive or a casual level. Yet that same game store had dozens of players on any given day playing Commander both casually and in the store run tourneys.
I bring this up because the store owner seemed to think that simply having the product was good enough to get people to buy it. That isn't so. Whether people want competitive or casual play, the lgs needs to give the players the ability to have that environment. Expecting the players to buy the product, build the community, and then effectively run the tourneys for free, all while making the store money, is NOT going to work. I've seen too many stores do this. They don't care about the games that they sell; they just want your money.
I would have loved to have given FAB a real chance but my game store owners either never invested what was needed to get the scene started, or they didn't carry the product at all. To further make matters worse, the little bit of FAB that I do have, and the heroes that I liked, have been made not legal because of the stupid legend rule. Bad ideas all around.
@@Xoulrath_as an LGS owner there is little we can do to make a game community happen. We have tried over and over to make different games happen and unless the community itself steps up and runs with it it seems only as a cash grab. Not to mention margins on TCGs are slim to non-existant and are a commodity product customers often times buy under our cost online it all adds up to a loss to try to push things day in day out to just lose money.
@@stevengilland4524 oh I didn't give full details. The community WAS there. The game store owner was a fucking idiot. The problem is that he was a music guy that was trying to sell random collectables. He shifted to card games after having players ask whether or not he was going to be doing gaming. Then he failed to support the community. He just wanted the cash.
Simply opening a store isn't enough. When you've got the player base and they are asking for the store to run formats, run the formats.
@@stevengilland4524 As someone who put in countless hours into building the Colorado community, I feel this in my soul. The bitter truth is that the community is needed to really keep things going or, as a shop owner, no way is a TCG worth the investment outside of, perhaps, the feels that come with it.
There are no options or securities for tcgs so if you want a stable price during the whole selling window, the manufacturer has to make the first adjustment in gauging correctly the demand for his production. That’s only if they wouldn’t want any of the parts involved to lose money.. like for example distributors. That’s called good business practice which in turn makes long term business possible. Are you familiar with basic market dynamics??🤔 respectfully, your argument are so detached is is surprising
Lots of good points I like the video but yea the products are being over printed. That’s not debatable. That being said over production isn’t the only issue either.
Rudy is selling sealed boxes and yes they are overprinted, but the singles is doing very good though, but Rudy dont sell singles so......😊
I keep loving the "singles are selling well" argument because it's only very specific singles and is being touted by people with the capital to buy and sell a lot of the high end things. Like 90% of the cards in the game aren't worth dick and everyone is complaining that they can't open their value in a box most of the time, so I don't know why singles are suddenly the saving grace. They arent.
@@DecksandDraughts well the saving Grace is that people in fact love the game and the playerbase is growing.
@@boskarvil1570 I just remembered my tweet from yesterday :-)
I miss Decipher 😢
Saaaaaaame!
@DecksandDraughts I played Magic back in the mid 90's but my parents hated it. So I switched to Star Wars and Star Trek and played them much more. It was easier to get friends to play them versus "demonic" Magic 🤣🤣
@@Zerostatik I have the SAME story! Grew up on the Bible belt, had to throw the Magic away, switched to Star Wars instead
12:43 the marvel armors Sucked in Bright light
That is also a good reason. They were just...lazy.
So essentailly you support this game becoming a board game.
If the mass majority of seal official product is being sold for cheaper than what LGS's get them for, this game is considered a failure. If stores dont even make their own nut first, how can they continue supporting a game that results in net negative results financially? If the game relies on the success of other games to sustain ling term gameplay, isnt that a FAILED GAME?
You were close and then just...veered into the ravine. LGS's need to be able to support the game. At the end of my video, I suggested a reason that FAB struggled to have new products sell, at least in the kind of quantities that would let LGS's make money off of them. That's the whole "people need to be encouraged to play more than one deck so new sets hold the interest of the wider community" thing. This needs to be financially viable. We're what...12 sets in? A few "high priced chase items" ain't cuttin' the mustard. That's why we're here and why my title encouraged you to think more creatively about the financials. The term you're looking for is ACV: Average Customer Value, which is really low, I feel, per set, and that's the real problem.
Regarding the board game thing...I have zero clue what you're talking about. Same with the game relying on the success of other games to sustain long term play. I...can't even wrap my mind around where you got that so Ima just...be done here.
@@DecksandDraughts seems like many people agree with what i have to say
@@buybitcorn3918 6 people. You showed me.
Respectfully I think you are wrong on the affordability aspect.
The market can easily dictate supply and demand... you think tcg titles are >> publically traded fortune 500 companies?? No shot in helllll whatsoever.
If youre gonna print "class specific" card sets, how are you too naive to have zero foresight into the future and maybe print less than your "major" sets..
Do you think the FAB marketplace is better designed than the NASDAQ/NYSE? Why is it that LSS struggles with "stock" mentality? Maybe cause they WANT to establish a board game/exploding kittens meme game mentality????
Oh you're still going. I don't think you...watched this video? Or...know...anything about this game? But go off, I guess. Just helps the ol' reach.
@@DecksandDraughtslol facts and truth hurt.
Funny you "walk away" from FAB in dramatic fashion yet here you are back whining about someone "you dont give af about" lol.
What is this...Your 7th comeback video after saying you quit FAB for one reason or another...
Ya i dont even pLaY tHiS gAmE but i play as often as you claim to quit fab/content creation - FREQUENTLY 😂
@Volleyball.Shorts ok. I mean I said end of the year so I get to sneak a few videos in...but ya know, thanks for the free reach.
@@DecksandDraughts you can clearly can use all the help you can get. Glad to help out.
I'm disappointed in the poor assessment and evaluation.
It was just SOOOO lazy. I feel an AI prompt could have written it.
@@DecksandDraughts aside from Rudy's business aspect, I wonder if there are other factors that bled into the creation of his video. It sounded like a man who was having everything go wrong. I guess what im postulating is that there must have been other emotional non-tcg factors and it manifested in the way that it did in his videos.
Connecting the dots of MetaZoo and LSS, it's certainly something that would spark some anger, but in that passion, I still would have expected some insight outside of the cookie cutter. Sadly, it has been a trend for a while as most of the "information" has been introduced as "messages from Patrons" and even his own anecdotes contradict each other. I could give him the benefit of the doubt, but he has been pushing a narrative constantly being proven wrong across multiple games and doubling down on "stay the course." Now that the rocket missed "The Moon" and landed in the Sun, he's tripling down and blaming every other factor but his course. No. That doesn't get to go unchecked. :-)
@@DecksandDraughts "Now that the rocket missed "The Moon" and landed in the Sun" - love that phrasing lol
@@zutubetiles I pop out fun phrases from time to time, haha
You’re lost my brother
Ok. Still was hoping for something interesting to respond to here, but thanks for the free reach :-)
Maaan, are you sure you understand basic economics?? You are very confused my friend
That’s not how demand works … wth 😂 I’m not a politics guy, but I can tell you voted democrat
You're new here. We show our thought processes on Decks and Draughts :-) I encourage you to do the same.
@@DecksandDraughts I’m just saying there are some parallels between the game piece mentality and the Modern Monetary Theory democrats abide by. Both mentalities tend to think money can be detached from value and created out of thin air.
@@skurai Thanks for playing along. So let's start with me being fiscally conservative, socially progressive. The bare bones of libertarian if everyone from that party with a microphone wasn't a special brand of moron whose only word that exists for it right now is..."libertarian."
So, playing into MMT, I feel like you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong) "it's stupid to accept, as a solution to accessibility, that any publisher can just print more of a high value card whenever they want, not caring about the financial repercussions of their product's value as a result." Similar to a government saying "well, if we need more money...since we're the ones who make the currency we can just...make more of the currency."
I certainly don't agree with it in the realm of devaluing a currency that is tied to an actual limited resource (which "money" is supposed to be) - especially one with more of a universal use. But we're talking about cards here where there isn't a limited resource it's tied to. The number of them is tied purely to a consciously made print run number that, unless denoted otherwise, has no actual limit. Additionally, it's secondary value isn't something that is set by the publisher, nor do they benefit directly from its secondary value increasing or decreasing (or they fucking shouldn't...but you've already watched temper tantrum part 3).
I can certainly see how your dots connect, but you're talking difference between "the country and its population is fucking over their ability to survive" and "entry into our game is a challenge because key components of playing it wildly over-priced and that's really not a great business strategy." Do you feel that Lorcana shouldn't have continued printing The First Chapter if boxes stayed at $300, saying "well, the market has spoken, and let's not devalue that?"
@@DecksandDraughts I agree they shouldn’t be overpriced, lorcana fukced up heavy from the get go by a lot. But, they shouldn’t be all game pieces worth chump change either. There is a fine line of equilibrium between the two that would make the game affordable yet valuable. Like grand archive at the moment for example.(set 1 at least) But I don’t really understand how you think they’re both different. Fiat money is not really tied to anything besides trust in the government reassurance of it, and it actually being scarce or proportional to the demand for it. Cards are just the same way. Scarcity, desirability and demand are what makes the cardboard valuable. In that way, printing without gauging demand would either result in a lorcana or a metazoo situation. Don’t you think?
@@skurai Ok, I think we're closer than we think on this.
GA's value comes primarily from CSRs and a very really good cards (which, hilariously, are rares and not SR/UR). I'm a fan of value coming from variants, not from things functionally exclusive. "Collectability" has really turned into this anyway (see "Collectors Boosters"). I'm all for chase, but it shouldn't block the play experience.
Great example is Command and Conquer. I want that to be a $20 card because I wouldn't feel as bad about having 8 of them spread across like 3-4 decks. That cold foil $800 Dynasty variant? Hell yeah. Go for it. Give me more of that. $45 Singularity? Sure! You can only have one in a deck anyway so not the worst price. But $500 variant version right now? That's where I like the "stonks" money to be.
I feel CnC being $60-70 prevents people from wanting to make multiple decks which turns sets into liabilities. This makes like...5 standard-print cards (often Generics) highly valuable and 200 of them "chump change." (See Dusk Til Dawn w/ Warmongers) I'd rather 5 cards valuable enough to see a return, with maybe 10-20% of the rest being able to at least pay for the pack, but, more importantly, have enough demand to find regular buyers. (See Dynasty)
Regarding "gauging demand" - market and competitive analyses exists for this reason. You can view ICv2 sales reports on sales by volume, look at Alta Fox's analysis when they tried to buy MTG, plenty of other statistics that can show you the audience you have access to, and if you jump in early enough, you can start doing pre-orders, seeing how well your hype marketing actually hits (in terms of raw numbers...not how many idiot creators can put headlines in ALL CAPS MetaZoo.........) and what those customers are interested in.