Cheaper Packs is NOT a Good Thing | Splinterlands
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лис 2024
- In this video we discuss the importance of pricing promo cards and or packs at a reasonable but NOT low price point. The key with cards is that they are priced to ensure those who value the asset can buy it out, but not so cheap that everyone can afford it. Scarcity is too important for the value of a card, and so let's try to ensure scarcity by pricing appropriately. Let's discuss.
As always, thank you for your time and attention, have an amazing day and God bless.
Check out SPLINTERCOACH
www.splinterco...
Join Golem Overlord TODAY!
go.splex.gg/?r...
Buy T&A Merchandise
spreadshop-adm...
my-store-d281f...
Join the Channel!
/ @dwaynecunningham
TNA Discord:
/ discord
Sign-up for Splinterlands!
splinterlands.com?ref=infidel1258
Sign-up for Splex.GG
splex.gg/referral
Twitter: / timenattention
Ethereum: 0x9e805A40E5d4C831b63d94E2603b5E3F436C0250
Bitcoin: bc1qk0v6n7uyr75fg528xew58ddqdy7k5tf2w7a0zk
XRP: r4sThPjjPRPnzTgARFEwmS2KC6ua9sD8Qd
Support Dwayne via AMAZON Affiliates:
Lord of the Rings Living Card Game - Core Set
amzn.to/3Gd78DZ
OBSBOT Tiny Webcam 4K
amzn.to/40VNFzI
I liked playing with the old cards, but after they left the wild league for bots and depreciated the usability of the old cards I got discouraged.
Consider spending your time and attention to a game that’s actually worth a damn 😅
14:27 Doggieeeeeeeeeee. Show us in one video
GG DWAYNE, you talked about the cards, value, scarcity, packs cost, like i think. 100% like my ideas and thoughts. Not everytime i agree with you, but this time you spoked my mind. GG.
Having scarcity in a TCG is fine but not for the meta cards. They can print all the collector's edition cards they want - Diamond foil, Platinum foil, 1 in 25,000 packs cards or whatever. The cards which are used in competitive play should be relatively accessible to everyone (not saying free but still accessible). I can't accept an argument that some cards should be very expensive and basically broken so you can pay2win your way to the top while probably more skillful players just watch and cheer from the sidelines. The competitive part of the game should be as fair as possible.
@@GhostlyBG this. The gold Foil represent the "chase" cards to a certain extent, but making cards 400bcx with 5x cards per pack and charging $4+ locks out any "casual" player who may check out the game.
@@thepsilence yup, totally..
Heres a counter argument ...as little players as when untamed was sold at 2$ and untamed is considered a rare set.....so next set at 2$ seems just fine espec if rebellion tanks and buyers unhappy in a year if no bull,no?
Card ownership should be given a lot more consideration. My suggestion: Collection Power (CP) of cards you own should be part of the ranked play boost you get when playing the game. At least a percentage of owned CP should be taken into consideration and would encourage more card ownership.
@@cryptobeaver5949 this is the most obvious answer to incentivize card ownership. Make each card +2% and you'll end up > 10% boost most times.
I do disagree on this one but only partially. I think the depreciation in the cards value is good as of now. But ongoing depreciation I see as bad. Timing wise with the new player experience being rolled out lower card value I think will also allow more new players to be kept and retained but after this critical time I would want to see some appreciation in card values although I hope that is it slow steady sustainable growth. I think though this could be good. And for older players gives us a window to pick up some older stuff while it's at a bit of a discount.
If they want to sell packs at $4 they should massively increase the burn value of the cards. Opening now a minimum pack will instantly give you a 99% loss in burn value.
You and Matt are so wrong. Card/pack prices need to correspond to earnings potential. Currently you earn pennies on your multi-thousand USD deck per day.
This is why people are running away. If you keep pricing at 4 USD per pack, just very few hardcore players will buy the next set, earnings for the team will plummet and the team will be crying out VERY loud - mind my words.
And please don't argue that high pack prices retain the value of existing cards. We have seen time and time again that card prices plummet after a certain time.
Lower pack prices to motivated undecided players to buy in AGAIN and stay rather than don't buy anything and watch the game break down (due to lack of fund) from the sidelines...
Packs are away 2 years from now so pricing of promos will matter and matt said he will expwriment with prices since there is 5 sets of releases
WRONG, THIS IS NOT THE PLACE WHERE WR PRINT FREE MONEY FOR YOU, CUZ YOU WANT IT.
First thing: soulbound cards are NOT free. That is probably the biggest lie in Splinterlands. Not even taking time spent into consideration (because you're supposed to have fun playing the game and also there are bots playing to get those cards), to earn those cards you need to spend money on a spellbook, money buying or renting other cards, and money buying or renting SPS. To get maxed soulbound cards by playing it ends up being quite expensive.
Now on the topic of cheaper packs: of course, cards being more scarce makes them more expensive (assuming the same demand). However, isn't it the same if you put $10 into one card and it goes up to $20 compared to putting $10 into 10 cards and each of those goes up to $2? The initial price only matters for the demand at that time. That's why Untamed at $2 became so much more expensive later on (even after falling a lot from the high it's still more expensive than at the start) and CL at $4 is not at $0,30. That's why Zyriel was priced at over $30 with Vouchers and is selling for less than $8 per BCX.
I 100% disagree that not everyone having access to all the cards is what makes the game so strategic. Unless people are using bots, having access to all the cards gives everyone the same options but people think in different ways. With so many rule sets, mana caps, and splinter restrictions, it takes a while before we get a similar game. Sure, with time, people would learn and move toward similar teams. That's why we need new cards (and other stuff) from time to time.
I honestly believe CL core set prices are perfect. $700 for a maxed full set is reasonable. The only reason people are unhappy with those is because they paid $4 per pack. However, $700 to play at max level is something that regular people can do. Should we have a game that only people willing to put $10k per year can enjoy? When everyone else leaves, will those 10 or 20 people still keep putting all that money? If you add RW that's like an extra $1300 per max set. That's already $2k without the promos. It's enough to play at a high level in Modern but not enough to be at the top of the top. For that, you'd also need many Rebellion cards. But we could even have a mix. Cheap core set, less cheap mini set, more expensive promo cards. Maybe cheaper packs actually leads to more money spent because more people are willing to buy.
And maybe it's not about cheaper packs but less cards per level. Considering there's no league caps anymore, it would make perfect sense if it took less cards to max level. You say the team provides several rarities to make it accessible to more people but that is not true. Since you need so many commons, rares and even epics to reach max level, it's easier to max out many legendaries than many lower rarity cards. Low liquidity aside, there are currently 11 rebellion legendaries that you can max for less than $60. Some of those are not very good but most are pretty strong in the right rule set. There are several commons that are more expensive to max out. And the low liquidity problem ends up increasing the cost more on cards that you need more copies.
Card prices are not protected and will not increase just by selling expensive packs and promos, they gain monetary value due to legit demand, which in turn is due to more players joining the ecosystem; but even so, prices do not remain high forever in every card, only while they are part of meta game, it is only a few that make it being more expensive over time, usually as collectibles, in the case of MTG, it is only like 100 out of more than 20000 cards printed to date; I am not saying this is wrong, it is just the natural flow of every TCG (after 25 years playing TCG's, I have observed this over and over). Being on the blockchain is not enough to make things happen different as TCG's in real life are cards that you also own, so, ownership is not an excuse to overprice.
This team needs a serious consultant to perform a deep market research in order to establish proper pricing on new packs and promos, in a way that results more profitable for the company and in the best interest of the community as a whole, and not only for those who dare to pay over 5k usd, which by now, there are unfortunately only a few left. Oh, and I need to add that not even at that budget you guarantee owning a competitive deck as the amount of cards to combine to max out is absolutely insane, specially when packs contain only 5 cards; MTG packs have 15, and you need at most 4 of each in a deck, in fact, 1000 usd in MGT allow you to make up to 3 builds competitive even at PTQ - Pro Tour Qualifier).
It is also an absurd argument to say that by selling cheaper packs, the RB and RW cards will decrease in value, as those cards are unique, and scarce already, due to the lack of people affording to buy those, and they are also already plummeting anyway, again, due to the lack of demand from players; if you think cards will be as expensive as in 2021 once more, that is most likely not going to happen ever, 2021 was a different context: we had only a few editions printed, most people entered in order to make a quick buck (most did not really enjoy the game), plus there were many loopholes where extractors took so much advantage to drain the capital from the game; nowadays that most extractors and exploiters are gone, the few of us remaining are players who actually love the game and want the best for the ecosystem, it is time to have a better knowledge of the community and their potential expenditure budget in order to guarantee sales and provide a constant flow of cash for the company, as well as leveling the competitive ground.
I hope they find a professional who researches and suggests the best course of action for pricing, they need to stop listening only to a very small wing of players or making decisions "at heart", seems like the way they have been pricing has been an absolute failure, proof of this is that since CL, most promos and packs had to be burned, as opposed to the previous editions which massively sold out (no brainer here, but arrogance and greed may block some people's mind).
I'm going to have to disagree for once, D. I will not be buying any more packs if sold for the same price as REB, and I'm fairly hardcore. I spent over $3k on REB packs and that didn't get me anywhere near top level competitive, and i had to buy a lot of singles on top of that 3k to even get my commons to 60bcx. I get 4x guaranteed airdrops per conflict so that has some value but doesn't come close to my investment. I could have rented, paid less, and had none of the risk of holding cards that will inevitably go down after airdrops end. For comparison in MTG you only need 4x of any card, get 15 cards in a pack, and packs are priced similar. At $2 per i could have built a competitive deck and i would have spent the same amount. Sure, some whales may not buy as much, but more "regular" people will buy in because the cost to rewards would be more in line. Tldr I can't justify buying packs at $4 again there was not enough value, but I'd be a buyer if cheaper.
Yup, exactly my thoughts. I bought 1300 RB packs in the pre-sale, that did not bring me anywhere close to maxing most of the cards apart from the legendaries. I still have about $300 worth of RB cards to go to finally max the deck.
If they do no do anything else they should at least cut the requirement to max a common card in half - from 400 to 200.
@@GhostlyBGto cut amount of cards to max in half would be the same thing as pricing packs cheaper though.
@@AsmongoldvsArtosisclips well, somewhat. I think the most problematic cards to max if you go the packs route are commons since even though you get mostly commons in the packs they are still the hardest to max due to the sheer amount that is needed.
@@GhostlyBG yea.
Technically, all cards are now cheap and accessible for everyone so this "price reduction" idea is completely irrelevant. As for cards being useful...well it's offer and demand and right now everyone is selling out and no one is joining this game so there is simply 10000x too many cards already in the echo system for the demand. This mean that the team is stocked in a catch 22 where no one wants more cards but the team rely mainly on card pack sell to finance their activity(except for a limited few hard core player that will die on that hill even if every asset goes to 0$, they will still buy more cards)
So unless the team find other ways to finance their activity, this cycle is doomed to fail since more cards keep getting introduced in a game no one wants to play and that everyone is currently trying to get rid of their cards before they go to 0$. Yet people keep pretending like this game will magically get better in 6-12 months with whatever Matt and the team will introduce to the game...I don't believe in miracle so yeah, good luck with this game as I know you still think it will get better soon but I hope you can cut your loss for the good of your own family and that you won't deny until it's too late and that what used to be 100k$ get to 0$ from your stash
Dwyane keeps saying SPS will hit $1.
@@TeamPhoenixRising 1$ is not impossible but very unlikely in the current market IMO, to reach 1$ we would need the game to be 100% revamp, working perfectly on mobile, and SPS sink would need to be put in place like it was supposed too (that include land being fully deployed, guild system revamped with card and SPS sinks like we were supposed to have 2 years ago) etc.
This sadly don't take in consideration that TD game, GLX, and such secondary game were supposed to help the SPS echosystem but both these project are pure failure and poor product without any substance. As for the other project Aggy are working on, I would not have too much hope in them getting out and running anytime soon and if they do, I doubt they will move the needle for SPS.
This mean that in the current form, there is no world where SPS is having enough demand and sink for it to go to 1$ any time soon (unless by some vodoo magic, Matt somehow prove me wrong and get 500k new players out of nowhere and that they all love our game enough to put 10k+ each and move the market back up which would be the only way for the game to generate green candles and therefore, put Splinterland back on the map) but let's be super honest, there is more chance that Matt and up syphoning 100% of all DAO resource to pay themself a salary for an extra X more months until all of it as run out and that Splinterland put the project in opensource for whoever wants to take back the lead of the project or the project will just die out so no, I see no world where 1$ is possible sadly base on the current state of the game
I think the dumbest thing ever is how people want to remove vouchers. Instead they should be simply used more. Why would you take a $5 pack with $1 off in vouchers (which is why people stake SPS to get these types of bonuses as you're supporting the game by staking SPS) only to drop pack prices down.
Look at this statement at 12min . He says he has amazing expensive modern deck and struggles to get out of gold in modern cause he is not as good as some ... and this amazing deck doesnt even have grimbardun or mantaroth etc other key reb cards. Wow,i wonder why he isnt as good as others in the game... also its clear high % of ppl still botting for optimal decks in modern as stever spoke of. But hey sylar said yesterday they gonna start banning soon ,in a way he was hired for,so maybe theyll catch the bots.
What kind of argument is it that some players having all cards and others half means that its good they have half cause then they have player agency in choosing among their weaker cards? And thats supposed to be a great thing. And player with 100% cards is in such a bad spot cause he now lacks that player agency,poor thing.
Yup, that's a totally flawed argument, lol.. :D
So put the shoe on the other foot. You say that people want cheaper packs so that THEY can afford them. Well, Matt is saying he doesnt want to lower the price of packs because it will devalue HIS holdings. I think the price is substantially prohibitive for a new player, even at a 2 dollar price pack, even with these "depressed" card prices. I feel like at this point the entire argument of "How to fix the game" is an argument of what came first, the chicken or the egg? There are too many players on all sides of the argument that want to defend their own assets according to how their train of thought works. Nobody is "Right" or "Wrong" but it has been constant infighting amongst the community for a solid 6 months, from both smaller and bigger players on both sides of the aisle. When you think about new players, most people spend roughly $50-$60 on a game to play it. This gives the new players 100% access to the entirety of the game (Talking AAA titles here) A new player who spends 50 dollars on cards or packs in splinterlands leaves them in an incomplete and quite frankly, uncompetetive, position.
We are hardly selling any rebellion packs to the community who is here, who clearly LIKES the game, and is INTERESTED in the game. How and why will we draw in new players to purchase packs? If the people here already dont want them, why would a new player buy them? Not to mention a new player finding the discord and seeing how toxic the chat and community has been lately. Im not trying to be an ass when I say this, but look at you. You are a larger player by all means, and you dont have a full rebellion set. If an OG like yourself cant justify getting the new set even given your incredible belief in the game, why would a new player get that set?
Also, just a note here about Gold matters post, and the screen shot of the $4000 malric inferno. There are currently 7 BCX total for sale on the marketplace for approximately $70 each. I can go ahead and list any price or asset at any astronomically high price, and it does not equate to value. Once there is someone who will PAY $4000 for that card, come make that same argument. I can go and list my doctor blight for $10,000 but that doesnt mean its worth that, right? I understand the point you are making about cards appreciating, and yes, going from 15 to 70 or so is still amazing! But I just think that it is OVERLY misleading by goldmatters to post a screenshot like this, knowing full well that the price is unrealistic. I can show you screenshots of my stocks being worth 10,000,000 dollars, but if its a bunch of fake prices, then who cares? Make this post AFTER someone spends 4k on a single card right now.
Maybe they shouldn't print 15 million packs for 1k players!
15mill for 2 players yes..just so u dont exagerate alone
😄
The game is dead. There is no way to take more money from current players, everyone is leaving.
The team need to put their efforts into bringing outsiders to the game. Maybe sets with one specific scarce card, like 10 copies, which would come at max level and be really powerfull.
Maybe if there were a chance to spend 4 bucks and get a really good and scarce card. After some time you would see stories of people who bought a pack for 4 USD and sold that card for 1k dol.
Outsiders need that kind of illusion to come in.
Huge dumps of cards with few human players in the ecossistem is what killed Splinterlands
Dwyane what is so bad about making packs cheaper? You can always make chase cards rarer by increasing the difficulty in getting them. I notice that you always side with the team and not with the community. I do not appreciate this sycophantic behavior. Why not make a proposal and see if the community wants $2, $3 or $4 per pack. If I remember right packs used to be $2 anyway. If the team earned $1 million by selling 500,000 packs versus selling 250,000 how does this harm them. It is not as if they need to spend money to print and ship and store the cards.
Reducing price of card is a bad move, and everyone with many cards will vote no to this since any card sold cheaper = devaluation of all the other cards that got sold at full price. That's basic market 101 and sadly you attack Dwayne here saying he's not thinking about the community but reducing the price would actually affect the entire card holders negatively and also, Matt promised there would never be any more stupid bulk sells and such to make sure that those that purchase extra pack at full price will never get the grass cut under their feet.
Also as I said up there, cards are like 80% cheaper then what they were 1 year ago so you can just stop wasting your money on opening expensive packs and just focus on buying those cards you want directly from the market since everyone are dumping all their cards right now on the market
@@Elistios Should raise prices, if you raised it to 10 million, you only need to sell six. Packs are not only devalued but they also award less (cp or land points stuff) but they cost more lol.
Million per pack,yes!!@@AvoxNilhi
First of all, the team needs to find out the minimum resources needed to run the developments for 2 years. Also find alternate resources, cut down costs, and only sell the amount of cards needed for the game not to die.
Second, find a way to make what we have in circulation less, like burning older cards for discounts on new packs, finding out ways to get rid of useless vouchers, and maybe lowering SPS supply.
The game was so badly ran by the team, that when they had money, they hired a crew with over 100 people who delivered NOTHING, except for many incomplete ideas.
Either the game puts all their efforts into making the supplies realistic to demand, or the game is faded to die.
And even If they achieve, next time I hope they keep resources scarce and desirable, not dump a bunch of different tokens and millions of cards on a small player base.
Crypto doesn't have to reinvent the wheel. Free works for other card games. Now, who's going to pay for Splinterlands rather than play the alternatives? And you don't need 400x copies of a card to use it there. Could play with lower-level cards but that's not the real game.
They don't pay for Splinterlands and play other games instead. You need to beat the value proposition of Hearthstone, Legends of Runeterra, MTG Arena, Gods Unchained etc.
Lol ppl dont play this to just play for free,but have fun While hopping to later sell for profit. All crypto games.
@@AsmongoldvsArtosisclips How's that working out for you?
@@AvoxNilhi ask guys that made millions in crypto games for 1k. They think its working ok.