[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


Why are Trading Card Games more successful/popular than Living Card Games?
>>
File: 1637727883655.png (322 KB, 507x369)
322 KB
322 KB PNG
Trading card games have a lower barrier to entry, the business model is less consumer friendly, lending to more money being spent on TCG over LCG in the long run, the most popular TCGs have been around longer and so appear more popular which is self perpetuating. Most importantly, TCGs have the "World of Warcaft" factor. Many people never played MMOs or even video games, but did play WoW. Many people never play card games, but when they did, it was inventible going to be MtG, Pokemon, or YGO. These are the things that people then become nostalgic about, what they come back to in later years. LCGs fail as they try to appeal to card games players, its a shame because so many have been great for already enfranchised card gamers, but the market is niche enough that to survive you need broad long term appeal. Also consider that the longer a LCG goes on the hard it becomes to keep up.

In short, I'll never forgive WOTC for what they need to Netrunner.
>>
>>82318437
LCGs are too much of a time and money investment for casual players but don't have enough content to cultivate interesting competitive meta.
>>
>>82318500
They're way cheaper than TCGs at entry cost though. Your first competitive TCG deck will be upwards of 300$ LCG on the other hand.... what? 50?
>>
>>82318500
I'd disagree with the latter half, both netrunner and L5R had really great metas at the end of their lifes. I think what you mean is that the games can become "solved" without updates. This is only partially true, as just because a game is solved doesn't mean that its not competitive or fun. Just that the best decks have been created.

>>82318511
I agree that the cost of a TCG deck competitively is way higher, if you want to play an LCG competitively you have to purchase all the packs. This comes with the benefit that you get the cards needed to build any deck you want, but if you are late to the game then that can be a big back log to catch up on.
>>
Ctrl-F "Gambling"
Zero Results
Hrm.
3 delusional people in this thread.
>>
>>82318511
Ah but a *casual* TCG deck is $12.
>>
>>82318787
And a casual LCG one is 10....
>>
>"Living Card Games"
>they all die
>>
physical lootboxes
gotta pull them secret rare alternate art chase cards
>>
>>82318879
oh, the irony!
>>
>>82318147
The gambling aspect of TCGs basically sets up "mining" operations where businesses crack packs and sell singles. Huge industrial demand built into your product makes more money, so TCGs can make more product and advertise more.
>>
File: 10 out of 10.png (141 KB, 400x550)
141 KB
141 KB PNG
>>82318147
>why are gacha games so successful guys? why don't people just pay $50 and get a full bodied game instead of paying $500 to get characters + weapons in a game? I don't get it
>>
>>82319170
honestly don't see the appeal in a vicious cycle of addiction that will leave you feeling nothing but emptiness
>>
>>82318147
The only lcgs that thrive are coop ones or ones that look like boardgame rather than 1v1 competitive cg.

Lets be honest here ffg fucked with market confidence on competitive lcgs and also did a bad job with their design of cards and products.

Soo you gonna spend $100 for a set of core sets or you gonna pay $30 for a playable (kitchen table) mtg or pokemon or yugioh deck.
>>
>>82319340
yeah, I think that their new approach with Arkham Horror, doing boxed expansions split two ways is far better; it'll take a while, but when you're able to just buy the scenario or the player cards for a specific expansion, it gets much cheaper than tracking all of the dozens of pack releases
You do get fewer releases each year, but I think it's worth it for the reduction in price alone, nevermind the convenience in buying exactly what you want
>>
>>82318836
L5R at least 2 core sets (not 3 cause it is casual, but you want som consistency) + 1 clan pack. What it cost? $60-70?

LCG is just bad for competitive 1v1 games, most lcgs that tried it died at least one time.
>>
>>82318147
the real answer is that booster packs print money from whales and market speculators
but also, i'm not going to buy a card game that
>makes you roll dice every turn
>has a movement grid
>has 4 types of counters in the core set
>is coop only
>makes me buy the core set 3 times for full playset
>>
>>82319733
>>has a movement grid
What's wrong with this?
>>
>>82319733
>>makes you roll dice every turn
Well this should be ok for combat, there where plent of tcg with dice mechanics and attack with dice that did pretty well for more than 4 years

>has 4 types of counters in the core set
>makes me buy the core set 3 times for full playset
le ffg lcg starting kit.
>>
>>82319733
>>has 4 types of counters in the core set
>>makes me buy the core set 3 times for full playset
and yet Android Netrunner flourished so well WotC had to bring axe down for second time
>>
>>82318147
Gambling. With a TCG each pack you tear open has a chance to get you a rare card. People love that shit.
TCGs get more market support because stores can make a lot of money buying and selling cards.

LCGs only appeal to the people who enjoy the game. TCGs appeal to the people who want to play the game, gambling junkies, traders, collectors, and more.
>>
>>82319767
>>82319819
>>82319854
it's just personal preference. there are some great games that have those traits, but i wouldn't be able to get my friends into any of them.
if it has two or more of those traits, it's probably failed at being a tcg without booster pack scamming. it's more of a weird board game. or a tcg where you can't buy singles. you lose the ease of set-up that tcgs usually have
>>
>>82318147
Retards love gambling and will spend unreasonable amounts of money on gambling because it's designed specifically to prey upon the mental deficiencies of retards.
>>
>>82318147
LCGs are actually more expensive to play casually because you need** to buy product constantly.

you can just buy singles for ccgs
>>
>>82318147
Because cardscum don't actually care about game design.
>>
>>82323113
Spirit Island to you too, sweaty.
>>
>>82318758
this, I wouldn't be surprised if not even 10% of the people buying tcgs give a fuck about the game
>>
>>82318147
LCGs (at least FFG's) are all designed to emulate TCGs in the worst possible way: The expected buy-in is two or three core sets for ONE FUCKING PERSON, just to make tournament-legal decks they'd play at a gamr shop.

The core set of ANY LCG should be an up-to 4 player card game in a box: All the variety and deckbuilding of a TCG in a single purchase, that you can whip out and play with two to four people.

Only THEN does the expansion model make perfect sense as actual expansions to a complete base game rather than a way to post-facto complete the capabilities of one person.
>>
>>82322618
What if LCG creators also provided a way to buy singles directly from them?
>>
>>82325103
That's how I presumed LCGs worked. A Set is like a set in a TCG. Difference being is that when you buy a box, instead of getting randomized variations of different cards, you know exactly what you're getting. But just like how 1 box is enough to play cube with 3-4 friends, so should an LCG box give you enough to build 3-4 decks.
>>
>>82318758
That's really not the key factor. Pre-2020 people didn't get into games like Magic because it was a wise way to show status, but the prices on the secondary market came around to ridiculous values since there were more Magic players, meaning more of a demand for rare Magic cards.
>>
>>82318147

Because human's have a natural urge to hint, gather, and collect.

It's why people amass anything outside of money. Action figures, baseball cards, classic cars.

The hunt, capture, and basking in your victory is a driving force. It's not the same thing when you open a pack and know what is inside before you see it.
>>
>>82318437
Yeah same. Fuck them for kneecapping the ffg game.
>>
File: meta.png (1.08 MB, 1283x888)
1.08 MB
1.08 MB PNG
>>82325103
>LCGs (at least FFG's) are all designed to emulate TCGs in the worst possible way: The expected buy-in is two or three core sets for ONE FUCKING PERSON, just to make tournament-legal decks they'd play at a gamr shop.
ffg are fuckers for not including full playset but i still don't see how ECGs are more expensive than TCGs
you can just buy expansions if you're penny-pinching, rather than getting 3 copies of the core set
>The core set of ANY LCG should be an up-to 4 player card game in a box: All the variety and deckbuilding of a TCG in a single purchase, that you can whip out and play with two to four people.
they all are effectively this. buy any ECG core set and you can play it with 4 people out of the box, either using the pre-made decks or mixing and matching like a draft
>>
>>82325895
People have been buying boxes hoping to get rare cards since CCGs came out. The predatory business model is the same as modern Gacha which is why a LCG can never compete. Gambling.
>>
>>82326800
>they all are effectively this. buy any ECG core set and you can play it with 4 people out of the box, either using the pre-made decks or mixing and matching like a draft
Which games can do this and be fun? Are the claims that the games are "gimped" overrated? I'm mainly interested in Game of Thrones and Legend of the Five Rings.

I'm also not too interested in collecting copies. Singleton games have always been the most interesting to me.
>>
>>82327300
Ashes:Rise of the Phoenixborn always comes in full play sets of cards, and in preconstructed deck form, to boot.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.