There has been a lot of hype about Magic Online, and it may be a great product. I personally haven't tried it. The problem I have is not with hyping Magic Online, but with bashing Apprentice. I don't even mind that if the criticisms are accurate and well-supported. But when a member of the magic community (read: Sonny Jones) takes it upon himself to criticize Apprentice for invalid and largely irrelevant"problems," I can't just sit by.
Apprentice may not be 100% effective. It may not be the best way to run an electronic game of Magic, but Sonny's complaints were trivial at best, and inaccurate at worst.
Let me take this point by point
The first thing Sonny talks about in his article is the price of Magic Online. No - no one knows the price of this game yet, but I can tell you one thing: It's not free. It also seems likely that there will be some type of monthly server charge or other additional cost. Even without this however, the game will still cost more than Apprentice - which sort of defeats the whole idea of playing online. (Well, not for those who don't have a good local store or a group of regular players at hand... But point taken. - The Ferrett)
That brings me to my next point:
"I asked Rusty Sullivan (the administrator of the MIE online league www.grimmoire.com): ' When this is released, will Wizards shut down Apprentice?' He replied, ' When this hits the shelves, who will want to play on Apprentice?'"
Well, I think the sheer volume of pro-Apprentice articles speaks for its self in proving this statement wrong - but in case it does not, I will expound. Most players I know play Magic online because it is free. Many have even quit playing in real-life due to the expenses. Why would they want to rush out and spend money if their whole reason for online play is cost efficiency?
Let's face the facts: Playing online isn't, never has been, and never will be as fun as playing in real life... But as long as it's free, the financial aspects balance out the negativity of losing the social aspects of the game.
In addition, if Magic Online does not succeed, consumers lose all the money they have put into the game. With a program like Apprentice, updates for the new sets are easy (well, not easy, but possible) to create. Even with Dragonstar Studios shut down, the game keeps on going. If Magic Online were to crash and burn, I find it difficult to believe anyone would put in the time required to update it. Even if for some reason Apprentice were to stop working, what do players lose? A great platform for the game, granted, but no money. Can you say the same for Magic Online?
Sonny's next point is by far his most valid one. Backwash (the cheating program for Apprentice) is indeed a factor (and a much greater threat to the success of Apprentice than Magic Online). It is difficult to detect, and many players do get away with using it.
That said I would simply like to congratulate Mr. Jones for his amazing responsibility in not only telling us all about the benefits of Backwash, but in posting the URL to give us easy access to cheating. How on earth, after all of the hype over cheating recently, can you possibly post a link to a site supporting cheating? The thought that a person can do this without even considering the ramifications makes me sad for this game. (Actually, that was me, and I did consider the ramifications - see my article today - The Ferrett)
But his next paragraph is the reason I am writing this.
He talks about al of the problems with tournaments online. You have to - gasp - type in six numbers and send a message containing them to the tournament director! In addition, it is very hard to do this wrong, as any decent tournament will have an auto response telling you if you did everything right and giving you instructions if you did not. He then goes on to say:
"If this isn't done correctly, you are not in the tournament and nothing can really be done about it."
Incorrect.
Almost every tournament director posts a players list before pairing players and give everyone a large time span to report any problems. If, for some reason, your code was not received, or you sent the wrong thing, there is ample time to solve the problem. In fact, you would almost have to try to not get into a tourney you wanted to enter.
All of this stands without even mentioning one of the most important fact:
Most tournaments do not require security codes to even be sent. It is only large tournaments, usually for prizes (and it should be noted that these tournaments are free, despite the payout of about a box to the winner) that require these codes. The many small tournaments run randomly throughout the day require none of the fuss Sonny has described here.
In fact, one league (in my opinion the best, despite Sonny's diatribe of self satisfaction) called MTG Online has even arranged a way to enter smaller tournaments that is just as simple as the one described: You simply log onto their site when the tournament is about to begin, and click the button that says"join." A timer counts down until entries close and the site informs you whether or not you are entered in the system. This also avoids the problem of people sneaking into tourneys, as the site will not let you join after entries close.
The difficulty Sonny describes in connecting is frankly nonexistent. It is very rare that two opponents try to connect and can't, and using this as a criticism of Apprentice is simply ludicrous. I guess CDRWs are bad, since some computers have trouble reading them.
Sure, Magic Online may look pretty, and it may be much better than Apprentice - but the question is, do the advantages of a flashy appearance and automatic rulings outweigh the potential cost? The answer may very well be yes, and who can really tell whether the product will be successful? Just next time you decide to criticize something, make sure your points are valid, and your writing is responsible (HINT: DON'T LINK READERS TO SITES THAT EXPLAIN HOW TO CHEAT). Mr. Jones may want to continue telling us why Magic Online is better than Apprentice as he assures us all he can.
In the mean time I'm going to keep playing my Atari. The game is fun, and I got it for five dollars at a yard sale. If it stops working, that's fine; I still have $295 to spend on whatever I like. Sure, your X-Box may look nice and flashy - but if the venture fails and they stop making games, you just spent $300 for a system that is virtually useless now (anyone remember Virtual Boy?). Besides, there's absolutely nothing wrong with my Atari.
| 
