Hasbro, the multinational toy and board game company, has recently faced criticism for their alleged practice of disposing of unsold and overstocked Magic: The Gathering card game products in landfills. This revelation has sparked outrage among both Magic enthusiasts and environmental activists, who argue that such wasteful practices are contributing to the global environmental crisis. Magic: The Gathering is a popular collectible card game that has garnered a massive following since its inception in 1993. The game revolves around fantasy battles between powerful wizards, with players using a deck of cards representing different spells, creatures, and artifacts to achieve victory. Each card has a unique art design and rarity, making the game a sought-after collectible hobby. However, it has come to light that Hasbro has been disposing of excess Magic: The Gathering products by sending them to landfills.
This is the initial argument for why the RL was created - they did not know if the game was going to be seen mostly for its collectable nature (like baseball cards) or for the actual game (like nothing else on the market at the time), and the RL is a case of them hedging their bets, sacrificing the game side of things to attract collectors.
My personal fear would be if the product did marginally well then Wizards would use these figures to justify an overall price increase on all future products. Thus, ensuring a form of reprint equity that set designers can cash in on to make sure a product sells well and gives WotC the funds to continue to invest in new card development.
However, it has come to light that Hasbro has been disposing of excess Magic: The Gathering products by sending them to landfills. This practice, if true, goes against the principles of sustainability and responsible waste management. The disposal of these products not only wastes valuable resources but also harms the environment, as the materials used in the production of Magic cards are not biodegradable.
Hasbro abandoning magic in landfill
I've lurked on Reddit for years now, and from time to time I see threads and/or opinions such as "The Reserved List is bad - it's an outdated concept." "They need to reprint the ABUR dual lands - the reason why they're so expensive is because of the gatekeepers and evil investors".
The worst opinion, and the one I find absolutely beyond irksome is the "The majority of magic the gathering players support the removal of the Reserved List" this is a prime example of the invisible/silent majority fallacy when someone wants to make their personal opinion (or poorly thought out argument) seem more "valid" they say "well a group of unnamed and invisible people support my opinion, so that makes it true". For the sake of argument lets assume that 5 million of the supposed 7 million magic the gathering players worldwide came together and signed a petition officially declaring this demand - where the hell is it? Where is this official public stance? Did I miss something? Or is this just the commiserating of a few online denizens that live in the illusion of a premium reprint product containing some of the most powerful cards ever made in Magic: The Gathering's history be made some how. affordable? I feel like these individuals have their heads in the sand - or don't know how WotC works or private corporations for that matter.
I think the Reserved List is good, and has ensured Magic's longevity. If it wasn't for the Reserved List magic wouldn't have been able to convince people to invest in card pieces in the secondary market over the years. Not only did this ensure that there was always something to invest in and collect, but it gave developers incentive to design new card pieces that could emulate (to a lesser extent) those powerful and sought after effects (e.g. Black Lotus to Jeweled Lotus ). Thus, ensuring a form of reprint equity that set designers can cash in on to make sure a product sells well and gives WotC the funds to continue to invest in new card development.
Wizards of the Coast and HASBRO are not in any way shape or form a friend of the Magic: The Gathering community. They do not care if a product is affordable or not - they simply want to make money - all of the money for all time. If a Reserved List reprint product were produced it would be so egregiously priced that it would make Magic 30th look tame. It would be beyond the reach of the average player and further strain the relationship between Wizards and it's customer base. My personal fear would be if the product did marginally well then Wizards would use these figures to justify an overall price increase on all future products. Sadly, we are seeing more and more expensive premium product (looking at you Commander Masters, Double Masters VIP Edition, Collector's Boxes in general, you get idea). I think the typical (uninformed) argument for an abolished Reserved List inspired the creation of Magic 30th. In my head the product was created by some out of touch CEO who was informed of the demand for reprinted RL cards. Thinking only dollar signs they were motivated to green light the most outlandish and greedy product in Magic's history. The propagation of the nonsense argument of this "majority" of players is only enabling more and more shameless behavior from the CEOs of WotC/HASBRO.
If I missed a petition of roughly 5 million players wishing for the Reserved List to be removed - then i'll at the very least admit that the argument has traction and it is indeed a legitimate demand of the community (But by the Mother of Machines that does not make them right). But I think most players don't give a crap about the Reserved List one way or another. I think it's removal will simply result in another controversy by Wizards pumping out another garbage tier predatory nonsense product that further pisses off it's customer base and doing more harm to the community.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
Edit: Thread closed - and a shame. But logic still stands - if there is a majority of anything then numbers must be stated to some degree, not vague mentionings of surveys whose results cannot be found or clearly demonstrated in a discussion. That's how a majority works.
Edit Edit: @ C a e r w y n , I couldn't care less what names you call me but I absolutely stand by what I say. If you think I'm being disingenous then I invite you (and anyone else interested) to talk this out on the Tappedout Discord in a voice channel - Mortlocke#5493
plakjekaas says. #2
The reserved list does gatekeep Legacy and Vintage as paper-playable formats if you'd want to join in as a new player. That's the argument I've heard the most. And I agree with that, I wouldn't want to spend several monthly salaries to be able to sign up a deck for a real tournament. The price of modern staples is already pretty restrictive, and ABUR duals are orders of magnitude worse than a fetch/shock manabase is.
Of course there's value in keeping the reserved list to have your cards stay valuable and collectable, but the purpose of the cards for me is playing the game with it, and the cards that are so restrictive to obtain are at the same time the best to play with. That stings if you're more of a player than a collector, and that's what keeps this argument alive.
Март 16, 2023 10:18 д.п. 13
C a e r w y n says. #3
Your analysis on a number of points is extremely questionable.
“Not only did this ensure that there was always something to invest in and collect”
This is the initial argument for why the RL was created - they did not know if the game was going to be seen mostly for its collectable nature (like baseball cards) or for the actual game (like nothing else on the market at the time), and the RL is a case of them hedging their bets, sacrificing the game side of things to attract collectors.
It can be debated whether that was necessary at the time of the RLs formation. However, it should be noted that the high price of non-RL Alpha cards, unique printings like Judge Foils and Kaladesh Masterpieces, etc. all show that there are plenty of ways to appeal to collectors outside of the RL.
“gave developers incentive to design new card pieces that could emulate (to a lesser extent) those powerful and sought after effects”
Developers do not need the RL to do this - and they do it all the time on non-RL cards for any number of reasons (see Lightning Bolt and Shock ). From the designer’s point of view, the RL actually creates a problem that otherwise might not exist. Say you want to print something similar to a good RL card (let’s remember, a large number of RL cards are unplayable garbage), suddenly you run into an issue where you could take a good card folks are running 4 copied of and make those decks far more powerful by allowing them to run 8 copies of a spell with a similar function.
Overall, that actually reduces design space by removing the designer’s freedom to simply say “this old card is perfect, let’s use that” and forcing them into a position where they have to make unnecessarily complex and avoidable design calculations.
“Thus, ensuring a form of reprint equity that set designers can cash in on to make sure a product sells well and gives WotC the funds to continue to invest in new card development.”
This is just a bad argument. “Rather than let Wizards cash in on actual reprint equity, isn’t it great they can try to cash in on an inferior form of reprint equity?”
Being able to tap into actual reprint equity - including some of the most valuable (though out of reach) reprint equity in the game - would be far better for “giv[ing] Wizards the funds to continue to invest in new card development.”
“If a Reserved List reprint product were produced it would be so egregiously priced that it would make Magic 30th look tame.”
Wizards recently reprinted a couple cards with values higher than most RL cards ( Imperial Seal , for example, was something like $800.00 prior to its reprint). The money to be made with Magic is in getting the most number of people to buy product at the highest possible price - that is why they do print to demand, and will reprint sets that sell out (Magic 30 is fundamentally different - it was designed to be a single run so they wanted to milk that one run for all it was worth).
Most importantly, they want to be able to sell boxes to LGSes for things like Draft Night—-and want the products priced such that the game stores are going to purchase large numbers with the expectation they’ll be able to keep demand going for quite a while.
That places limitations on how high a reprint set can go, even one with a few valuable chase cards. After all, it isn’t like they would just release a “oops, all RL” product - they would do a slow rollout and spread the reprint equity over numerous sets.
Every point you make about not seeing the data supporting that the majority dislikes the RL
Magic’s Mark Rosewater has acknowledged before that the majority of players dislike the reserve list, while also acknowledging it does appeal to some, such as collectors. It also is important to note that Wizards’ staff do not talk about the RL often, and, when they do, they often stay on script in a way which de facto indicates they do not like it either.
Overall, I think the evidence shows that Wizards dislikes the RL as much as players seems to—-it ties their hands, cuts into their profits, upsets their players, and means they have to write off entire formats (Vintage, Legacy, high tiers of cEDH) as “something we can’t really cater to”.
From players to designers to management, the overwhelming position seems to be that no one wants the RL - I expect the only reason it is still in the game is because Wizards’ lawyers are saying removing it presents an unacceptable risk.
When you force your opponents to make a villainous choice, they will be forced to choose between two options, each one benefiting you. As the deck puts pressure on your opponents, you can gather resources by drawing upon the power of the Doctor's most infamous foes.
Critics argue that Hasbro should explore alternative solutions to deal with their unsold Magic products, such as donating them to charitable organizations, finding ways to recycle the materials, or designing more environmentally friendly packaging. Many fans of the game have expressed their disappointment and frustration with the company, as they feel their beloved hobby is being undermined by such wasteful actions. In response to the backlash, Hasbro has claimed that they are committed to sustainability and minimizing waste. They argue that disposing of unsold products is a last resort and that they have implemented measures to reduce overstocking and manage their inventory more effectively. However, given the evidence and the magnitude of the alleged disposal practices, it is clear that more needs to be done to align the company's actions with their stated values. The controversy surrounding Hasbro's alleged abandonment of Magic: The Gathering products in landfills highlights the delicate balance between corporate profitability and environmental responsibility. The company, along with other toy and game manufacturers, should consider the long-term consequences of their actions and take concrete steps towards more sustainable practices. Only then can they regain the trust of their customers and work towards a greener future..
Reviews for "Hasbro faces criticism for landfilling beloved magic toys"
1. Jane Doe - ★☆☆☆☆
I was extremely disappointed by "Hasbro abandoning magic in landfill". The storyline was weak and lacked originality. The characters were poorly developed, making it hard to connect with them. The dialogue felt forced and unnatural. Additionally, I found the pacing to be inconsistent, with some parts dragging on while others rushed through important moments. Overall, I did not enjoy this book and would not recommend it.
2. John Smith - ★★☆☆☆
"Hasbro abandoning magic in landfill" had an interesting premise, but I felt that it didn't live up to its potential. The world-building was lacking, leaving me with more questions than answers. The writing style was also not to my taste, as I found it to be overly descriptive and convoluted at times. Furthermore, the plot seemed disjointed and the twists felt forced. Although there were a few redeeming qualities, such as certain emotional moments and the occasional witty dialogue, I ultimately did not enjoy this book.
3. Emily Johnson - ★★☆☆☆
I was really looking forward to "Hasbro abandoning magic in landfill", but it fell short of my expectations. The characters lacked depth and their motivations were unclear. The pacing was slow and the plot felt predictable. I also found the writing style to be confusing and it was difficult to follow the story at times. While there were a few interesting ideas scattered throughout the book, they were not enough to salvage my overall opinion. Unfortunately, I cannot recommend this book to others as I found it disappointing.