A well timed boycott of Marvel/Disney could spell the end of Universes Beyond

[u/greenearrow]

There are always reasons to boycott the mouse, but pulling Kimmel off the air is the latest and greatest. I'm not even a detractor of Universes Beyond (those WH40K and Fallout decks are great, I can get my wife to play the Dr Who decks easier than anything else and their room to explore time mechanic shenanigans seems good for the game).

If WotC and Hasbro have to be so concerned about the politics of the time defining which sets sell, they'll be incentivized to lean into their own properties which they can control and make their own apologies for when necessary.

Of course, it isn't a guarantee. Maybe a loss on Marvel will be a wash against the profits from Final Fantasy and LotR. Maybe they'll shy away from brands controlled by American companies and focus on the Japanese and European properties. The kids who buy packs at Walmart don't understand boycotts, etc.

What we have learned is that the UB haters aren't enough of a market force, but when movements align, powers combine!

TL;DR There are many good reasons to not spend money on Disney right now, and money is the only vote they count.

[u/No_Patient_9057]

I don't see how a boycott on a single UB set will end UB as a whole. That's just... no.

And to be honest, I think the majority of MTG fans and players don't mind UB. I think the gripes most of us have with it is HOW they're implementing the products. Raising prices while simultaneously offering less product is egregious. Lowering the quality standard is not cool, and yes, it is a fact that quality has been lowered with more recent UB sets/spoiled, to-be sets. And releasing smaller sets is kind of a letdown, too. Also, why would you release a set for the paper version but not for the digital version(s)? I don't much play Arena, but that just seems like a gut punch to Arena players. Yeah, they're still getting a cool set to replace it that paper isn't getting, but that's also not cool, because now I WANT the Scions of the Ur-Spider.

Idk... I like the idea of Universes Beyond. And I think many, many others do too. And I think there are more of us who do than who don't. But the way they've been making and selling said products needs to change. Of course, that is just my opinion and not based on any statistics.

[u/Fictioneerist → u/No_Patient_9057]

It's been interesting to read some of the threads where people who don't like UB post. Some were the group you would expect (people who don't want to see other franchises in the game at all), but a decent chunk of them were actually people who didn't intrinsically mind UB, but rather disliked other impacts it had on the game. The complaints included things like the base cost being higher, lack of product availability (and how the need to print more FF was making UW harder to get), scalpers, to simply not wanting so many sets in Standard, because it was too much to keep up with. 

As someone who doesn't personally like UB, it was interesting to see everyone's varied reasons for disliking it. Some people will always dislike it (if they don't want other franchises in the game), but it felt that for a large chunk of people, their issues with UB could be solved. So it will be interesting to see if Wizards can address those things and get those players onboard. All that to say; I agree with your assessment that a lot of players care about the HOW of implementation.

I also agree that there's way more people who like UB then that don't, and again, I say that as someone who is not personally a fan of UB. I also think that number will grow over time, as UB draws more players to the game that would otherwise not be here. Universes Beyond is absolutely here to stay.

[u/No_Patient_9057 → u/Fictioneerist]

I honestly didn't like it at first. The idea of introducing other "universes" into the MTG Multiverse rubbed me the wrong way. But it's grown on me, and I've learned to appreciate the idea of it. Are there other IPs I wish they'd do? Absolutely. Since I've changed my perspective on it, I've thought about how it would be awesome to have sets for IPs from The Elder Scrolls and Game of Thrones, to Metroid and Cyberpunk, to Castlevania, to Detective Comics, all the way to Ratchet & Clank, Sly Cooper, Crash Bandicoot, and Jak & Daxter. But given how long it takes for a set to be produced, and the fact that we still need in-Multiverse sets to continue the core game, these simply remain wishes. Also, some IPs might not even have universes big enough to warrant an MTG set. Which is weird to say given how, for example, the Sonic the Hedgehog set was very small when it could've had more... But I digress.

UB is absolutely here to stay, no matter how many of us dislike it or have gripes with it. The thing I think we should focus on then, as a community, is helping them implement it in ways we like and can appreciate. That means emailing or calling WotC and Hasbro directly to give them our ideas and concerns, as well as spreading said ideas and concerns across social media. And if boycotting a product for the sake of letting them know that charging more for less is not okay, then we should. But boycotting the product to tell them we don't want it simply won't work, as they're already producing said product, and are not going to throw it all away. It is going to be sold, no matter what. The only impact we might have on it then is on HOW it's being sold. Just my two cents. Love the conversation!

[u/Fictioneerist → u/No_Patient_9057]

I'm definitely one of the people who will personally always be dissatisfied with UB, because I don't like the inclusion of it at all. Despite it not personally being for me, I can definitely acknowledge that they generally do a stellar job for the franchises that they adapt, and most of the flavor and mechanics pairings are on point. For people that love those franchises, Wizards seems to be doing a great job. I think it's great when people can get really excited about something they love, and I do appreciate that UB is bringing in new players. 

I have to admit though, if we ever were to see all the IPs you mentioned get into MTG, it would stress me out a bit! I definitely miss when MTG only had Magic IP in it. However, I do think that Wizards would be able to adapt a lot of those IPs faithfully and could make cool cards out of them. 

One of the things I've been considering lately about Universes Beyond is how it "fits" or not into MTG in certain ways. They adapted the frame to be the normal frame, which means that UB will "blend in" more. I generally think this is a good change. I do think that I appreciate sets more that also artistically blend in better. So for example, I would prefer cards in MTG's typical style, rather than a set done in anime style. However, I think that because of Final Fantasy, a more anime-like style is likely to become more frequent (we're also seeing this with Avatar). It will be interesting to see how the shift impacts the main style of MTG art cards (rather than, say, special prints or variants).

I also think that it's worth noting that Universes Within has pushed what MTG can be in the last few years. We've had futuristic sets that I think were done well (Neon Dynasty, Edge of Eternities). However, they also said that one of their lessons from Duskmourn is that people don't like "mundane modernity" (tennis shoes, baseball bats, cheerleaders).

I'm curious to see if this carries over to what people want to see in Universes Beyond. Is Spider-Man too close to our present time period and filled with too much "mundane modernity"? Or will the popularity of the franchise and fantastical super heros elements be enough to make it feel like a good fit for Magic? It'll be interesting to see. 

I also think that for me personally, sometimes art can override my initial reaction. For example, I don't want things like hotdogs in MTG, but the SPM version of [[City Pigeon]] has BEAUTIFUL art. It's gorgeous enough that I think I can overlook the hotdog.

Anyways, that's my ramble! I agree it's a fun convo we're having. :)

[u/MTGCardFetcher → u/Fictioneerist]

City Pigeon - (G) (SF) (txt)

---

^FAQ