Which is the cheaper buy-in, Collectible Card Games or Living Card Games?

Collectible Card Games

If you’ve ever heard the words “tapped,” “cast lightning bolt,” or summon creature,” you’re probably familiar with “Magic the Gathering,” and if so you’re familiar with the concept of Collectible Card Games (CCGs). In CCGs, cards are sold in either decks of 60 cards or booster packs of around 15 cards, and randomly seeded with cards based on rarity: common, uncommon, rare and “mythic” rare. A card’s actual in-game effectiveness isn’t necessarily based on rarity but in general, the rarer the cards, the better it is.

Magic the Gathering remains the world’s most popular CCG. Designed by Richard Garfield, and produced by Wizards of the Coast since the early 90s, the brand has millions upon millions of loyal players world-wide. Competitive play is a major aspect of Collective Card Games. In competitive play, the yearly format defines the sets of cards players may use for that year. Official events from weekly to yearly campaigns are the norm, with cash prizes running into the tens of thousands of dollars, and top-seeded players attaining cult followings.

Living Card Games

The CCGs’ counterpart is the Living Card Game (LCGs). LCGs require gamers purchase a “core set” of the game. This set of usually over a hundred cards give gamers a glimpse of the world’s theme. Supporting the core game will be scheduled releases of “expansion packs.” These sets of 60 cards are uniform, containing all the sets of that expansion.

The Living Card Game was first introduced by Fantasy Flight Games (FFG) in 2008 with A Game of Thrones: The Card Game, as an alternative model to selling card games. The attractiveness of LCGs to players is the premise that they are cheaper than their Collectible Card Game counterparts. However, many would argue that to start, one would need multiple copies of the core sets, causing initial investment to balloon.

So, are LCGs really cheaper to play or is it all just misdirection?
Some number crunching shows the level of investment between the two retail models. For better comparison, this computation excludes the cost of buying single cards.

Analysis:
The start-up cost of LCGs without competitive play is 12.7% cheaper than its collectible card game counterparts. These savings can increase to 36.9% if both customers are into for competitive play. In the long run, LCGs are a cheaper investment than CCGs. The cost of LCG expansions are lower compared to the random chancing of CCG booster packs.

I came from the now defunct World of Warcraft Trading Card Game, personally spending thousands on the hobby. Seeing it die was heart breaking, however I still enjoyed it while it lasted. The nice thing about CCGs is that you always get something new every few months, which is also the problem with it as your favourite cards are cycled out of season. Still, the bottom line is, cost aside, if you love the game, prices become acceptable. There’s an adage that one should put their money where their mouth is. In games, one ought to place it where their heart desires.

Written by: Ronald Villaver
Edited by: Reg Tolentino