Re: Unreleased and New Card Discussion
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2023 11:39 pm
It makes my experience worse because I have no clue what is sitting across from me anymore.
Magic the Gathering Resources, Tools, Previews, and Community.
https://www.mtgnexus.com/
I'm not sure where I'd rank the sketch frames, but I absolutely loved that they printed the art direction notes on many of them. Now that I think about it, I should pick up one of those for General Ferrous Rokiric. One of the deck's side missions is to have as many unique frames as possible.
Can you expound on this? This seems like it would play better as a critique of some of the more gonzo Secret Lair treatments. And Invocations *shudder*
Well now it sounds like we're talking about card design instead of graphical design.tstorm823 wrote: ↑6 months agoDo you believe that the existence of cards you don't want to play with makes your experience of the game worse?DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoWotc chose to use an alternate frame and it makes my experience of the game worse.
I think this is effectively parallel to the situation others are attempting to communicate. You can prefer other cards and other strategies and have no intention of ever playing tribal strategies, but still be able to look at a tribal card and think "hey, that's kind of neat, I hope people have fun with that."DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoOther cards I don't play could be neutral or positive though. Like I don't hardly ever play tribal decks but most tribal cards don't bother me.
I've mostly just been idling watching this argument, but I had to jump in:
I do find this argument pretty confusing but you know me, I'll never let an argument die no matter how frivolous :D
Personally, while alternative borders aren't a huuuge impediment to recognizing cards, they are sometimes harder to recognize at a moment's glance if I'm more used to the default modern frame.
See but I wouldn't say I "like" those tribal cards. For example I think Strefan, Maurer Progenitor is very lame, not interested at all, tribal designs are boring, don't let the door hit you on the way out. But if someone is playing it against me, I have zero problem with that. In fact it's a positive because it allows me to differentiate my own deckbuilding preferences from other people, and without those cards I personally dislike I wouldn't have anything to separate myself from. I'm glad they exist but I don't like them. In fact I'm glad they exist BECAUSE I don't like them, even.tstorm823 wrote: ↑6 months agoI think this is effectively parallel to the situation others are attempting to communicate. You can prefer other cards and other strategies and have no intention of ever playing tribal strategies, but still be able to look at a tribal card and think "hey, that's kind of neat, I hope people have fun with that."DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoOther cards I don't play could be neutral or positive though. Like I don't hardly ever play tribal decks but most tribal cards don't bother me.
People can prefer the default border to an alternative, and have no intention of using the alt-art or alt-border, but look at it and think "that's kind of neat, I hope people have fun with that."
I think you could be willing to concede that someone could reasonably use the word "like" to mean "I'm glad they exist".DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoYou could say "well, I'm glad those borders exist even if I don't personally want to use them" but I wouldn't describe that as "liking" them. You're presumably going to avoid using them if you'd rather have the default modern frame. That really doesn't sound like "liking" them to me.
The question you answered is slightly different than the question that was asked. You're answering the question "are there cards that you choose not to play that make your experience of the game worse." The answer to that is probably yes for everyone. Everyone has cards they wish they'd never have to play a game with, usually Scrambleverse.Dunadain wrote: ↑6 months agoI've mostly just been idling watching this argument, but I had to jump in:
%$#%!!!!!
There are (probably) hundreds of cards on this game that I choose not to play, yet frequently find myself playing against them anyways. Usually it's the card mechanics, rather than art, but I do hate textless cards with a passion.
This point would make more sense in a single player game (though I believe balancing is important even in single-player games).
Nope, that's the question I was answering, because the fact that they do exist means that I do play against them, you can't really separate the two.tstorm823 wrote: ↑6 months agoThe question you answered is slightly different than the question that was asked. You're answering the question "are there cards that you choose not to play that make your experience of the game worse." The answer to that is probably yes for everyone. Everyone has cards they wish they'd never have to play a game with, usually Scrambleverse.
The question was whether the existence of cards you don't want to play with makes your experience worse.
I don't think it's useful to speak in absolutes like that. I wouldn't expect every card that I don't like to be banned/cease to exist, but are you honestly telling me I'm wrong for wishing the worst offenders, like legacy Dreadhorde Arcanist was never a thing?To restructure the question: if you could eliminate every card you don't personally want to use from existence, would you? Would you rather play a game with only the game pieces you want to use personally, or would you allow for alternatives that you don't plan to use but others could? Which of those options do you think would result in a better experience?
You can think it's useful or not, that is the discussion that is happening. We are not talking about whether the game would be better without specific cards. The existence of the ban list sort of settles that question, the game is better without certain cards. Even aesthetically, the situation with the Dryad Arbor that just looks like a forest is an example of the game being better without specific aesthetic treatments. That's not the conversation though.Dunadain wrote: ↑6 months agoI don't think it's useful to speak in absolutes like that. I wouldn't expect every card that I don't like to be banned/cease to exist, but are you honestly telling me I'm wrong for wishing the worst offenders, like legacy Dreadhorde Arcanist was never a thing?
I think if I may be so bold, this quote sums up how I think Dirk feels and is the stick that he uses regarding alternate looks of cards be it a frame or art treatment.
No it is not, this is the quote that I was replying to:
I thought this take was comically bad so I replied to it.
Where do you get that reading of anything RxPhantom has said? He has never mentioned other people's enjoyment being the reason he "likes" them.tstorm823 wrote: ↑6 months agoI think you could be willing to concede that someone could reasonably use the word "like" to mean "I'm glad they exist".DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoYou could say "well, I'm glad those borders exist even if I don't personally want to use them" but I wouldn't describe that as "liking" them. You're presumably going to avoid using them if you'd rather have the default modern frame. That really doesn't sound like "liking" them to me.
Its a factor. I wouldn't say it's "the stick". The stick is the default version, the version that exists without the alternative version. The new anime art for Divine Visitation I don't think looks that great, definitely would prefer the original art. But if it was the alternative art for Celestial Prism then it would be a big improvement. Same thing with frames. If a frame is worse than the default frame (currently the post-m15 frame) I don't like it, and vice versa. But if a card only previously existed in the B&W innistrad frames/art, then printing it in the neo old frames would be an improvement and I would like the card. But the way the game is designed means that ALMOST every card is printed at least once in the normal frame for whatever year it is, so that's almost always the stick.
RxPhantom wrote: ↑6 months agoOnly if you're intentionally missing the point. I like multiple frames. It's crazy, I know.
Anyway, complaining about new frame treatments is pissing into the wind. Your old cards are still available. You're fine.
These users thanked the author RxPhantom for the post:
@TheAmericanSpirit
I see you over there ;PDunadain wrote: ↑6 months agoI think dirk's stance is reasonable if you do feell strongly about alt borders (and in his defense, it sounds like it doesn't even bother him that much, but then people started jumping down his throat and now he's defending himself but that's just what the argument looks like to me)
These users thanked the author Dunadain for the post:
@TheAmericanSpirit
Bitter Triumph is here, so I guess Infernal Grasp is chaff. Grasp itself invalidated Go for the Throat and Ultimate Price. Poor Terror...TheGildedGoose wrote: ↑6 months agoCan we add a way to snooze users so I can enjoy my regularly scheduled complaining about power creep?
I don't believe anyone has jumped down your throat. You repeatedly expressed or displayed a lack of understanding of a concept, and people attempted to help you understand. That should be a positive interaction.DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoThat still doesn't solve the mystery of why multiple people have been jumping down my throat over this when I've made great pains to use neutral language but whatever.
That wasn't a take. That was a question, presented as an opportunity for the person being asked to better express themselves.Dunadain wrote: ↑6 months agoI thought this take was comically bad so I replied to it.
I haven't said anything about the rest of this discussion because I don't care, most frames don't bother me, but I think dirk's stance is reasonable if you do feell strongly about alt borders (and in his defense, it sounds like it doesn't even bother him that much, but then people started jumping down his throat and now he's defending himself but that's just what the argument looks like to me)
TheGildedGoose wrote: ↑6 months agoIf you don't feel the same way about all alternate frames it sounds like you're just a boomer hater.
This one I find particularly galling since 1) he wasn't involved in that particular back and forth, 2) his "gotcha" response is a complete non-sequitur - I'm asking what RxPhantom means by "liking" something if he thinks it's worse than the norm (HOW he likes it) versus the original question (DOES he like it) - 3) his response was unnecessarily rude, and 4) then afterwards he complains about this conversation wasting his time. You didn't need to get involved if you didn't want to spend time on this, Goose.TheGildedGoose wrote: ↑6 months agoDirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoI guess I just don't understand why you'd say you like an alternate frame unless you like it more than the default.Because you %$#% asked!DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoAm I the only one who really doesn't care for these old border versions of new cards?
I'll admit that one is funny but also fr how dare you.
From my perspective, most of Goose's comments, but most notably this one, were almost certainly meant to be light-hearted. I don't think you were actually being called a "boomer hater" for disliking certain borders.DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoTheGildedGoose wrote: ↑6 months agoIf you don't feel the same way about all alternate frames it sounds like you're just a boomer hater.
To be fair, most of our arguments have been about multiplayer politics and group hug strategies, where we have very different preferences, and I am 100% trying to prove you wrong. I believe that goes both ways though. There's not really a truth to get to when arguing about how we both think the other person's favorite tactics are heinously unfun.FWIW I wrote up my response before I read @Dunadain's post that used the exact same phrase xD so I know it's not just me who feels like this whole conversation has been unnecessarily combative. Not from you, tstorm, you're consistently civil. Though, at least from my perspective, it sometimes feels like you argue with the primary goal of finding a way to prove me wrong rather than getting to the truth of the matter.
Liking the old frame - directly answering your question - doesn't preclude liking the modern frame more. Your inquiry lasted for four days and two pages and reads as deliberately obtuse and argumentative on a subject completely unrelated to the thread topic at hand.
I certainly don't have a problem with you defending yourself if I attack the way you like to build decks, and I don't mind you attacking my own preferences, that's all good. Big part of what I love about this forum.tstorm823 wrote: ↑6 months agoTo be fair, most of our arguments have been about multiplayer politics and group hug strategies, where we have very different preferences, and I am 100% trying to prove you wrong. I believe that goes both ways though. There's not really a truth to get to when arguing about how we both think the other person's favorite tactics are heinously unfun.
Whether or not you think my clarifying question was justified (and I would argue it was - who says "I like Clamato less than water" but still claims to like Clamato? It's at least unusual) it was a different question than the one I originally asked.TheGildedGoose wrote: ↑6 months agoLiking the old frame - directly answering your question - doesn't preclude liking the modern frame more.
I mean you're contributing to the "problem". This conversation could have been much shorter if so many people weren't intent on interjecting to beat me over the head for asking some clarifying questions.Your inquiry lasted for four days and two pages and reads as deliberately obtuse and argumentative on a subject completely unrelated to the thread topic at hand.
I apologize for implying you're prejudiced against boomers.
Not if someone has asked the room for their opinion of Clamato.DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoThat doesn't sound unusual to you? You don't think it's reasonable to ask for clarification?
C'mon, it was obviously a rhetorical question.
What relevance does that have? He gave a confusing answer to my question so I asked for clarification. Me asking the question means I can't ask for clarification?TheGildedGoose wrote: ↑6 months agoNot if someone has asked the room for their opinion of Clamato.DirkGently wrote: ↑6 months agoThat doesn't sound unusual to you? You don't think it's reasonable to ask for clarification?