Would you find it fair to say, then, that as it has progressed, the Pokemon franchise has worked to appeal to a broader adult audience as well as the initial audience of children?
Yes, the Pokemon franchise has branched out in a way that included older fans as well as the younger. But the thing is, it hasn't lost the things that appeal to its primary, younger audience. I understand that you're concerned that a focus on a different demographic will detract from the aspects that appeal to your own demographic, but i feel it's far too soon for such doomsaying. If anything, the new Core Set format shows me a renewed appreciation for "classic" fantasy flavor, which was more strongly present in the first incarnations of the game. A return to Magic's roots. That shows me a continued interest in appealing to older fans of Magic's rich history, and those who appreciate classic fantasy imagery. Don't forget that the whole "Core Set is for new players" mindset was dropped; this works against a theoretical "dumbing down" of Magic. Branching out to include new blood is something I don't mind at all, because it introduce young fantasy fans to a new hobby that not only appeals to their interests but develops strategy and critical thinking skills.
Were people pissed when the did portal: three kingdoms. i mean thats based loosly off historical events. its also a video game franchise. and those cards are some of the most sought after. so whats the big deal? if you dont like the cards dont get them, if you hate it so much, quit the game. im sure wizards wont mind.
Yes, the Pokemon franchise has branched out in a way that included older fans as well as the younger. But the thing is, it hasn't lost the things that appeal to its primary, younger audience.
My point wasn't to illustrate that Pokemon has betrayed its original customer base (I don't think it has), but that you personally enjoy Pokemon because of its apparent appeals to adult gamers, and that Magic is heading in the opposite direction with this movie marketing.
Not really because you can Stifle the Storm ability on Storm. Not to mention you cannot chain-Storm it (when you play multiple storm cards, TES players know what I'm talking about)
Imagine if these are tournament legal. Illusionary Thought looks as good as Hymn to Tourach. It also has the ability to hit lands!
My point wasn't to illustrate that Pokemon has betrayed its original customer base (I don't think it has), but that you personally enjoy Pokemon because of its apparent appeals to adult gamers, and that Magic is heading in the opposite direction with this movie marketing.
Is Wotc betraying it's customer base and heading in the wrong direction or just branching out their marketing to appeal to another segment of potential players? Their ads aren't changing the game or affecting you in any way. They aren't Philip Morris. Who cares if they advert to kids? When they announce the kingdom hearts expansion, start complaining.
Because conservative bias is a far, far worse thing. Liberal bias doesn't, statistically speaking, make people stupid. Conservative bias (or at least Fox's version of it) does.
My point wasn't to illustrate that Pokemon has betrayed its original customer base (I don't think it has), but that you personally enjoy Pokemon because of its apparent appeals to adult gamers, and that Magic is heading in the opposite direction with this movie marketing.
I understand that concern, I think anyone could. However I strongly disagree with the premise that this movie marketing is leading Magic that direction. I have seen little evidence of the kiddifying or dumbing down of magic, and I am sure if there was a more mature movie set in modern times using magic they would be trilled to cross-market with that. I don't have anything again Disney so this doesn't really worry me.
----------
Quick aside, I wonder if the game had been about pirates rather than wizards, and they'd cross promoted with the first Pirates movie, would a similar reaction have occured?
Bane's Reading Suggestions David Eddings: The Belgariad, Mallorean, Elenium and Tamuli Series. The Redemption of Althalus Jim Butcher: The Codex Alera Series
Their ads aren't changing the game or affecting you in any way.
Why does everyone subscribe to this? Every choice Wizards makes, whether it be marketing, development, rules, art, or otherwise, changes the game. Not often in a fundamental fashion, but always to a certain degree.
Quote from jedimindtricks »
They aren't Philip Morris. Who cares if they advert to kids? When they announce the kingdom hearts expansion, start complaining.
Things don't happen in cut and dry, black and white absolutes. Magic won't suck "all of a sudden". Not voicing displeasure with announcements like this (combined with whatever influx of customers that comes from the movie adverts) is what leads to Wizards thinking, "Hey, a lot of people must enjoy this!" which is what leads to Magic eventually coming to resemble something that I do not, in fact, enjoy.
I'm not disallowing you to like this; why challenge me for feeling differently?
This. No denying it. If there were better actors in the movie, the promos would be a selling point for the movie. Nick Cage is only becoming more unpopular as time goes on...
Wizards will in turn lose revenue because they have to spend money on product that won't sell. Everything else they market sells; heck, even Duel of the Planeswalker decks if you want to bring that discussion into the mix.
Why does everyone subscribe to this? Every choice Wizards makes, whether it be marketing, development, rules, art, or otherwise, changes the game. Not often in a fundamental fashion, but always to a certain degree.
Things don't happen in cut and dry, black and white absolutes. Magic won't suck "all of a sudden". Not voicing displeasure with announcements like this (combined with whatever influx of customers that comes from the movie adverts) is what leads to Wizards thinking, "Hey, a lot of people must enjoy this!" which is what leads to Magic eventually coming to resemble something that I do not, in fact, enjoy.
I'm not disallowing you to like this; why challenge me for feeling differently?
I get it. You like to argue for the sake of arguing. Every choice wizards makes does not affect the game. This isn't theoretical physics where each action of every particle and molecule makes infinite alternate dimensions/timelines. They put an advert with a movie that's somewhat close to their genre. Big deal. You're acting like this means Mickey mouse is the next planeswalkers. Do you see Marvel putting out Thor vs. Donald Duck instead of their primary books? No. And they bought the freaking company, not just did a miniscule cross-promotion. Just looking at the marvel example you have no basis for your fear.
WotC has the only CCG around that has lasted this long with this much success. They know who their primary audience is and aren't going to abandon/alienate them. You can take off the tinfoil hat now. FFS they're a business trying to drum up more business. If you don't like it: buy the company or buy enough product so they don't have to.
Because conservative bias is a far, far worse thing. Liberal bias doesn't, statistically speaking, make people stupid. Conservative bias (or at least Fox's version of it) does.
This. No denying it. If there were better actors in the movie, the promos would be a selling point for the movie. Nick Cage is only becoming more unpopular as time goes on...
Wizards will in turn lose revenue because they have to spend money on product that won't sell. Everything else they market sells; heck, even Duel of the Planeswalker decks if you want to bring that discussion into the mix.
wait really? did you really just make the argument that magic is going to suffer and product won't sell because of product placement in a nicholas cage movie?
do you realize how absolutely asinine this sounds?
I would submit it's rarely a good move for any particular product to be associated with a failed movie.
I agree that the knee jerk reaction to this is a little overkill. *shrugs* I don't like the idea of it - but without seeing how it's painted in the actual film, its obviously too early to judge.
I would submit it's rarely a good move for any particular product to be associated with a failed movie.
I agree that the knee jerk reaction to this is a little overkill. *shrugs* I don't like the idea of it - but without seeing how it's painted in the actual film, its obviously too early to judge.
ask yourself this, when you think of a failed movie do you think of the products that appeared in that movie, or do you just think of how bad that movie is?
everyone seems to be operating under the assumption that this film will be an abysmal failure. it won't be because of who its marketed toward, and what its marketed as. it may not be star wars level of success, but it won't be so terrible that no one will see it at all.
further, nicholas cage may be an absolutely terrible actor incapable of playing anything but the same character over and over again, and he may be in some god awful movies, but people have still seen them (excluding the wickerman) and he's also been in some fairly decent movies... which people have also seen.
this whole argument is just plain stupid. its product placement thats all it is. if it doesn't work it won't effect the game, the same people will still play it. no one is going to quit because wotc put magic in a film. if it works, more people will play... and thats generally a good thing as its nice to have opponents to go up against and new product on store shelves.
Perceived connotations are not unimportant. In an academic sense, yes, "branching out" to Shakespeare is similar to collaborating with Disney. But in practical terms, the two are miles apart. You can't just ignore the many differences involved. Especially considering that Magic: The Gathering owes its very existence and continued success to the existence of classic literature, specifically of the fantasy genre. It is not a huge leap from imagery found in The Lord of the Rings to referencing other works of great British literature. It can be much more unsettling to make the jump to a modern media machine like Disney.
Don't belittle these concerns, they are perfectly valid. If anything, dismissing these practical issues as unimportant is in itself a form of elitism. You can't just paint it black and white, that any form of media crossover can all be lumped together. It doesn't work that way.
I'm not lumping the collaborations together, in fact I'm saying that you can go either way and I don't see how it can be asserted that this is a bad thing. I agree that there is a difference in theory and in practice, but it doesn't change that the fearful reasoning that is being supported is all in theory too. So if we are talking in theory, seems fair to offer the reasoning in theory too.
All of this speculation is in theory, nothing in practice. And to insinuate that an promo card will destroy 15+ years of collectible card gaming is not exactly sound. I'm not trying to dismiss these concerns, I'm saying that I don't understand the reasoning behind these concerns. They aren't practical or validly theoretical that I can see.
This is because if the fear is that collaboration with Disney in terms of media promotions will attract a younger audience that diminishes the game as we know it, then why isn't it also valid to assume that having many classical literature quotes on cards will attract many classicists and turn the game into a literary history fest.
I'm not lumping the collaborations together, in fact I'm saying that you can go either way and either way I don't see how it can be asserted that this is a bad thing. I agree that there is a difference in theory and in practice, but it doesn't change that this fearful reasoning being supported is all in theory too. That this collaboration will be, in theory, damning to MtG. So if we are talking in theory, seems fair to offer the reasoning in theory too.
All of this speculation is in theory, nothing in practice. And to insinuate that an promo card will destroy 15+ years of collectible card gaming is not exactly sound. I'm not trying to dismiss these concerns, I'm saying that I don't understand the reasoning behind these concerns. They aren't practical or validly theoretical that I can see.
This is because if the fear is that collaboration with Disney in terms of media promotions will attract a younger audience that diminishes the game as we know it, then why isn't it also valid to assume that having many classical literature quotes on cards will attract many classicists and turn the game into a literary history fest.
these are very valid points.
in short though everything can be explain with this: magic players will ***** about anything.
ask yourself this, when you think of a failed movie do you think of the products that appeared in that movie, or do you just think of how bad that movie is?
I cringed when I saw them turn an Xbox into a transformer in the first one of those abominations. It made me think "Why would the Xbox team allow themselves to be mocked in this drivel of a movie."
Draw your own conclusions as to why there's a lot of hostility from people thinking similar thoughts about Magic in this film.
everyone seems to be operating under the assumption that this film will be an abysmal failure.
Like I said, it's early and we haven't seen the movie yet - but I don't have very high hopes for it. Its an entire film based off an animated short....
(And I'll add - I don't think this could impact the game itself all that much. I just hate that theres still the "nerd" stymy associated with games like Magic - and I don't think this film is going to do anything to help that.)
I'm wondering, if the 5 sorcerer mock up magic cards aren't that bad, art quality and theme wise, do we still having this pretty heated debate?
Let's imagine that the cards will be given out at the premiere but the arts is drawn by great artist like zoltan boros, argyle, chippy, komarck and still resonate magic western fantasy and high quality, instead of lame CGI of someone wearing ridiculous post apocalyptic goth dress with blurry magic land art, will we be arguing still?
If I start contemplating myself of my disapointment of this marketing strategy, it's because the card's art, yes the art, don't really represent magic's quality. If the art is still in tune with current magic theme, or they handout an alternate planeswalker art of the current, I bet we'll be lining the day before this movie premiere
Emmara is like the worst parts of Legends and Homelands got pregnant, aborted the fetus, tossed it in the trashcan, set it on fire and wrapped the corpse in a Dragon's Maze pack wrapper.
Yes, the Pokemon franchise has branched out in a way that included older fans as well as the younger. But the thing is, it hasn't lost the things that appeal to its primary, younger audience. I understand that you're concerned that a focus on a different demographic will detract from the aspects that appeal to your own demographic, but i feel it's far too soon for such doomsaying. If anything, the new Core Set format shows me a renewed appreciation for "classic" fantasy flavor, which was more strongly present in the first incarnations of the game. A return to Magic's roots. That shows me a continued interest in appealing to older fans of Magic's rich history, and those who appreciate classic fantasy imagery. Don't forget that the whole "Core Set is for new players" mindset was dropped; this works against a theoretical "dumbing down" of Magic. Branching out to include new blood is something I don't mind at all, because it introduce young fantasy fans to a new hobby that not only appeals to their interests but develops strategy and critical thinking skills.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
My point wasn't to illustrate that Pokemon has betrayed its original customer base (I don't think it has), but that you personally enjoy Pokemon because of its apparent appeals to adult gamers, and that Magic is heading in the opposite direction with this movie marketing.
Not really because you can Stifle the Storm ability on Storm. Not to mention you cannot chain-Storm it (when you play multiple storm cards, TES players know what I'm talking about)
Imagine if these are tournament legal. Illusionary Thought looks as good as Hymn to Tourach. It also has the ability to hit lands!
Thanks for spiderboy4 of High~Light_Studios for the kick ass avatar.
Thanks for DarkNightCavalier of HotPS for the exceptional signature.
I think it's a clever tie-in myself. And if it piques my 8-year-old's interest in MTG, cool.
Is Wotc betraying it's customer base and heading in the wrong direction or just branching out their marketing to appeal to another segment of potential players? Their ads aren't changing the game or affecting you in any way. They aren't Philip Morris. Who cares if they advert to kids? When they announce the kingdom hearts expansion, start complaining.
I understand that concern, I think anyone could. However I strongly disagree with the premise that this movie marketing is leading Magic that direction. I have seen little evidence of the kiddifying or dumbing down of magic, and I am sure if there was a more mature movie set in modern times using magic they would be trilled to cross-market with that. I don't have anything again Disney so this doesn't really worry me.
----------
Quick aside, I wonder if the game had been about pirates rather than wizards, and they'd cross promoted with the first Pirates movie, would a similar reaction have occured?
Under Original Management!
Bane's Reading Suggestions
David Eddings: The Belgariad, Mallorean, Elenium and Tamuli Series. The Redemption of Althalus
Jim Butcher: The Codex Alera Series
Why does everyone subscribe to this? Every choice Wizards makes, whether it be marketing, development, rules, art, or otherwise, changes the game. Not often in a fundamental fashion, but always to a certain degree.
Things don't happen in cut and dry, black and white absolutes. Magic won't suck "all of a sudden". Not voicing displeasure with announcements like this (combined with whatever influx of customers that comes from the movie adverts) is what leads to Wizards thinking, "Hey, a lot of people must enjoy this!" which is what leads to Magic eventually coming to resemble something that I do not, in fact, enjoy.
I'm not disallowing you to like this; why challenge me for feeling differently?
What exactly in the simplest terms is the problem with them making promo cards for a movie that will in all likely hood fail at the box office.
Association with Nicholas Cage?
This. No denying it. If there were better actors in the movie, the promos would be a selling point for the movie. Nick Cage is only becoming more unpopular as time goes on...
Wizards will in turn lose revenue because they have to spend money on product that won't sell. Everything else they market sells; heck, even Duel of the Planeswalker decks if you want to bring that discussion into the mix.
I get it. You like to argue for the sake of arguing. Every choice wizards makes does not affect the game. This isn't theoretical physics where each action of every particle and molecule makes infinite alternate dimensions/timelines. They put an advert with a movie that's somewhat close to their genre. Big deal. You're acting like this means Mickey mouse is the next planeswalkers. Do you see Marvel putting out Thor vs. Donald Duck instead of their primary books? No. And they bought the freaking company, not just did a miniscule cross-promotion. Just looking at the marvel example you have no basis for your fear.
WotC has the only CCG around that has lasted this long with this much success. They know who their primary audience is and aren't going to abandon/alienate them. You can take off the tinfoil hat now. FFS they're a business trying to drum up more business. If you don't like it: buy the company or buy enough product so they don't have to.
wait really? did you really just make the argument that magic is going to suffer and product won't sell because of product placement in a nicholas cage movie?
do you realize how absolutely asinine this sounds?
I agree that the knee jerk reaction to this is a little overkill. *shrugs* I don't like the idea of it - but without seeing how it's painted in the actual film, its obviously too early to judge.
Someone didn't see Kickass...
Twitter
ask yourself this, when you think of a failed movie do you think of the products that appeared in that movie, or do you just think of how bad that movie is?
everyone seems to be operating under the assumption that this film will be an abysmal failure. it won't be because of who its marketed toward, and what its marketed as. it may not be star wars level of success, but it won't be so terrible that no one will see it at all.
further, nicholas cage may be an absolutely terrible actor incapable of playing anything but the same character over and over again, and he may be in some god awful movies, but people have still seen them (excluding the wickerman) and he's also been in some fairly decent movies... which people have also seen.
this whole argument is just plain stupid. its product placement thats all it is. if it doesn't work it won't effect the game, the same people will still play it. no one is going to quit because wotc put magic in a film. if it works, more people will play... and thats generally a good thing as its nice to have opponents to go up against and new product on store shelves.
I'm not lumping the collaborations together, in fact I'm saying that you can go either way and I don't see how it can be asserted that this is a bad thing. I agree that there is a difference in theory and in practice, but it doesn't change that the fearful reasoning that is being supported is all in theory too. So if we are talking in theory, seems fair to offer the reasoning in theory too.
All of this speculation is in theory, nothing in practice. And to insinuate that an promo card will destroy 15+ years of collectible card gaming is not exactly sound. I'm not trying to dismiss these concerns, I'm saying that I don't understand the reasoning behind these concerns. They aren't practical or validly theoretical that I can see.
This is because if the fear is that collaboration with Disney in terms of media promotions will attract a younger audience that diminishes the game as we know it, then why isn't it also valid to assume that having many classical literature quotes on cards will attract many classicists and turn the game into a literary history fest.
these are very valid points.
in short though everything can be explain with this: magic players will ***** about anything.
Draw your own conclusions as to why there's a lot of hostility from people thinking similar thoughts about Magic in this film.
Like I said, it's early and we haven't seen the movie yet - but I don't have very high hopes for it. Its an entire film based off an animated short....
(And I'll add - I don't think this could impact the game itself all that much. I just hate that theres still the "nerd" stymy associated with games like Magic - and I don't think this film is going to do anything to help that.)
i am going to buy the dvd if these cards are in it
also check me out on fb
Let's imagine that the cards will be given out at the premiere but the arts is drawn by great artist like zoltan boros, argyle, chippy, komarck and still resonate magic western fantasy and high quality, instead of lame CGI of someone wearing ridiculous post apocalyptic goth dress with blurry magic land art, will we be arguing still?
If I start contemplating myself of my disapointment of this marketing strategy, it's because the card's art, yes the art, don't really represent magic's quality. If the art is still in tune with current magic theme, or they handout an alternate planeswalker art of the current, I bet we'll be lining the day before this movie premiere
I don't even like Nick Cage but I must say he was amazing in that movie.
its a win/win or more like a win/i dont care situation.