What a stupid argument. MaRo clearly said the flavor of Kamigawa didn’t resonate with most players and the mechanics weren’t distinct or interesting enough to make up for that.
Holy mother of unneccesary arguments. If you actually read the Maro quotes without being bent on "winning" an argument, it's stupidly clear that while the aesthetic/flavor wasn't the ONE problem that caused Kamigawa to perform badly, it was one of several factors that lead to the set's bad overall performance.
And if you read the discussion thread carefully, you'll see no one claimed otherwise. The issue, however, is disregarding the failings of flavor and put the blame solely on card design or bad timing, which is wrong, based on the most legitimate source we have, that being Mark Rosewater. Therefore, tweaking the flavor and aesthetics of Kamigawa for a "return set" is justifiable, at least based on WotC's market research.
I'm not saying that flavor of kamigawa is good or one of the better planes since maro said it's one of the unpopular ones.
It's Kamigawa's mechanics along to how it is played compare to onslaught, mirrodin and ravnica that probably made the Japanese mythology theme of Kamigawa to be unpopular compare to the other expansions along it's line. It's underwhelming when were speed, flexibility and synergy are common appeal on those sets.
The Kamigawa's mechanics being restrictive and slow are the contributing factor to dislike a Japanese mythology based plane.
It's safe to say that they could do another different Japanese mythology plane that isn't Kamigawa but wouldn't suffer the same fate as Kamigawa if most of the mechanics isn't to be expected to be exactly the same as Kamigawa and the mechanics are more designed like the other successful blocks, sets and expansion.
It could have been more loosely and flexible in it's tribal mechanic like how onslaught block were handle and it could have been fun than being what they came out with their mechanics from conditions and requirements.
Imagine if Ninjutsu would require you to return only an attacking Ninja creature. Probably we wouldn't seen it played much as today like Bushido and etc worst mechanics. Bushido sounds cool and promising in a teaser but as soon the mechanic is reveal in-game is so terrible. It wasn't because it was called Bushido but how it works in-game
Fun fact: Just because you specifically don't bold the parts that contradict your argument doesn't mean those parts of the quote don't exist.
I didn't need to bold the whole article to begin with.
No one claimed it didn't exist, What I claimed was the snippets of the guy was part of the article that supported my claims. So I posted the whole article instead which clearly said it was the mechanics. That the mechanics is also the cause for the Kamigawa Set to be one of unpopular set and not for it being based on a Japanese Myth.
SO basically bolding the other text or whole article is non-sense and the best way is to post everything for clarity, it's better than cherrypicking fragments of that article.
I didn't need to bold the whole article to begin with.
No one claimed it didn't exist, What I claimed was the snippets of the guy was part of the article that supported my claims. So I posted the whole article instead which clearly said it was the mechanics. That the mechanics is also the cause for the Kamigawa Set to be one of unpopular set and not for it being based on a Japanese Myth.
SO basically bolding the other text or whole article is non-sense and the best way is to post everything for clarity, it's better than cherrypicking fragments of that article.
Except that was not your argument, AT ALL, you're moving the goalposts. It's as if you started this conversation stating that "the sky is blue because there's an ocean in the sky", and now that you've been proven wrong, you're acting as if people are trying to prove you wrong on the "the sky is blue" part of the statement.
And second, no, emphasizing a part of a quote via bold text while ignoring the rest is not any different from quoting specific parts of a larger argument. Both have the exact same purpose and both are equally legitimate forms of information as long as you provide your sources. The difference is that latter is not plagiarism nor an eyesore to read.
Except that was not your argument, AT ALL, you're moving the goalposts. It's as if you started this conversation stating that "the sky is blue because there's an ocean in the sky", and now that you've been proven wrong, you're acting as if people are trying to prove you wrong on the "the sky is blue" part of the statement.
And second, no, emphasizing a part of a quote via bold text while ignoring the rest is not any different from quoting specific parts of a larger argument. Both have the exact same purpose and both are equally legitimate forms of information as long as you provide your sources. The difference is that latter is not plagiarism nor an eyesore to read.
False
First of all your quoting me from my response in somebody else? That clarifying the it didn't exist of comment of someone else.
To begin with your the one that engage and disagree with my comment so I asked link from where your claims are found.
People can see it in thread.
And all I have asked you is for a link. You start saying this is a game and starts creating rules and demanding me not to quote maro. I'm not moving goal post I only ask for the link.... stop projecting yourself on me.
Im am consistent and your the one throwing saying thing like "all-knowing" and all I do was defending Japanese mythology at the beginning of the argument.
All I did was asking for the sources link in the initial post from were your claims and I didn't required you to do other
thats how clarification works asking links from your claims and I posted the whole one so and I didn't ask anything any futher or greater
So, here you go: Give me ONE quote from Mark Rosewater stating that Kamigawa's flavor was NOT a contributing factor to its failings. DO NOT quote him saying that Card Design was a factor, quote him saying that Card Design was the ONLY factor.
while later you demanding and creating weird condition like it was a game to you. Your even said in other comments I need to play your game? Your starting to give me rules and I only ask for the link lol
WTF lol. I was only here asking the link of your claims then I post the whole article then starts your saying to me I'm playing a game with you? lol
I'm just defending Japanese Myth here lol
Why I should I not quote MARO lol? when it's my point I did post the whole article to give clarity...
Man if you believe Japanese Mythology is not for a MTG plane. it's fine but don't force me or command me to NOT to or AVOID QUOTING Maro. I don't even just quoted him I posted the whole thing to be seen.
And all I have asked you is for a link lol
It doesn't mean I asked for the link for your claims that it also means I'm playing a game? lol
You can play your games with someone else. I'm not interested and I was just defending Japanese Myth here.
The dislike of the Kamigawa setting goes beyond the power level. We’ve had worlds of blocks of equal or lower power level test much better than Kamigawa did.
We tested the creative as well as the cards and the world (once again, not just the cards) didn’t test well. It didn’t quite jell with a majority of the players.
We test both the mechanics and creative elements for sets. Kamigawa did poorly on it’s mechanics. It did even worse on its world (I believe it holds the record for the worst results for any world since we did market research on them - Ulgrotha predates the market research). The idea that it was successful creative married to bad mechanics is false. At the time, both were strongly disliked.
As much as a majority of Magic players disliked the mechanics, they also disliked the world, independent of the mechanics. Mechanics were not "the contributing factor" to disliking the world.
And all I have asked you is for a link. You start saying this is a game and starts creating rules and demanding me not to quote maro.
Because you took my statement, demanded proof, then painted it as "FALSE". Your arguments for doing so are flimsy and erroneous, using sources that were used by multiple people to prove that you're wrong, and using selective arguments to misrepresent MaRo's opinions on the discussed matter. Therefore, I contested your "FALSE" statement with a simple alternative, and you still haven't delivered.
all I do was defending Japanese mythology at the beginning of the argument.
No, you didn't. What you did was launch an unfounded counterargument over me pointing out (with proof) on the fact MaRo has denied that flavor wasn't an issue. Said argument I made was based on the conception that "It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa. It was most of the printed cards being played was underwhelming and boring after mirrodin and before ravnica". This is NOT "defending Japanese mythology", because Japanese mythology was never attacked by anyone. This is a lie based on the information MaRo has presented over the reasons Kamigawa has failed: Kamigawa did not fail because of Japanese mythology. Kamigawa failed because, along with other issues, it did Japanese mythology wrong. Your initial argument can't be true because you didn't specified Japanese mythology, you specified KAMIGAWA and its AESTHETIC and ATMOSPHERE. You are mixing up the facts and trying to move the goalposts to attest the former while everyone else is telling you that the latter is true.
I will not answer you any further. I do not know what your first language is, but it has been made pretty clear that your understanding of the English language is extremely weak and faulty. Learn to speak English properly before coming into an online forum and accusing other people's arguments of being false.
Because you're wrong. You talking bull to another person doesn't changes the fact you're talking bull.
Look your misleading the comment and just talking for the sake of talking. it wasn't for you move on. it was clearly saying about "it doesn't exist and bold part comment.
Because you took my statement, demanded proof, then painted it as "FALSE". Your arguments for doing so are flimsy and erroneous, using sources that were used by multiple people to prove that you're wrong, and using selective arguments to misrepresent MaRo's opinions on the discussed matter. Therefore, I contested your "FALSE" statement with a simple alternative, and you still haven't delivered.
Look I only asked for the link were Maro said that because you said Maro said it. I don't know it so I ask for it because most I have seen are spolight regarding mechanics being terrible in Kamigawa and even back in the day it was a major criticism.
We even think when Kamigawa was tease to be something that might be cool but turned out differently to our expectations and it's terrible.
and because Japanese Mythology isn't an outdated theme even today.
There's nothing wrong asking the link people can see that in the early comments because I'm not aware of what your talking about and I knew the mechanics is the faulty.
Your the one saying demanding and saying it's a game and it's my turn or something like putting weird like some rules like not quoting maro
I only ask for the link it's not a demand like what your doing to me like give what's "not to" and implementing some "rules" to me. your the demanding one.
I only ask for a link and I posted your sources and it's clear that mechanics is the huge downfall. which was my initial comment so I said it's false.
your trying to reason that it being a japanese myth base also contribute to it's downfall right? that's when I started to defend.
it's WOTC's execution and implementation of designing a Japanese myth plane that would be cause it to be a failure or a success. Not because it's hard or not traditional to how they used to.
Yes I did people can look on the early comments that I was defending the Japanese Mythology as not the downfall of the plane. I still remain consistent on that.
while all you do is answering different things like quoting me from different person that I was commenting with, also giving some sort of rules and demanding something weird and your reason your doing that is because I'm asking for a link? WTF
Good, I already said you win and go play your game with your rules to somebody else. I'm not interested. I was talking to another person not you. In the first place it was you that engage with me in the early conversation.
It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa. It was most of the printed cards being played was underwhelming and boring after mirrodin and before ravnica". This is NOT "defending Japanese mythology", because Japanese mythology was never attacked by anyone.
Wrong Your lying and twisting arguments. No one was attacking Japanese Myth here,
I was defending it when you started quoting me.
Calling it now: Lukka will be the villain of Kamigawa 2.0 and he'll be the one to bring Kaijus into the plane. No idea why he would do that, but then again it's Lukka. Dude couldn't even keep a consistent personality and motivation on a single set, nevermind a year.
It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa. It was most of the printed cards being played was underwhelming and boring after mirrodin and before ravnica.
Not entirely true, at least based on what MaRo told us. In their attempt to make Kamigawa accurate to Japanese myths and properly portray it in Magic lore, they "dug too deep" into Japanese mythology and showcased every part of the least resonant aspects of it.
My initial claim was it failed because mostly about it's mechanics I even said even if the mechanics was in other planes it would fail. I don't need to defend in that point because I'm basically just saying a personal opinion and I started defending because you quoted me that includes it.
My claims was also right that the mechanics is the mainly the cause of it's downfall because of tumblr and the article also mostly spotlight it clear not just a bit or a contributing because the weakness and worst of Kamigawa is it's mechanics. that was also according to your sources
My point is it was the mechanics that failed Kamigawa not the it being based on an interpretation of a Japanese myth.
To end this once
My initial comment was it's mechanical which was the main cause. That's it then you point out a snippet which talks about Japanese Myth. Which put's me to defend that Japanese Myth.
My initial comment was an opinion not my second was a response to you were I started defending.
I wasn't defending before you responded. The comment progression in the first page says that clearly.
If Kamigawa mechanics were designed better and good. I don't even think it being a Japanese Myth base plane would be an issue here or a spotlight at all like other eastern plane and non-dominaria like plane that has already done.
Kamigawa wasn't too accurate also with the mythology. They just created a Japanese myth plane with a very terrible mechanics. If the mechanics were done right as par or average to the set in it's era like Onslaught and Ravnica being it as a Japanese Myth base plane wouldn't even be an issue. It an underwhelming set compare to the mentioned sets in terms speed, flexibility and synergy because of the mechanics.
I believe it's entirely possible to create a japanese myth base plane with good mechanics and it would be appealing and standout. An expansion with a plane that is a usual favorite for being familiar plane can be a disliked as an expansion if the mechanics were poorly designed as terrible like Kamigawa.
I don’t really agree that Kamigawa did Japanese mythology wrong. It did it more true than pop culture has it, but that isn’t wrong. That said if this is what we are getting for Kamigawa it’s moot, this is without a doubt one of the worst possible ways they could have brought it back. Here I thought getting effectively Naruto and Bleach the plane would be bad, but cyberpunk on top doesn’t make it any better.
Ritokure, please stop feeding the troll. No genuine person could possibly present a full quote definitively proving themselves wrong and present it as proof they are right. They'll stop mucking up this thread if you stop provoking them.
Please, mill me. Mill my important cards. Mill my lands. Mill it all. Because I will still deal 20 damage before you can mill 45 cards most every time.
Ritokure, please stop feeding the troll. No genuine person could possibly present a full quote definitively proving themselves wrong and present it as proof they are right. They'll stop mucking up this thread if you stop provoking them.
Look it's over. It might be you that is not a genuine person because it stopped already and your the that is provoking me.
It wasn't even the full article it was just "the portion of the article that discuss Kamigawa" which was very elaborate and specific about the mechanic issues.
I just commented here about that it was mostly the mechanics and aesthetic. it was he the one that responded saying that it being too much Japanese Myth also another cause. Which I disagree because it's more WOTC's interpretation that just took inspiration to Japanese Myth.
Japanese Myth are not just kami, samurai, ninja. rat, kitsune, snakes and oni. It's richer and more broad than that. The thing is WOTC just failed to execute their own concept of a Japanese myth set because of it's mechanics being terrible. WOTC aren't as restricted with Kamigawa, Clearly Kamigawa isn't like how Arabian Nights and Portal Three Kingdoms were designed.
Because I believe regardless it being a Japanese Myth base set if the mechanics were done right it wouldn't be a unpopular plane. AM I wrong?
Japanese myth are not boring and lackluster even now. It's one of the most used and loved setting along with medieval fantasy and greek mythology
If you agree with him and if you believe that my initial opinion was wrong that's okay.
If the mechanics had been different Kamigawa would be less unpopular but still unpopular overall. Unless they changed the lore there wasn’t any way they were going back. Which... lo and behold, that’s what is happening (though I’m still holding out hope it’s a hoax, forlorn though I expect that hope to be).
Making this same Kamigawa because of being historically connected and being japanese only restrict their design space. This should had been detach and had been separated with Kamigawa.
But why aren't they calling it Neon Dynasty: Kamigawa?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
It's Kamigawa's mechanics along to how it is played compare to onslaught, mirrodin and ravnica that probably made the Japanese mythology theme of Kamigawa to be unpopular compare to the other expansions along it's line. It's underwhelming when were speed, flexibility and synergy are common appeal on those sets.
The Kamigawa's mechanics being restrictive and slow are the contributing factor to dislike a Japanese mythology based plane.
It's safe to say that they could do another different Japanese mythology plane that isn't Kamigawa but wouldn't suffer the same fate as Kamigawa if most of the mechanics isn't to be expected to be exactly the same as Kamigawa and the mechanics are more designed like the other successful blocks, sets and expansion.
It could have been more loosely and flexible in it's tribal mechanic like how onslaught block were handle and it could have been fun than being what they came out with their mechanics from conditions and requirements.
Imagine if Ninjutsu would require you to return only an attacking Ninja creature. Probably we wouldn't seen it played much as today like Bushido and etc worst mechanics. Bushido sounds cool and promising in a teaser but as soon the mechanic is reveal in-game is so terrible. It wasn't because it was called Bushido but how it works in-game I didn't need to bold the whole article to begin with.
No one claimed it didn't exist, What I claimed was the snippets of the guy was part of the article that supported my claims. So I posted the whole article instead which clearly said it was the mechanics. That the mechanics is also the cause for the Kamigawa Set to be one of unpopular set and not for it being based on a Japanese Myth.
SO basically bolding the other text or whole article is non-sense and the best way is to post everything for clarity, it's better than cherrypicking fragments of that article.
And second, no, emphasizing a part of a quote via bold text while ignoring the rest is not any different from quoting specific parts of a larger argument. Both have the exact same purpose and both are equally legitimate forms of information as long as you provide your sources. The difference is that latter is not plagiarism nor an eyesore to read.
False
First of all your quoting me from my response in somebody else? That clarifying the it didn't exist of comment of someone else.
To begin with your the one that engage and disagree with my comment so I asked link from where your claims are found.
People can see it in thread.
And all I have asked you is for a link. You start saying this is a game and starts creating rules and demanding me not to quote maro. I'm not moving goal post I only ask for the link.... stop projecting yourself on me.
Im am consistent and your the one throwing saying thing like "all-knowing" and all I do was defending Japanese mythology at the beginning of the argument.
All I did was asking for the sources link in the initial post from were your claims and I didn't required you to do other
thats how clarification works asking links from your claims and I posted the whole one so and I didn't ask anything any futher or greater
while later you demanding and creating weird condition like it was a game to you. Your even said in other comments I need to play your game? Your starting to give me rules and I only ask for the link lol
WTF lol. I was only here asking the link of your claims then I post the whole article then starts your saying to me I'm playing a game with you? lol
I'm just defending Japanese Myth here lol
Why I should I not quote MARO lol? when it's my point I did post the whole article to give clarity...
Man if you believe Japanese Mythology is not for a MTG plane. it's fine but don't force me or command me to NOT to or AVOID QUOTING Maro. I don't even just quoted him I posted the whole thing to be seen.
And all I have asked you is for a link lol
It doesn't mean I asked for the link for your claims that it also means I'm playing a game? lol
You can play your games with someone else. I'm not interested and I was just defending Japanese Myth here.
Except that's not true. The world was poorly received independent of the mechanics:
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/21427203784/i-think-you-may-be-underestimating-your-audience-a
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/77834619992/kamigawa-may-have-been-a-legitimate-design-flaw
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/154559419028/i-can-see-where-people-who-dont-like-kamigawa
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/171535849908/do-you-believe-the-admittedly-bad-mechanics-of
As much as a majority of Magic players disliked the mechanics, they also disliked the world, independent of the mechanics. Mechanics were not "the contributing factor" to disliking the world.
Because you took my statement, demanded proof, then painted it as "FALSE". Your arguments for doing so are flimsy and erroneous, using sources that were used by multiple people to prove that you're wrong, and using selective arguments to misrepresent MaRo's opinions on the discussed matter. Therefore, I contested your "FALSE" statement with a simple alternative, and you still haven't delivered.
No, you didn't. What you did was launch an unfounded counterargument over me pointing out (with proof) on the fact MaRo has denied that flavor wasn't an issue. Said argument I made was based on the conception that "It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa. It was most of the printed cards being played was underwhelming and boring after mirrodin and before ravnica". This is NOT "defending Japanese mythology", because Japanese mythology was never attacked by anyone. This is a lie based on the information MaRo has presented over the reasons Kamigawa has failed: Kamigawa did not fail because of Japanese mythology. Kamigawa failed because, along with other issues, it did Japanese mythology wrong. Your initial argument can't be true because you didn't specified Japanese mythology, you specified KAMIGAWA and its AESTHETIC and ATMOSPHERE. You are mixing up the facts and trying to move the goalposts to attest the former while everyone else is telling you that the latter is true.
I will not answer you any further. I do not know what your first language is, but it has been made pretty clear that your understanding of the English language is extremely weak and faulty. Learn to speak English properly before coming into an online forum and accusing other people's arguments of being false.
I was talking to different person not you. Look I only asked for the link were Maro said that because you said Maro said it. I don't know it so I ask for it because most I have seen are spolight regarding mechanics being terrible in Kamigawa and even back in the day it was a major criticism.
We even think when Kamigawa was tease to be something that might be cool but turned out differently to our expectations and it's terrible.
and because Japanese Mythology isn't an outdated theme even today.
There's nothing wrong asking the link people can see that in the early comments because I'm not aware of what your talking about and I knew the mechanics is the faulty.
Your the one saying demanding and saying it's a game and it's my turn or something like putting weird like some rules like not quoting maro
I only ask for the link it's not a demand like what your doing to me like give what's "not to" and implementing some "rules" to me. your the demanding one.
I only ask for a link and I posted your sources and it's clear that mechanics is the huge downfall. which was my initial comment so I said it's false.
your trying to reason that it being a japanese myth base also contribute to it's downfall right? that's when I started to defend.
it's WOTC's execution and implementation of designing a Japanese myth plane that would be cause it to be a failure or a success. Not because it's hard or not traditional to how they used to. Yes I did people can look on the early comments that I was defending the Japanese Mythology as not the downfall of the plane. I still remain consistent on that.
while all you do is answering different things like quoting me from different person that I was commenting with, also giving some sort of rules and demanding something weird and your reason your doing that is because I'm asking for a link? WTF Good, I already said you win and go play your game with your rules to somebody else. I'm not interested. I was talking to another person not you. In the first place it was you that engage with me in the early conversation. Wrong Your lying and twisting arguments. No one was attacking Japanese Myth here,
I was defending it when you started quoting me.
Here: My initial claim was it failed because mostly about it's mechanics I even said even if the mechanics was in other planes it would fail. I don't need to defend in that point because I'm basically just saying a personal opinion and I started defending because you quoted me that includes it.
My claims was also right that the mechanics is the mainly the cause of it's downfall because of tumblr and the article also mostly spotlight it clear not just a bit or a contributing because the weakness and worst of Kamigawa is it's mechanics. that was also according to your sources To end this once
My initial comment was it's mechanical which was the main cause. That's it then you point out a snippet which talks about Japanese Myth. Which put's me to defend that Japanese Myth.
My initial comment was an opinion not my second was a response to you were I started defending.
I wasn't defending before you responded. The comment progression in the first page says that clearly.
If Kamigawa mechanics were designed better and good. I don't even think it being a Japanese Myth base plane would be an issue here or a spotlight at all like other eastern plane and non-dominaria like plane that has already done.
Kamigawa wasn't too accurate also with the mythology. They just created a Japanese myth plane with a very terrible mechanics. If the mechanics were done right as par or average to the set in it's era like Onslaught and Ravnica being it as a Japanese Myth base plane wouldn't even be an issue. It an underwhelming set compare to the mentioned sets in terms speed, flexibility and synergy because of the mechanics.
I believe it's entirely possible to create a japanese myth base plane with good mechanics and it would be appealing and standout. An expansion with a plane that is a usual favorite for being familiar plane can be a disliked as an expansion if the mechanics were poorly designed as terrible like Kamigawa.
It wasn't even the full article it was just "the portion of the article that discuss Kamigawa" which was very elaborate and specific about the mechanic issues.
I just commented here about that it was mostly the mechanics and aesthetic. it was he the one that responded saying that it being too much Japanese Myth also another cause. Which I disagree because it's more WOTC's interpretation that just took inspiration to Japanese Myth.
Japanese Myth are not just kami, samurai, ninja. rat, kitsune, snakes and oni. It's richer and more broad than that. The thing is WOTC just failed to execute their own concept of a Japanese myth set because of it's mechanics being terrible. WOTC aren't as restricted with Kamigawa, Clearly Kamigawa isn't like how Arabian Nights and Portal Three Kingdoms were designed.
Because I believe regardless it being a Japanese Myth base set if the mechanics were done right it wouldn't be a unpopular plane. AM I wrong?
Japanese myth are not boring and lackluster even now. It's one of the most used and loved setting along with medieval fantasy and greek mythology
If you agree with him and if you believe that my initial opinion was wrong that's okay.
Making this same Kamigawa because of being historically connected and being japanese only restrict their design space. This should had been detach and had been separated with Kamigawa.
Don't let my hopes up. I will buy 10 boxes of it.
Reality is but a perception of your being --
Visit my blog!!! - http://huffalump-magic.blogspot.com/
"The brain is wider than the sky,
For, put them side by side,
The one the other will include
With ease, and you beside."
—Emily Dickinson
For sales or trade, visit my blog or visit my ebay blog for my listings :http://myworld.ebay.com/arcane7828
881
Oooh Dicey:
[dice=1]100[/dice]