♥Łövëły-Ċħän♥ Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='Miror B.' timestamp='1312849206' post='5426130'] Fish - Sea serpent - Aqua Beast - Beast Warrior Warrior - Beast Warrior Dinosaur - Reptile I really don't see a point in saying "You can do fake types as long as you don't do these fake types" [/quote] :/ Theres a certain extent to which redundance can go. Once there, its plain pointless to continuing to repeat the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master White Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Well, at least whatever happens, would this make it so if lets say Fake-Types were moved to AoC, would the cards that are Realistic and Proffesional, and with a whole new look, like the Gamble Summon Cards made by Gandorator or the Cards made by Zextra, would they end up going to the AoC 2 if the so called "Fake Type" suggestion made its way to be moved to AoC? Just out of curiosity.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanael D. Striker Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='White Archaic Dæmon' timestamp='1312849982' post='5426172'] Well, at least whatever happens, would this make it so if lets say Fake-Types were moved to AoC, would the cards that are Realistic and Proffesional, and with a whole new look, like the Gamble Summon Cards made by Gandorator or the Cards made by Zextra, would they end up going to the AoC 2 if the so called "Fake Type" suggestion made its way to be moved to AoC? Just out of curiosity.... [/quote] Fake Type =/= Fake Sub-type Fake Subs have a clear already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archwing Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 I still have to wonder what Fake-Types arnt covered by existing types? Ironicly the only one I can think of is Sound (The very same one i used as example as a type allready covered by thunder) Because all existing Thunder-types with one or two exceptions like Thunder Nyan Nyan are electric (Like Batterymen and Watt's) or energy monsters (Like The Creator), making me think "Thunder" was a mistranslation. Ice would be a good one but too many cards exist allready that would have been Ice-Type IMO. Any "Ghost" monsters that i can think of would be a Fiend (Evil Spirits Even Vengeful Spirits like Headless Knight) Zombie (Things like Spectres, Wraiths and Phantoms) Fairy (Good Spirits, Guardians) Or just Spirit monsters (Otherworldly beings) Toxic is a possiblity,But I think of Toxic like poison and most "Poisonous" monsters I can think of either have an effect that implies being poisonous and/or fall under Reptiles like snakes or Aqua like Sludge creatures... Though this one is still possible. Duel types can be made with an effect saying its also treated another type or even just a attribute, like Pyro-Warrior is just a Warrior with a FIRE attribute. I mean I would love to work with Fake-Types but I cant think of enough good ones.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♥Łövëły-Ċħän♥ Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='Mr. Striker' timestamp='1312850117' post='5426177'] Fake Type =/= Fake Sub-type Fake Subs have a clear already. [/quote] Thank...You. Thats a main issue. People who try to make fake-types make them fake-subtypes... The two are not the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master White Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 @Mr.Striker: Okay, thank you, now I unnderstand @Lovely Chan: Well, yea, lots of people do get them mixed up, but really, they are the same in similiarity, so you'd have to understand the confusion..... @the topic: So, I support fake-types in the RC, just at least make sure it makes since......It don't have to, but Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kato_Zenamara Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 I personally have nothing against Fake-types. I do, however, have something against the [i]people[/i] who use fake types. Just like how anyone can make a terrible Pyro-type monster, the blame falls on the card maker, not the type. But since people who usually resort to fake types are the uncreative type and who won't put much effort into their set, fake-types have become something of a scapegoat. However, I'm not exactly behind the whole "yeah lets have fake types!" That would just be opening up a can of worms. The second you announce fake types are "legal", you'll get a swarm of fake type topics, most of which are made just because they can. And then arguments will break out of "your cards suck" and "nu-uh, we're allowed to use fake types" and it will just be flame and troll central. Lets look at what "Realistic Section" means. This is a place for any card [i]that could legitimately be released and played in the actual game.[/i] Something like "Demon-type" has no place in the game, has no distinguishing factors, and more than likely will have no support or even a reason for being made. But what exactly is a "type"? It is a category of monster cards, used to distinguish a certain group of cards that share a certain theme or idea. Pyro-type are all fire-like monsters. Fiend-types are all demonic and satanic things. Machine-types are all machines, etc. If you can find some ideas that reasonably don't fit into any of the existing categories, go ahead and make yourself a fake type, and more power to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sploda Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 I agree with Lovely-Chan here, lets make a basic "go to" list for what kind of types aren't allowed. This is to avoid people trolling the fourms with idiotic types like "Dog" and redundant ones like "Demon". Well Chaos Bakugan pretty much blew my cover. I've been working on A set of Toxic (Granted I've been using the word "Poison") Monsters for a bit, nothing worth posting at the moment but still. It's types like these that should be allowed into the Realistic Section. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icy Posted August 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 That would create a forced list of "what's not allowed" and allow loopholes rampant. No reason to generate a problem when there isn't one in that area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cloister Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Just like Enzax, I've been working on a Fake-Type too (Virus-Type). And holy s***, that list would be SOOOOOOOO long. If it's going to cover all fake-types not allowed, I truly feel sorry for the one writing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sploda Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 @Icy I'm not saying a list with every unallowed Fake-Type posted for the next three topic posts, I'm just saying a basic thing like a "Do and Don't" sort of thing like "Toxic/Poison" is fine but things like "Dog" aren't and "Demon" are redundant and fall under a pre-made type. Something to set a basic standard to work off of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icy Posted August 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 So you're asking me to define an aspect of creativity then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sploda Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Everything has a bottom line, creativity is no exception. You wouldn't compare a 5 year old's artwork to Picaso would you? Of course not, so you need to set a minimum standard for something like that. It's not hard, no silly Fake-Types like "Dog" or "Cat" and no redundant ones. That way the type can be considered a "Realistic" Fake-Type and not just someone/some people trying to troll the entire RC section. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 There is no bottom line for creativity. No, we wouldn't compare a 5 year old to picasso, but a 5 year olds drawing can still be creative in it's own right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaos Dralcax Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Not if it's a parody of one of Picassio's paintings. It's like how the Mona Lisa is great art, and the Mona Everything Else parodies are not.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Weird Al Yankovic's parodies are quite good and creative though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 [b]Ice[/b]: Completely redundant. Aqua-Type covers it simply because H20 is H20, no matter what form. If Yu-Gi-Oh! really wanted Ice in the game, it would make more sense to introduce it as an Attribute. Why didn't they? Because it would extremely small because of overlaps into Water. [b]Ghost[/b]: Zombie-Type was made by Konami with the general undead in mind. Ghosts would be better suited as a theme, rather then a whole Type. Simply because the lack of monsters that would be made within the type. [b]The list[/b]: Shouldn't take long. There are only 22 types. There are people who like to use OCG versions of the types, but I'll include them sometimes anyway. Aqua - Water, Ice, Amphibian Beast - Animal, Creature Beast-Warrior - Tribal, Feral Dinosaur - Fossil, Ancient Divine-Beast - God Dragon - Drake, Serpent, Wyvern Fairy - Angel, Spirit, Guardian, Saint, Sprite, Elf, Pixie Fiend - Demon, Devil, Imp Fish - Crustacean, Mollusc, etc. Insect - Bug, Fly, Pest Machine - Digital, Virus (the computer variant), Robot Plant - Weed, Tree, Sprite, Fungus, Flower Psychic - Cyborg, Mutant, Scientist Pyro - Fire, Explosive Reptile - Snake, Serpent, Lizard Rock - Ground, Earth Sea Serpent - Leviathan, Whale Spellcaster - Wizard, Mage, Magician, Warlock, Scientist Thunder - Lightning, Electric, Digital Warrior - Person, Human, Soldier, Knight Winged Beast - Bird, Griffin, Wind Zombie - Ghost, Spirit, Vampire, Undead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icy Posted August 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 There are still loads of tangible technicalities in that list, and I could prove a mass majority too if I wasnt in such a terrible mood. You're still setting a standard to something that has none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 I honestly don't think the type they use is as important as how well it's executed. They can use Snake for their cards all they want, if they're using it because they're uncreative, then their cards are most likely going to reflect that with how badly their effects and support are made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 However, some are obscure and aren't worth placing in their own typing just for the sake of a few monsters. The overlap is so huge and the difference not as much as needed that it's slightly useless. The point is to work on existing types and making them more solid than making 50 different 5-member types. I'd like to think there are standards to fake typing. If anyone's up for proving any suggestions wrong, I'm all for hearing why. This an interesting issue raised to the CC community so a list should be made in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 [quote name='Cursed Reaction' timestamp='1313006154' post='5430896'] The point is to work on existing types and making them more solid than making 50 different 5-member types. [/quote] If a member makes a 5-card type then it's probably not going to be a very good set in the first place, no matter how creative the type name is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mehmani Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 About two years ago, I was part of an extremist group if you will that was devoted to getting Fake Types wiped from the entire site, such was the level of annoyance they instilled in myself and the other members of the Fake Destruction Division. I feel that if supported correctly and "done well", Fake Types are fine in RC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Max Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 I'll say it again, done right Fake Types can actually be a good thing. The only reason I didn't stick with Fairy/Field for my Field Chibi's was only due to the fact that (at the time) Fake Types were shunned in RC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 They can obviously be a good thing, however, I have a great hate for redundant typing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 [quote name='Cursed Reaction' timestamp='1313060061' post='5432813'] They can obviously be a good thing, however, I have a great hate for redundant typing. [/quote] Then don't go to a thread that has "redundant" typing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.