Aix Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 [spoiler=This is not a proper comment]Names have been removed to preserve anonymity, but you know who you guys are. You guys probably took 2 seconds to make these comments. Cool. It'd be ace to build a deck around level one monsters, might give it a go myself. Diggin' the picture too, good stuff What did you even point out about the card? You may as well just rep the card then. Very powerful, I'd shorten it's effect though to make it more simple, long lores get sometimes dull if they don't contain very special effects in them, the card might still be technically useful but is less attractive (not in looks, in overall). Explain what makes it powerful. Is the card aesthetics really necessary? Should we now have a standard for card pics as well in RC? In the effect don't put just negate the activation. Make it like stardust "negate the activation AND DESTROY THAT CARD" is beter Explain why gdi. I don't even browse RC and it took just a few seconds to find these.[/spoiler] I know most of you nubs go tl;dr on my ass, so let me keep this short. 1. Think about the card. Actually think. For more than two seconds. (what does the card do/how can it be used or abused) 2. Make your point (e.g. the card is badly designed) 3. Support your point with reasoning (e.g. it encourages OTKs and thus screws player interaction) and point out a possible way(s) to fix any negatives (e.g. make your opponent take no damage this turn) Rinse and repeat for any further points. And you know what? Guess what a review is? Multiple of these points for a more well-rounded analysis. You don't even necessarily need to be an expert at the game like Koko to do this. Looking at some of the cards that occasionally pop up, I'm sure some of you haven't played a game of competitive level Yugioh in your life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poisoned Simochi Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 The steps are exactly what it should be, I agree completly. they IMO show the ideal. Still, I disagree with a quote of mine in the improper comments section, a)you cut half of the comment down and left just the first line, which is like for me to rip your argument apart, twist it and claim it improper. b)card aesthetics are important, the reason why was featured in the next lines you cut, so it had reasoning, and if you deem it improper because it spoke about aesthetics, that's not a good enough claim, and is based on your opinion about the importancy of aesthetics, which is still subject to discussion, where opinions are valid. c)there was thought, reasoning and point. edit: sorry for the strangely high language, I tried to be exact and it made me look highbrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Frankly this should be stickied. Hopefully people will read it and take it to heart before we get any more comments in RC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aix Posted June 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 The steps are exactly what it should be, I agree completly. they IMO show the ideal. Still, I disagree with a quote of mine in the improper comments section, a)you cut half of the comment down and left just the first line, which is like for me to rip your argument apart, twist it and claim it improper. b)card aesthetics are important, the reason why was featured in the next lines you cut, so it had reasoning, and if you deem it improper because it spoke about aesthetics, that's not a good enough claim, and is based on your opinion about the importancy of aesthetics, which is subject still subject to discussion, where opinions are valid. c)there was thought, reasoning and point. edit: sorry for the strangely high language, I tried to be exact and it made me look highbrow The rest was an expansion on the OCG talk (which doesn't count for Advanced Clause really, even if you are explaining OCG) that wasn't even correct and just made you look worse and then another point that didn't really explain its reasoning. By all means, I can make you look worse if I want by including the rest of it. I just wanted short stuff that could fit on one line to make a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Althemia Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 You don't even necessarily need to be an expert at the game like Koko to do this.Sure helps to actually look at what's good and what's bad when writing a review though. :uNot touching upon playability in it's current form is something that concerns me due to it being a major factor in the card's design, imho. It's not exactly difficult to go look up what's winning right now and get a vague idea of how these cards might fare against some of the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poisoned Simochi Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 The rest was an expansion on the OCG talk that wasn't even correct and just made you look worse and then another point that didn't really explain its reasoning. By all means, I can make you look worse if I want by including the rest of it. I just wanted short stuff that could fit on one line to make a point. Oops, you're right. looks like I didn't elaborate in the next lines. still, doesn't make my argument in the first line any less valid. Doesn't make me look bad at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aix Posted June 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Oops, you're right. looks like I didn't elaborate in the next lines. still, doesn't make my argument in the first line any less valid. Doesn't make me look bad at all. Your knowledge of OCG isn't correct. And fixing OCG isn't fixing the card itself, unless the OCG is really messed up on the card that you can't understand it. Which it wasn't. In fact Sakura's OCG is almost perfect with the exception of the first line which should be "You can Special Summon this card (from your hand) if your opponent..." rather than what you were suggesting, but that doesn't really matter. Sure helps to actually look at what's good and what's bad when writing a review though. :u Not touching upon playability in it's current form is something that concerns me due to it being a major factor in the card's design, imho. It's not exactly difficult to go look up what's winning right now and get a vague idea of how these cards might fare against some of the best. My first and foremost advice to all cardmakers is to go play the game and get an understanding of it, but no one ever listens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poisoned Simochi Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Your knowledge of OCG isn't correct. And fixing OCG isn't fixing the card itself, unless the OCG is really messed up on the card that you can't understand it. Which it wasn't. In fact Sakura's OCG is almost perfect with the exception of the first line which should be "You can Special Summon this card (from your hand) if your opponent..." rather than what you were suggesting, but that doesn't really matter. I'm speaking about the lines you quoted. The other lines are not the subject now and even if they are, [spoiler='unimportant']I mentioned that I wasn't sure about my OCG fix there and explained my doubt, as well as saying it was no big deal.[/spoiler] The thing that irritates me is how talking aesthetics, which might in your opinion be worthless, is deemed by you as improper. Aesthetics are a huge part of the card and are the difference between here and Written Cards, it's subject to opinion, and disagreement here is basis for discussion but speaking of aesthetics is in no way invalid. I'm sorry but this is part of the card, part of how people percieve it, and is a completly valid point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazooie Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 I'm speaking about the lines you quoted. The other lines are not the subject now and even if they are, I mentioned that I wasn't sure about my OCG fix there and explained my doubt, as well as saying it was no big deal. The thing that irritates me is how talking aesthetics, which might in your opinion be worthless, is deemed by you as improper. Aesthetics are a huge part of the card and are the difference between here and Written Cards, it's subject to opinion, and disagreement here is basis for discussion but speaking of aesthetics is in no way invalid. I'm sorry but this is part of the card, part of how people percieve it, and is a completly valid point. Aesthetics shouldn't be your only point. OCG barely matters, especially when you don't even know what's right. If you can't talk about a card's usage at all, don't bother. The card's balance and usability are both far, far more important then the card's aesthetics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poisoned Simochi Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Aesthetics shouldn't be your only point. OCG barely matters, especially when you don't even know what's right. If you can't talk about a card's usage at all, don't bother. The card's balance and usability are both far, far more important then the card's aesthetics. aesthetics only? no. aesthetics, OCG and effect critic? yep. [Spoiler='subject comment'] Very powerful, I'd shorten it's effect though to make it more simple, long lores get sometimes dull if they don't contain very special effects in them, the card might still be technically useful but is less attractive (not in looks, in overall). OCG: I'm not very sure about this, but didn't Konami change the punctuation of card effects in a way that "If X, then Y" becomes always "If X: Then Y"? you did it in the end of the lore but not in the beginning, I think it's okay for variety and not such a big deal [afterall, OCG is not a strict rulebook as people think it to be and you can change stuff just as there are lots of different OCGs from different periods] but think of it. IMO you should remove the Special Summoning effect.. too annoying, too powerful. [/spoiler] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazooie Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 You made a bad comment on OCG, a stupid comment about how "long effects are boring" and one horrible comment on removing a part of an effect that doesn't really explain why. Good job, that's a horrible post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
宇佐見 蓮子@C94 Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Your only critic is that the card effect is too long, and nowhere in that review did you talk about balance nor usability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 aesthetics only? no. aesthetics, OCG and effect critic? yep. [Spoiler='subject comment'] [/spoiler] How is it too powerful? You don't give insight, that's where the issue is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poisoned Simochi Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 How is it too powerful? You don't give insight, that's where the issue is. "very powerful" in the beginning, "IMO you should remove the Special Summoning effect.. too annoying, too powerful.", in the end. not alot, very enough to convey the messege considering how it is not even the main point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 It's enough insight, "very powerful" in the beginning, "IMO you should remove the Special Summoning effect.. too annoying, too powerful.", in the end. not alot, very enough considering how it is not even the main point. WHY very powerful? Is the Summoning too easy to make? Is the cost worthless? Saying it's powerful isn't insight, it's an observation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Just stepping in to say, as a former RC Mod who shares views with both of the former relevant RC Mods, OCG doesn't matter if you can explain the intent of the card and/or its rulings. Yes, it matters to a degree, but RC's "HURR OCG MATTERS MOST" trend atm is idiotic beyond reason, and OCGexists to be fixed to make the card look nice and pretty, not to make it better designed. AS long as the creator clears up their intent, OCG should be an afterthought.which is exactly why OCG never counted to the AC. It's trivial and doesn't matter to design, inherently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poisoned Simochi Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 WHY very powerful? Is the Summoning too easy to make? Is the cost worthless? Saying it's powerful isn't insight, it's an observation. It's self explainable really, just go through it, I'd be very surprised if you don't get my point. You remark about removing the special summoning effect, mentioning it is powerful and annonying, someone who read the effect and read the comment could understand it well. Let me get it, does commenting in RC equal writing a court statement? it's being so strict to a sick level. It's a forum guys, clear out. even if the OP there didn't get what I wrote to him, there's the option to ask for elaboration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Max Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 It's self explainable really, just go through it, I'd be very surprised if you don't get my point. You remark about removing the special summoning effect, mentioning it is powerful and annonying, someone who read the effect and read the comment could understand it well. Let me get it, does commenting in RC equal writing a court statement? it's being so strict to a sick level. It's a forum guys, clear out. even if the OP there didn't get what I wrote to him, he could ask himself. You don't need to write a "Court Statement" Just explain why you do and don't like the card. In 1 on 1 I often see pretty good explinations for Votes so why can't that be applied here also? A good few people are good at commenting but there is still members that miss the point. Also as a Former Mod of CC, it was actually a lot worse then this before myself, Icyblue and Yankee took over to clear things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 It's self explainable really, just go through it, I'd be very surprised if you don't get my point. You remark about removing the special summoning effect, mentioning it is powerful and annonying, someone who read the effect and read the comment could understand it well. Let me get it, does commenting in RC equal writing a court statement? it's being so strict to a sick level. It's a forum guys, clear out. even if the OP there didn't get what I wrote to him, there's the option to ask for elaboration. Why should we have to ask for elaboration? Your whole point sounds like "too stronk". It's very much nice to have an explanation. We aren't being strict either, we're just asking you to explain your point after stating it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourmaline Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 The steps are exactly what it should be, I agree completly. they IMO show the ideal. Still, I disagree with a quote of mine in the improper comments section, a)you cut half of the comment down and left just the first line, which is like for me to rip your argument apart, twist it and claim it improper. b)card aesthetics are important, the reason why was featured in the next lines you cut, so it had reasoning, and if you deem it improper because it spoke about aesthetics, that's not a good enough claim, and is based on your opinion about the importancy of aesthetics, which is still subject to discussion, where opinions are valid. c)there was thought, reasoning and point. edit: sorry for the strangely high language, I tried to be exact and it made me look highbrow I'm mostly here to say that you have a depressingly lowbrow lexicon, even with attempted grandiloquence. Or, rather, acronyms and contractions are precisely the opposite of what you intended. Anyway, the point of the card is definitely much more important than anything else. It reminds me of having a major political idea with minor questionable financial decisions despite working otherwise. The aesthetics of the card are not nearly as important as the function of the card. Imagine we have somebody attractive, such as... J-Max, for example. Prime example of the Adonis. A true stud among studs. But, rather than helping you sell a product, he is a seductress that ends up fornicating with every client in his cubicle as he also gets a rush from such an exciting act in public space. And then you have Aix. He has the face and stomach of Shrek but the height of a Farquaad. But he sells your product so well that all the clients end up fornicating with you in YOUR office while you make a lot more money. I would much rather have Aix as a worker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 It's a forum guys, clear out. even if the OP there didn't get what I wrote to him, there's the option to ask for elaboration.'Cept the TC shouldn't have to ask for an elaboration of what someone wrote. Feedback should typically be all there from the beginning, because it gets to the point and makes the whole situation a lot less confusing/pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Max Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Wait what? lol. I am actually speechless right now XD Not sure wether that describes me as a Cardmaker but the thought of me like that is truly hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aix Posted June 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 First thing first. I hope you don't feel victimized or that we're mean or anything like that. People tend to feel like that and focus on that rather than the logic of the argument. We may sound harsh but we're all big softies inside. It's self explainable really, just go through it, I'd be very surprised if you don't get my point. You remark about removing the special summoning effect, mentioning it is powerful and annonying, someone who read the effect and read the comment could understand it well. Let me get it, does commenting in RC equal writing a court statement? it's being so strict to a sick level. It's a forum guys, clear out. even if the OP there didn't get what I wrote to him, there's the option to ask for elaboration. If you state something that is so self-explanatory that it wouldn't really benefit from elaboration, doesn't that just mean you've stated the obvious? I mean, that's not very helpful either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poisoned Simochi Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 I'm mostly here to say that you have a depressingly lowbrow lexicon, even with attempted grandiloquence. Or, rather, acronyms and contractions are precisely the opposite of what you intended. Wow, that was just weird. I stated the high language was unintended, and never even said I had a big lexicon, just that I tried to be accurate. it was a side thought, what have you made of it. just wow. Anyway, the point of the card is definitely much more important than anything else. It reminds me of having a major political idea with minor questionable financial decisions despite working otherwise. The aesthetics of the card are not nearly as important as the function of the card. Imagine we have somebody attractive, such as... J-Max, for example. Prime example of the Adonis. A true stud among studs. But, rather than helping you sell a product, he is a seductress that ends up fornicating with every client in his cubicle as he also gets a rush from such an exciting act in public space. And then you have Aix. He has the face and stomach of Shrek but the height of a Farquaad. But he sells your product so well that all the clients end up fornicating with you in YOUR office while you make a lot more money. I would much rather have Aix as a worker. That's why you have other aspects, such as usability etc. card aesthetics are important and your example concerns a case where only economic output is important, but as I say, in Yugioh it's not the only concern.. cards design is important, part of it is the look, whether it's walls of text or a simple effect, whether the lore gets caught up doing too much and gets tiring or not, whether the effect gets into explaining cases [for example describing what happens if X, and Y and Z happen, when it could be left more simple without having to face all those situations. obviously it won't be the same but it will change the light in which people see the card]. Anyway, back to topic. @Jmax: My comment was explained, not elaborated though. Elaboration should be the choice of the commenter, a comment with a reasoning, a point and thought behind, just like in the OP, is valid. just read my comment again, I'm very surprised you think it covers nothing. I did not left anything in the air, and think saying it's improper is being too picky. [spoiler='comment'] Very powerful, I'd shorten it's effect though to make it more simple, long lores get sometimes dull if they don't contain very special effects in them, the card might still be technically useful but is less attractive (not in looks, in overall). OCG: I'm not very sure about this, but didn't Konami change the punctuation of card effects in a way that "If X, then Y" becomes always "If X: Then Y"? you did it in the end of the lore but not in the beginning, I think it's okay for variety and not such a big deal [afterall, OCG is not a strict rulebook as people think it to be and you can change stuff just as there are lots of different OCGs from different periods] but think of it. IMO you should remove the Special Summoning effect.. too annoying, too powerful. [/spoiler] When I wrote it, I left food for thought, provoked a discussion about the card, listed my opinions. It is enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 When I wrote it, I left food for thought, provoked a discussion about the card, listed my opinions. It is enough. Ignoring of course the minor triviality that as per the rules of the forum, it isnt enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.